Lots of the focus of the shoulds, ought tos and related fears were about S's beliefs and rules, but I realise that when I'm talking 'with him' it's me talking to myself too. We delved into standing alone without the prop of 'family',, whether our siblings are still part of who we believe ourselves to be or if it's an image of ourself that we're maintaining in order to flesh out a diminished view we have of ourselves. If there's a void when we don't have a family around us.
If/when I start using I instead of WE here . . . The difference in my position from S's on this is that I am realising that I've actually stopped propping myself up with identities of family member, sister or brother. At least MOST of the time (when I stay awake) I'm ME, still friendly with my siblings but as me, not as the sister of P. It's a one-on-one situation iin this position and it's very liberating . . . most of my shoulds have fallen away as a result, the remaining ones I keep as values (respect, empathy, compassion) that I embrace for ME regardless of whether it's my siblings, my friends - or people I don't really know. These values affect how I interact with them and it's my choice to let them guide me. I think the difference is a stronger awareness of ME and of my boundaries, now; in the 'family' situation, and if I'm honest, with friends too, I had lost them and was too willing to mesh with the group or the other (believing it necessary for acceptance, love etc.), In fact, I was losing myself, becoming invisible. As I write, it's clear to me that I'm saying that these are values for me when dealing with others . . . What about me and ME? do I have respect, compassion for myself? Not enough! I can quickly lose myself in reverting back to old shoulds and ought tos; in fact propping myself up with rules.
I know I can 'risk' dropping them, and seeing what emerges . . . when I do it, it works! It's wonderful, liberating, and allows expansion and exploration.
The paradoxes! Such as standing alone and not being alone, stronger boundaries that create bigger spaces: the void after exploding the myth of Family as a prop and realising it was a myth and thus there's no new void; boundaries and edges.
Over the last few days, I've been focussing on and meaning to write down many thoughts that occur when I see this photo I took in London in January.
Until right now, I'd been seeing the path; thinking about 'paths' and going forward and speed and movement and lots more; and the importance of the protective railing in this picture for the picture - and of course the swoops in the stones that change/distort the guardrail; and the importance (for me) of protective guards. And I've been getting really curious about THAT, and about the fact that I just clicked on this shot when I saw it and how amazing my higherSelf is to know that I'd find so much meat on the bones of this image. Today I realise that the photo can also open the door to further musing about boundaries. When are guardrails protecting me from a (perceived) danger, or hemming me in, or allowing me to walk with more certainty as I have more awareness of where I want to be (what my boundaries are)? And I thought I'd been taking numerous photos of pathways (it was out of my awareness that I'd been taking so many on that theme until I review my image library, recently) because I delight in the visual image I see, in the unendingness of the path itself, and in the geometry of the composition, and in the distortion or complications that shadows often create! Was I also inviting myself to see the edges of the paths too, and the clear definition route coupled with the unspecifity of the destination? Good 'work', Lucy! - that just spilled off the fingers of someone (ME) who thinks she doesn't know how to play! In truth, that work I'm patting my back for was actually huge fun and I've just caught in the act of merrily showing myself another one of my myths: that 'playing isn't me'? And I've believed it. This is fodder for another blog, I can feel it.
No comments:
Post a Comment