Meade, and tele

[Regina Sewell]

Adam,
I am by no means an expert on G.H. Meade.  A fine way to start this, but 
I quite like Meade’s ideas and find them quite relevant to psychodrama. 
I think a slightly different way to look at the I/Me distinction is that 
the “me” is the socially conditioned aspect, the part of us that’s 
always looking over our shoulders, that’s looking at the cultural 
conserve and holding on…  that stays in role taking  and maybe some of 
role playing mode…..   it is the “what would people think” aspect that 
holds most of us down.
To me, Meade’s  “I”  – is the subjective aspect of the self is the part 
of the self that ditches the cultural conserve, that is spontaneous and 
creative.
But in reality, both work together….   The me balances the I and keeps 
new responses to old situations  adequate responses to new situations 
appropriate
Meade created the notion of the generalized other to acknowledge the 
cultural conserve – the awareness of the norms/rules and expectations of 
others in particular roles.  So at some level, I see Meade – and it’s 
been years since I read the books/articles from scratch so I might have 
added my own twist – as being deeply rooted in the interactive aspect of 
life, even if it’s just conscious awareness of social roles and 
expectations that we choose to ignore or circumvent.  You raise an 
interesting question about Meade and Self-awareness because so much of 
his focus is on awareness of self in relation to others.  How does this 
relate to simply being present – absolutely in the state of “flow” if 
you will.  And how does it relate to the sort of witness state – the 
ability to watch ourselves with compassion as we engage the world, the 
ability to be the actor, playwrite, and director of our own drama?  I 
would imagine that perhaps it is really the balance of the I and the Me 
– which are – I think, merely theoretical devices to help us understand 
the nature of mind before we had microscopes and cat scans and mri 
machines that allowed us to look into the brain and see the connections. 
Before we had Daniel Siegel to give us a beautiful definition which he 
defines as “this flow of energy and information, is created within the 
interaction of both the neurophysiological, that is the brain of the 
individual, as well as the interpersonal, how two brains interact with 
each other. “
Daniel Seigel also speaks to this – the spiritual aspect of mind – to 
connect w/ something greater than….   Meade…   I’m not sure.  I just 
don’t know…   This is such a brilliant question.
“Being swept up in a team experience (or in a battle in war) can shift 
the sense of self away from personal self and towards the success of the 
mission and safety of one's buddies. Spiritual experience can also 
involve a shift of emphasis about what is important from the Me to the 
Greater Becoming. Sometimes that's a "We" and sometimes it really 
doesn't matter if the Me is technically part of this or not. (This is 
one way I'm beginning to contemplate my own mortality and limitedness.) 
“
Re:  tele --  I think perhaps the link is – and again I am merely a 
student – but I sort of see tele at some level as what we used to call 
vibes, what we call intuition, that bit that superceeds conscious 
thought that has a much clearer picture and much better judgement if we 
are able and willing to listen.  But it’s more specific than intuition 
because it’s really focused on relationship – connection between people. 
If in order to really be in touch w/ one’s intuition, one must be really 
present, must be in sort of a spiritual, connected state to the bigger 
whole and outside of one’s own monkey mind, then it makes sense that 
tele too would be similar …   to be accurate…   though I also wonder.. 
if one is really in a deep spiritual space, really present, in the 
“flow” zone or whatever, can there be “negative” tele or is there just 
awareness and compassion.  I don’t know.

“Turning to Moreno's theory of tele, I suspect that this concept 
overlaps with his intuition that we exist in broader resonant mental 
energy mind-fields, social fields, or fields of increased morale or 
purpose of one's group. One resonates with the sense of feeling 
scattered and alienated, variably conflicted or coherent, feeling 
paranoia or trust.

Are these part of tele or do they deserve another more specific term? 
All of these experiences clearly overlap with but aren't exactly the 
same as they dynamics of rapport, interpersonal preference. 
Nevertheless, one of Moreno's desires was to draw us toward an increased 
sensitivity to our social being-ness, the degree to which we transcend 
the boundaries of our skin-selves and participate in an psycho-social 
dynamic that is non-material, but still as "real" as our physical 
behaviors.”

I totally agree that tele and sociometry is only the beginning and with 
Siegel’s work and the work of other neuro scientists, very fascinating. 
You posit some really interesting theoretical questions.  So..  for my 
small addition…  I think role is important but only to the extent that 
we are locked in role taking and role playing rather than role creating, 
only to the extent that we are in the “me” space rather than the “I” 
space, only to the extent that we are in our heads, calculating and 
making up stories rather than being really present and thus able to be 
spontaneous and creative…
“Part of the problem is that our expansion into or out of this 
psycho-social field varies with role and mood, but especially with a 
variety of psycho-social factors:

- how new are we to a network, how well-known or obscure are we to 
others?

- how much do we feel we have anything to offer, or anything "they" 
desire, or in other ways do we have the skills to become better 
connected?

- how competitive is the system, in terms of skill, money, or other 
criteria, and do we feel we have the wherewithal to advance at all in 
this network, or even hold whatever status we have?

- how congenial is the network with other roles, attitudes, and 
qualities that we have? How much do I have to or even can keep these 
other facets of my life separate or secret?

- do I know one or a few people who are trying to draw me in, help me, 
or contrariwise, keep me out?

- and so forth.

What I'm getting at is that tele and sociometry is only the opening to a 
very complex field, analogous to how the field of, say, immunology has 
grown vastly more complex in the last forty years. Tele in its narrower 
definition is about rapport, I think, but I suspect that Moreno was also 
trying to talk about his intuitions of the wider field of 
sociodynamics.”

Thanks for raising this and allowing my brain to stretch!
Regina Sewell

> From: "Adam Blatner" <ablatner at verizon.net>