Assagioli works together with a group of his students, with the exercise of the ideal model, a central experience in psychosynthesis

Roberto Assagioli, 1967, From the Assagioli Archive in Florence[1]. Original Title: Esercizio del Modello Ideale. Translated, Compiled, Edited with Notes by Jan Kuniholm[2]
Part I (from Doc. #23382 – Assagioli Archives – Florence)
Assagioli: Has anyone done exercises in this fortnight? Who has done exercises? The average is quite low. Before I hear who has done them, may I ask: — Why haven’t you done them?
L.: I was at a conference, and I didn’t even have time to sleep.
Assagioli: The activism of modern life makes it a little difficult to do them, however not impossible, because one finds time to do so many other things. However, this difficulty is overcome by what I said this morning, which is that if you really don’t have time to do special exercises, such as those that have been described, you can do exercises in daily life itself.
L.: I would like clarification on what you said today. You gave two exercises in self-control, I would say, rather than will exercises, one for lazy types, one for hurried types. Now I don’t know if I’m very sure that this is right, because I personally find that it’s very easy to be lazy about some things and hasty about other things. That is, if I’m impatient in certain cases, I’m also lazy in certain others, and I have the impression that it’s not just me, that in everybody there’s just a certain degree of impatience and a certain degree of laziness; not just one or the other; and I wanted to ask if that’s true.
Assagioli: Very well: you have raised a very important issue. Now I will mention it only briefly because a long talk would have to be given, and this long talk I threaten you with is for when I talk about psychological types. There is a whole important and useful branch of psychology, which is differential psychology, or characterology, or typology. This very objection has been raised: it is said that these types do not really exist, because in each one there are elements of the opposite type, or of every type. Here, too, we have to understand each other well; for example, there are no 100 percent extroverts and introverts, there are no 100 percent lazy people, despite the fact that perhaps the 90 percents exist, and vice versa. It is very true that there are opposite tendencies in us, that we oscillate between irritation and passivity, etc. However, the fact remains that there are clear prevalences, if not in everyone, in many people.
The so-called “classical” psychology — which distinguished the choleric, the phlegmatic, etc. — was too schematic, but it had an element of truth in it. Now with more modern terminology and with finer analysis you really find, between an extreme extrovert and an extreme introvert, really clear and certain differences, and you can even predict somewhat the conduct of one type or the other. So there is nothing absolute in psychology, and especially in differential psychology; but there is a basis of truth, especially for certain distinct types, which has both cognitive and especially practical utility. When the difference, I would say, reaches toward 70% of one tendency versus 30% of an opposite one (of course these are only symbolic figures, it is not as if they can be measured by any instrument), there is already a clear indication in what way to exercise our will.
The same can be said about the question of male and female psychology: some have found and described fundamental and substantial differences, while others tend instead to deny them, saying that basically that the sexes are more or less the same, that in women one finds masculine elements, and in men feminine elements. There is some truth in this finding, but the truth lies in the middle: in a normal man or woman there is still a clear predominance of characteristics and functions specific to either sex. So any reaction against overly categorical or absolute statements, however, must not go to the opposite extreme of denying all differences; these differences exist.
For the rest, in practice, if you want to do both the exercise against laziness and the exercise against impatience you do very well, only perhaps it is better to recognize which are the most necessary and the most urgent and on which to put the emphasis; but it is perfectly fine to do both. So in practice the problems evaporate, but in precisely theoretical [. . .].
Mrs. M.: I was thinking something else, I was thinking that at some point there is something like a game [going on] inside us, and then I fear that my lazy part or my impatient part at some point might play a role in making me choose the exercise that implicitly is easier for me. But I might force myself and say, no, I’m lazy, and so I’m interested in this. So that’s why it seemed more fair to me to say, I’ll pick one, and one of the two, so I’m sure I actually need it for the point where I’m weak.
Assagioli: No, no, it’s okay to do both. But I remember what I said at the beginning, which is that any psychological work on us presupposes a psychoanalytic first stage, just like a farmer — a modern farmer — before he chooses what to sow on a piece of land he has it analyzed, or he already knows from experience what products he needs most, given its chemical constitution and physical conditions. Thus, before making a program of psychological exercises and will exercises, we need to know ourselves — up to a certain point at least — including our unconscious.
Mrs. M.: Well, Professor — but I would be very convinced that I am mostly lazy; however, here while listening, I had the opposite feeling; that is, I was more impulsive than lazy, because the first exercise you mentioned caused a nervous reaction in me; I even had goose bumps from it, so . . . yes, I knew I was a little bit impulsive, but I did not expect such a strong reaction.
Assagioli: This confirms the fact that there are in us all the elements and all the tendencies, at all levels, from the material to the spiritual; but it’s a question of gradually determining the approximate proportions of these various elements. And this I call psychoanalysis in the broad sense; that is, self-knowledge.
Returning for a moment to typology, to differential psychology, here again a classification can be made, not rigid but practically functional. There really are types who (unscientifically) are called “all of a piece,” who have more or less constant characteristics: certain practical men, for example, who are just practical, without psychological complications: that’s how they are and that’s how they remain all the time, at least somewhat. And so also are certain people of almost exclusively artistic type or temperament; this is an aspect of them that remains constant in them, and it is possible to predict their general reactions in life.
On the other hand, there are the types that can be called “polyhedral,” multiple, “diffluent,” or plastic, in whom no one function or quality particularly prevails, who are, I would say, “chameleon-like.” Finally, there are the “ambivalents;” that is, they oscillate between two opposite poles: laziness-irritation, optimism-pessimism, euphoria-depression. These actually represent one psychological type: the ambivalent type. One could then speak of three classes — again approximately, not rigidly: those all of a piece, the ambivalent and the chameleon-like, and of course for each of them the exercises and opportunities for inner culture are different.
Finally, there is the existentialist[3] attitude, which does not exclude the previous ones but has a closer approximation to reality, which is that every individual is a unique being, with unique characteristics, whose past and heredity is unique in every sense, so sees that in reality every being is unique and never fits exactly into any classification. This [position] I fully accept; but still one should not deny the relative and practical usefulness of classifications, of typology, as a first approximation and especially as a practical tool.
Fortunately then, in practice many theoretical distinctions and problems disappear, fade away and are irrelevant. Just as it is not necessary to know the essence of the energy of the universe — external or internal — such as the essence of electricity, in order to use it, so it is not necessary to have complete, perfect and existential knowledge of a human being, beginning with ourselves, in order to work on ourselves. So knowledge has its limits, that must be recognized. If you want to know too much, you do nothing. Knowing too little makes one do wrong; knowing too much can lead one to do nothing. But it is not easy to know too much; what is easy is to want to know too much, and make it an excuse for not “doing.” Let this be a warning to you.
IDEAL MODEL EXERCISE
This is an exercise that that we prepare for by some visualization training. Since it is about visualizing ourselves in a given way, we need to have a little bit of visualization training, to evoke and keep certain images fixed. So I recommend again, to do elementary exercises, as daily gymnastics, of visualizing figures, colors and shapes, the simple ones. [4]
I said in one of the previous lectures that we all, more or less, consciously make models of ourselves; we have images, models. We have what we think we are, what we would like to be, how we would like to look to others, and so on. So we do not avoid the problem of the model; and since we inevitably have models of ourselves, we should try to have a good one — the ideal model; that is, the one we would like to be. Basically, all inner education and every psychological exercise starts from the more or less explicit and conscious assumption that we want to change ourselves for the better, or we would not be here. To change ourselves for the better, expressed more definitively, means to substitute a program, an ideal, a model of what we want to become, for the image of what we currently are. Now this generalized [idea] can become a specific exercise; that is, to visualize ourselves endowed with the qualities we wish to develop because we have recognized them as deficient in us. Here we must avoid a danger or exaggeration. I repeat again that for every exercise there can be exaggeration and drawbacks; in this case there is the drawback, or danger, of wanting to make too ideal a model of ourselves; that is, an ideal of total perfection which of course is unattainable — and to attempt it means to fail, and to fail means to become discouraged and quit. So this ideal model must be realistic, in the sense of being the next step toward one’s psychosynthesis. So we don’t have a general model of perfection, but a model of improvement of a specific deficient function in us. So this is fully within the limits of possibility.
The model can be either static, or dynamic: static — that is, to imagine oneself, to see oneself as if in the mirror endowed and expressing oneself in one’s appearance and attitude, and evoking the state of mind corresponding to the quality we wish to develop. Thus a shy, a fearful, an anxious person may imagine seeing himself in a calm, energetic, courageous attitude. A violent person (I repeat, when I say violent, it means a person in whom there is [say,] a 70% violent attitude — always an excessive or deficient quality) can imagine himself in a calm attitude; smiling, benevolent, patient, and so on.
The dynamic model is more effective but also a bit more difficult. Here, too, I make a reservation: for some it might be easier instead; however, even here it is not a matter of choosing [one or the other]; it is good to do both exercises; perhaps start with the static one, with the still image, and then proceed with the dynamic one.
The dynamic model consists of imagining oneself in action; that is, in a particular situation, first feeling it within oneself, and [then] acting in the desired way. This exercise has great practical utility and very many applications in life. I will mention only one that is typical and also topical for many young people: an exam. For others it may instead be an important interview: an interview with a superior; or a play, a piano performance, a singing concert, etc.
Let’s take the exam, which is the most typical immediate example and which affects some of those present. Here again, let me tell you, there are two types of students who are distinctly different. Those who go to the exam with a straight face, and those who go with anxiety, with worry, so the exam is like a nightmare even weeks before they take it. We will leave aside those who have the nerve and who see it as a game, a sport, a risk, and who maybe prepare only one part and attempt it — they are not what interests us now. Instead, let us look at those who, for their own benefit, give importance to the exam — indeed, excessive importance. And they are really caught in a distressing vicious cycle, because the more they worry about the exam, the more they fear they will fail, the more they become paralyzed while studying and even more so at the time of the exam; and thus they have a much poorer result than they would deserve if these emotional factors did not disturb them. In this case, an imaginative training exercise can be most useful, indeed decisive — I say this because this has been demonstrated in many cases. It involves imagining the scene of the exam vividly; the nerve-wracking wait, then the call into the lecture hall, the questioning, and imagining oneself calm, confident, tranquil: remembering well what one has learned, or cleverly avoiding with turns of phrase talking about something one is not sure of or is unaware of. I assure you that this exercise, when done well, repeatedly, succeeds.
I will now make it more precise. Here again there are two cases: when the anxiety and fear is moderate, and when it is very strong. When the fear is slight, visualizing oneself with the opposite quality, that is, tranquility, courage, serenity, is enough to neutralize the anxiety factor, the fear element; all the more if one succeeds in saying, “I’m going to the exam, I am fairly well prepared, good enough for what is needed among my classmates, and if I then fail it is nothing terrible — one survives a failure, and even more than one” — and that exercise succeeds. But in the case where the fearful feeling becomes almost an obsessive and anxious state, this exercise is not enough: it fails; it may alleviate the fear, but it does not eliminate it. Then something deeper has to be done, that is, to precede this positive imaginative training with a discharge of the emotion of fear. Attempting the exercise causes precisely this discharge. If one does not do the exercise, one keeps this anxiety, this fear, this worry in himself. If on the other hand, one does the exercise it gets brought to the surface, at the moment one is almost overwhelmed by it; one suffers from it and feels it more acutely, but this is good — that the fear does not remain rooted in the unconscious but is discharged. In several cases in which I have had this exercise done [by a client], psychosomatic reactions occur — that is, trembling, cold sweat, in short, all the psychosomatic symptoms of fear. It is necessary to do the exercise and endure these reactions two, three, four or five times — as many times as necessary. After a certain number of times, which is not very long (often I have seen eight, ten, twelve times) you notice that the emotional reaction gradually decreases in intensity. I would say that you train yourself, you get used to the traumatic situation, until it no longer makes an impression, or makes much less of an impression. Here is a precise example for a typical situation. Now each of you can apply it to many other different and more complex situations. The principle is: visualization of oneself with the desired quality; if it is enough so much the better; if it is not enough do it repeatedly; at first consciously let the emotion discharge psychosomatically, until by the discharging it fades and is exhausted.
Now let’s do it together. I cannot prescribe the model to everyone. Each of you can reflect for a moment and imagine yourself endowed with a quality you wish to develop in yourself. First do a preparation of physical relaxation and emotional calming, and take a certain interest that directs mental attention toward the exercise to the exclusion of other irrelevant, distracting mental activities. So each person imagines themselves endowed with a specific quality. Then you can also try to see yourself in action, that is, to see yourself demonstrating this quality in a situation. I will give five minutes so that you can find themselves. (pause)
* * *
I think these minutes must have seemed long to you. Is that true? This shows how unaccustomed we are to internal action. Think that people who are trained in meditation can do it for half an hour, for an hour, always staying collected, concentrated. But in the West few people know how to do that. In the East, on the other hand, where internal action is so much more appreciated and developed, not everyone of course, but those who devote themselves to it achieve things that for us seem extraordinary, almost unattainable.
Part II
Discussion
Assagioli: So who has succeeded at least partially? Who has not succeeded at all? Now I am interested first in who has not succeeded — why and how?
Dr. S.: I failed to keep my mind still. I had the intention of wanting to do it, but there was a continuous flow of images, of memories, I don’t know what aroused them, but I certainly failed.
Assagioli: He was thinking about something else, the mind was rambling . . .
S.: The mind just thought about something else. I don’t think even one-seventh of the time I spent on it succeeded.
Assagioli: This fully confirms what I will repeat to the point of boredom, or until you decide to do it; that is, you have to do elementary preliminary exercises.
S.: This was the first time for me to do an exercise.
Assagioli: There, that fully confirms it. I did a whole program of exercises, I would say, of increasing difficulty, and I insisted that just as those who study piano must do the [simple] notes and the scales first, so you cannot jump to quite complex exercises, like the present one, without having exercised the power you visualize in a simpler way. What about you , C.?
C.: Interference of various images and thoughts that interfered with concentration.
Assagioli: Miscellaneous thoughts or specific concerns?
C.: Specific concerns.
Assagioli: This also happens. When one is dominated by some worry, one hardly ever succeeds; and this also shows the necessity of the elementary exercises. Now let’s hear from those who partially failed.
Ms. M.: I immediately visualized myself as if I were another person, and then I immediately gave her a character, and instinctively there was the response to what I had discovered before; that is, I tried to be gentle and patient, whereas before I had discovered the opposite; and then also strong-willed, because I think I lack willpower. In short, combining the two. (Assagioli: Yes, they go very well together) But I kept vacillating on the idea of physical appearance, and so my mind kept bringing up the idea of physical appearance, and I was saying to myself, why do I see myself in that particular way? Then later I understood why I had imagined a dress and a hairstyle that referred to a certain situation, that was essentially disturbing. I had this same difficulty in fixing the inner image — the outer image took over.
Assagioli: You see, the outer image should serve exclusively as an aid to the inner image; but instead it annoys us, so it is better to eliminate it. The important thing is the inner image, the inner feeling. So if the outer image helps, fine; if not, it is not necessary. This shows how all these exercises should be done not literally, but using the most appropriate variations that are most useful for the purpose to be achieved. The important thing is the purpose; the means are always secondary to the purpose.
Anyone else? No ? then see you next Sunday.
Part III
EXERCISE OF THE IDEAL MODEL
Discussion
(from the Lecture of February 12, 1967 – Assagioli Archives – Florence)
[. . .] What should my behavior be? Should I encourage, let things go the way they go, or should I sometimes take the child aside?Assagioli: Here, this is a typical example of a generic question that cannot have an answer. Each case is unique. However, speaking generally I would suggest non-intervention, and only intervene when there is a very precise indication. But in general this would seem to be a natural evolution of the “idol” father figure, which is followed by gradual disappointment and finally rebellion: it is a very normal parable.
B-T.: I realized that it is easier for boys to have their ideal role models at that age. Little girls are more superficial and are oriented toward the exterior. Little girls seem to mature more quickly, but in my experience their maturation is outward rather than inward, toward things — hair, nails. And that bothers me a little bit. I mean, in the woman it’s nice that there is this self-care, the woman has to be pretty on the outside, but I also worry about forming the inside and I’m afraid of being overly moralistic, of boring the children. How should my behavior be? I ask for advice, because no one gives us such advice, and it is very important.
Assagioli: These are very general questions, however I want to say this: I would say that intervention sometimes becomes necessary, and is very useful in periods of reactions, illusions or oscillation between idealization and disappointment. When a crisis happens in the child, in the adolescent, then yes; otherwise let it evolve by itself. On the difference between boys and girls, I would also like to hear the experience of others. I don’t know, I think that in the aesthetic hairstyle of the little girl, while there is a natural tendency, there is, however, also an unconscious imitation of the figures in the movies and television. So there is an external model there too: they don’t realize why they do it, but they do it because this is an unconscious process. On the other hand, in males there is evidently also there a superficiality in admiring these pseudo-Western heroes. So they too are external.
B-T.: I invite the correction of the bad taste of these demonstrations. I don’t know; if I get a little girl with painted nails, I say well, but it’s funny, and I try to pass it off as a game, like when you’re playing ladies, and so I limit myself to these expressions. So yes, they are only general, because from a portrait that they made of me — which I was very pleased with, because it gave me the possibility of self-criticism — I saw that the boys like me: this lady who is so nice, who treats the mothers well; in short, I was satisfied.
L.: Among the difficulties on which the ideal model can work for us, you mentioned the illusion of [being] static. Really, this seems to me a very strong illusion that is [. . .] very much from the development of our psyche. Because the illusion of being static exists in a very [. . . ] way.
Assagioli: You can say, though, that having images and models is inevitable, and so it is a matter of choosing them well, and especially of moving from the static model to the dynamic model. From a psychological point of view, we live in a world of ghosts — to put it a little brutally — we live in a world of images, and not only fixed, rigid and static images and models; one must clearly realize that these are also plastic and changeable, changing with the flow of life. The model as such is inevitable, I would say absolutely inescapable: for example, in technology and industry they are constantly creating models of new machines, of whatever; the architect draws or makes a model of the building to be built, etc. So the model is a necessary and normal stage of creativity.
L.: I wanted to say that in the world around us there are a lot of static forms . . .
Assagioli: I would say there is an acute conflict between too much static nature in some, and too much, I would say, abruptness and impetuosity in others. Speaking very roughly, the adult generations are too static, or go too slowly, while among the young there is a rush, an impetuosity, and an excess of dynamism. To quote a witty Chinese proverb, “You see an egg, and you already want to hear it sing.” [. . .]
C.: I would like to refer to the practical realization; that is, this working toward the ideal model. I would say that one of the biggest obstacles in practical realization is precisely to be able to place oneself — even roughly — in that typological category that you mentioned, of the introvert and the extrovert. Because I have noticed this, at least as a personal experience — that the realization of the ideal model is greatly facilitated if we can get to know ourselves, if we can understand the way we actually are .
And this is very difficult, because I have observed practical cases where essentially introverted people would like to just imitate the diametrically opposite ideal models, that is, extroverted people; and also the reverse, I have noticed strongly extroverted people who would like to look completely introverted. But I think that once you have succeeded in framing this label — what we have called by this ugly term — then I think you have taken a great step forward, because this having framed oneself is a stepping stone that would greatly facilitate the realization of the ideal model.
Assagioli: Among my aspirations, and I don’t know whether they will be realized, would be to give a course in differential psychology. It is such a vast and complex subject that it would require a very long discussion. Now here I would say something only by way of illustration, as is often done in this conversation. Typology is most useful, and it is a study from general differential psychology to each person’s specific existential situation. Again, it is good to go step by step, but above all, one should never make it something rigid or to give a label; and one can never say that one is an extrovert or introvert. It is always a matter of “percentage” or prevalence — and often prevalence at a given stage of life, and also in a given condition. So the degree and nature of the level of the direction of vital interest must always be specified.
Indeed, one can be extroverted at one level and introverted at another. A typical example I have given other times is the general example of the English, who are [often] very extroverted in the physical realm: sports, outside activities, etc., and very introverted on the emotional side. That manifests itself in what often seems to be their unwillingness to express their feelings. This is an example that I would say is very clear, very stark.
Then there is the oscillation between extroversion and introversion. Oscillation between the two extremes, but here again we have to remember two things: that there are also what I call supraversion and subversion, subversion being the tendency toward everything that is lower in human nature.[5] Of this I would say that psychoanalysis constitutes a very good example: in fact, there is in it a blatant excess of subversion; that is, its turning its vital interests almost exclusively toward the lower sides. And on the other hand, there is also supraversion; that is, the tendency to turn vital interests toward the higher aspects, which really is a very good thing, but which can in turn also become excessive in certain cases. So you see actually how complicated is even the first differentiation, which would seem to be the simplest in the direction of vital interests.
C.: This relates back to the existence of the well-known masks that we’ve been talking about, that the individual often assumes depending on their surroundings. And so certainly, extroversion and introversion are greater or lesser depending on the various levels, environments or people that the individual encounters. So the faculty of self-expression varies greatly because of these very facts.
Assagioli: . . . of all these factors, these variables.
G.: . . . . in her latest book The Little Virtues[6] she says at one point that children should not think so lowly of their parents that they should be ashamed of them, but on the other hand they should also not feel such admiration that they take them as ideal role models. I would like to bring an example, the typical example of the son of a famous man who has been successful in life. I have a cousin who felt such admiration for his father that he even mimicked him in his gestures, the way he spoke, walked, etc. Now this is absurd. For example, we see so many boys between the ages of 12 and 15 who follow certain orientations in politics just because they are the same as their parents, especially their fathers. And this and many other cases [. . .] and then moreover to lose, and not acquire self-awareness and individual authority.
Assagioli: This is very right, and could be summarized with the word “conformity.” The tendency to conformity is very strong. Conformity, I would say, arises out of an unconscious urge for imitation, [. . .] when there is a lack of information, a boy living in his family hears only one bell, and they read only one newspaper; now this should not be done because each bell tower rings its own bell. In Florence there is only one, but you can take those who come from other cities, and it would be good if everyone read two or three newspapers of different tendencies. But then there is the question of time, etc. But one must always hear various bells, and in this case I would say that television has precisely that merit; that is, that it makes one hear various bells — discussions both in the political and other fields.
Conformity also has other roots, namely the feeling of discomfort of being, of finding oneself isolated or alone. Then the solution it offers is of feeling part of a group, of a community, if not of the majority. This explains many things: youth groups, etc. So the tendency toward conformity is strong. However, the reaction to conformity is also equally violent: the demonstrations of angry youth are a truly excessive and exaggerated reaction to conformity. It is always necessary to rightly see the noble middle path, that is, to avoid the two extremes. — Easy to say.
L.: Then there would be the sensory, sentimental, imaginative, mental and then intuitive and volitional types.
Assagioli: Now we can pause, to do our exercise.
* * *
(Exercise [given earlier] Was Performed)
* * *
There are two different causes of failure, one I would say is a general one, and that is the difficulty of concentration that you mentioned. The other is the specific difficulty of a given exercise, of which the one I proposed last Sunday is one of the most difficult, but it was within the theme, and so there is no discouragement. But this gives me an opportunity to lay out just what my proposal is, and that is to start again with the elementary exercises. This is necessary for new people, but it is most useful, and I would say almost necessary even for those who have been doing different exercises in the past few days. I mentioned the comparison with pianists, violinists and singers who humbly do elementary technical exercises to keep their hands or voice trained. So even in our field, we should always do the elementary exercises before the more difficult ones.
X:: I would like to know what is the best time to do the exercises.
Assagioli: In general, at a time when one is free and quiet. Then there are also clear, let’s say psychobiological types: there are the so-called morning people, and the evening people. That is, there are those who feel foggy and dull in the morning, and then lively and intelligent in the evening, and vice versa. So choose the time that suits our constitution, our own life, our circumstances — always choose the most suitable, most favorable time, at least from the beginning. Later on, I would suggest sportingly trying to do them even at times that are not favorable to us; but that comes later, it is a second degree; for now it is better to do them at the most suitable times.
X.: Well, since you were urging us last time to vary the task as much as possible, do you think the lying position is more appropriate?
Assagioli: Again, there is no fixed rule for this. I suggest that you adopt the external conditions of time and position that you find experimentally most favorable in practice. Each one is a case in itself, and we must always refrain from rigid, general rules.
So now let’s do the elementary exercise. It involves visualizing a not-too-large normal blackboard of dark gray color. You can also do some staging; it would seem to complicate the exercise, but instead it makes it easier. Imagine you are in a classroom sitting at a desk, and in one corner you see a large blackboard with a brown wooden frame. All of a sudden on this blackboard . . . first, however, try to visualize it well, to hold it still during [. . .] At first I recommend concentrating with your eyes closed. After visualizing the blackboard, imagine that a number is formed, I will say a given number, after that a second, and after that a third; this is the pattern of the exercise. Now I will give the details of the case.
So first of all let’s visualize the blackboard, the big blackboard with the characteristic dark gray color. Let’s observe it, keeping it in mind, trying to form a vivid and realistic image. In the middle of the blackboard appears a drawn “five,” [5] as if drawn with white chalk, regular and quite large. We visualize this white “five” in the center of the blackboard. To keep the mind or imagination fixed, you can repeat the word “five” to yourself several times. Now next to the “five” appears a “nine,” [9] again drawn in white chalk of the same size. Five, nine. Now visualize the two figures together: fifty-nine [59]. Now next to the nine appears a “two” [2]. Now let us follow the three digits, almost tracing with the eye from left to right: five, nine, two. Let us dwell on the two so that it becomes as vivid as the others. And now let us try to see them all together, as the number five hundred and ninety-two. Let us keep it firmly in mind, still, vivid, visualizing it if it escapes, five hundred and ninety-two [592].
Let’s hear the results.
P.: To begin with I will tell you my experience, because it is comical. I put the 5 on the board, and it went for a walk; I put it back on the board, and it went for a walk; it said, I don’t need the board, I’m just fine [. . .]. Then I put the 9 next to it and they both walked around. The 59, and maybe the 9 was even bigger in the presence of the 5 with an air of [. . .] they were walking around by themselves. Then I put the 2 next to it, and the 2 was smaller and they all went wagging their tails. . . .
B-T.: enjoyed it immensely, while the 59 [. . .] was gray instead of white and quite puffy [. . .] the 2 on the other hand was tiny and more composed, and so these three numbers were great fun.
Assagioli: You see how psychologically interesting things jump out in such a simple, elementary exercise. One fundamental tendency that is emphasized by psychologists is that of personification, of tending to personify oneself; and here we come back to last Sunday’s talk about sub-personalities. Every strong tendency, every complex tends to personify itself, and so do even numbers.
B-T.: I understand why the 2 was small, because I ordered myself to [do this], and I am annoyed to hear things being ordered. So this 2 came after the 5; I ordered the 5, then I ordered the 9, then I ordered the 2. And so this 2, probably I was a little annoyed to put it in.
C.: I managed the visualization of the separate digits; that is to say, for a moment I saw the 5 marked with clear, white chalk, and then the 9 and then the 2. But as far as the digits are concerned there is to be noted that the gray board was quite [. . .] then the trouble happened with the fluctuation and superimposition of the images on the board. The blackboard first was in one place, then in another place, then school accessories were superimposed, then the room changed — in short, a mess! — what I meant, this fluctuation in short [. . .] the numbers however were in handwriting as if in third or fourth grade, where the teacher does them nicely, and all the surroundings were distinct [. . .]
Assagioli: These testimonies are enough to demonstrate a fundamental fact: that we are not masters of our psyche. I would say that this is an exercise in disidentification, negative but very persuasive. For if we cannot make our imagination do what we want it to do, if we cannot keep our mind still, then it evidently means that we are not our imagination, nor our mind. So the negative exercise is even more demonstrative than the positive exercise.
C.: I would like to ask this. This same disorder that grabs the visualization, this same lack of order that occurred with the visualization of the surrounding elements — I wanted to know if it is the same as when all those grotesque images are formed as we sleep, just in sleep? Is it the same situation?
Assagioli: It is a matter of imagining and keeping fixed the images that we want, and not what they want. That is, we must realize that in ordinary life we are in a semi-dream state; so much so, that in the spiritual realm there is just a continuous symbolism of awakening, of awakening to higher truths, of awakening to the consciousness of our being. All of this demonstrates our basically humiliating situation, whereby we believe we are awake, when in fact we are half hypnotized, half asleep.
C.: A perfect execution, let’s call it perfect if that is possible with this visualization — would it be to see the blackboard and the figures and that’s it, and nothing else?
Assagioli: Yes, exactly. The successful exercise involves being able to see what you want, all that you want, and only all that you want. So you see how this is an exercise in spiritual truth, and it is very instructive. We do not know how to hold an image still, even the simplest, most basic image. So there is an extreme need to do the psychological workouts of the exercises, and to become masters in one’s own house. I think we can end on that note.
Shall we endure some more exercises?
Good. You are brave. So now let’s do the ideal model exercise. I will make it as simple as possible. So each one of us gathers and chooses a quality that he wishes to develop, each one chooses what interests him, I would say, and [it will be] different for each one. Once you has chosen it, imagine yourself possessing this quality, in two ways: 1) imagine having it, feeling that you have it in a psychological sense, 2) but also showing it in your bodily attitude, and in your facial attitude. In this one can help oneself, it is not prescribed but it is permissible, by putting oneself in front of the mirror and seeing oneself: whether it is smiling in gladness, whether it is energy with a firm physical attitude, or whether it is calmness in a relaxed, laid-back state.
So you have to evoke the quality in a psychological sense, and you also have to have the physical attitude, both felt physically — these are the images that are called kinesthetic or muscular — by visualizing your image in the mirror. Here, now I will leave you three or four minutes, we did the earlier exercise a little too quickly. Then each one imagine a quality, try to feel it, feel its bodily expressions I would say, and see himself in the mirror in the corresponding attitude.
* * *
Now, those who have succeeded even to a small extent in doing this, try raising your hand.
[…]Here is already an interesting result. This exercise has succeeded better than the previous one. Why, because there is a vital interest, because one feels its usefulness. Whereas the purely mechanical exercise of numbers did not set in motion any interest other than simply the gymnastic interest of the mind, perhaps it had not identified the value, it did not [. . .] I would say the unconscious, it did not hold the imagination still. Let’s hear some qualitative comments.
M.: I have already done the exercise of the ideal model a few times on my own. But I did it to prepare for public speaking, to discuss important issues, not to make mistakes, and so there is a prior preparation, a preparation that I had to do, and so I am trained a little. But now I haven’t been able to have what [. . .] it seems to me that the gentleman here who was speaking earlier was saying that there are elements in the image that change and that they are confusing; they don’t succeed well, and so that we don’t see our image as well as we would like. So we see this image, but it’s kind of blurred, it’s not a sharp image.
Assagioli: . . . But if you can do without it, sometimes it can be [. . .] and I would say you succeed better by just physically feeling that you possess the quality, without the visual image.
M.: This mirror is not a mirror, it is like a glass through which we see ourselves.
Assagioli: In the field of typology, in this case there is another type of distinction, which I would say is different from what I mentioned earlier. In this case we have the visual, auditory and motor types. Then there are also gustatory and olfactory types [. . .]. Now if one is a visual type one is helped by [. . .] different ones, but if a visual type of person is disturbed then he or she cannot visualize in a useful way. So here again there is great freedom, use the imaginative type that is most appropriate.
C.: I meant to say that a large part of the problem in visualization is that the vision of the pattern to be achieved is not distinct enough [. . .].
Assagioli: Everywhere you need practice. These are not things you improvise; success is the deserved fruit of exercise, of constant training. Just as it is true that those who want to acquire a technical skill, say playing an instrument, or singing or even other technical skills, such as being able to type fast, etc. Understand that practice is needed, in those cases it is all the same. The difference being that these psychospiritual skills are more important than any technical skills. And they deserve to be appreciated, so that adequate time and energy is devoted to them for their development, and this is precisely the leitmotif I insist on in our meetings.
B-T.: Let’s see, one more little thing. What I was asking for was something I was already asking for myself before, and I am still asking for it. But from the mirror I was immediately transferred to the environment where I have to exercise this inner virtue. Well, is this positive or negative?
Assagioli: You see, it depends on whether or not the result succeeded in evoking the quality you desired.
B-T.: As soon as you said to evoke, I recognized immediately what was less [. . .] I saw myself very serene in a behavior as I should be, and that sometimes I am not.
Assagioli: I suggest you continue, you will see that [. . .].
B-T.: I mean with certain clothes [. . .] the fact was that from the mirror I immediately passed into the environment in which I have to exercise this fundamental quality.
Assagioli: You see, all these collateral images are not to be driven away if they do not disturb; if they help they are to be welcomed; as usual there are no general rules; everyone has to find his optimal choice by exercise, by experiment, by trying and trying again. I would say an appropriate “setting of the scene” of the unconscious helps. One can also do it voluntarily, to see oneself in a given environment, if that helps. As you see, the simplest experiments become interesting, and all their different modes [. . .].
[1] This is a “synthetic” essay bringing together aspects of several different lectures and papers on this subject. Note that the content includes some basic visualization exercises too, because Assagioli considers them a necessary preliminary to doing the Ideal Model exercises.—Ed.
[2] Ellipses shown as . . . or [. . .] were found in the original manuscripts. These probably indicate either pauses, or words not heard or understood by the transcriber. —Ed.
[3] Assagioli is not using the term “existentialist” to refer to any philosophical approach, but rather to a realistic attitude that a person may take to his or her own existence.—Ed.
[4] Some of the preliminary exercises are given later in this “synthetic” essay, and a more extensive treatment is given in the monograph titled “Visualization Exercises.” —Ed.
[5] These are special technical terms for Assagioli, which do not have equivalents in English. The term, “subversion” has a different meaning in colloquial English, where it refers to the act of overthrowing or undermining, especially a government or authority. But Assagioli is using the etymology of the word, which is to “turn under.” C.G. Jung first coined the terms “introversion” and “extroversion” to indicate whether a person’s vital interests were “turned” inward or outward from oneself; Assagioli is extending this usage to indicate whether that interest is directed or “turned” in a “higher” or “lower” direction. —Ed.
[6] Le piccole virtù (1962) by Italian writer Natalia Ginzberg (1916-1991). More recent editions are available, including an English translation. —Ed.
Leave a Reply