Tat: ationships evolve in and out of intimacy.
Tit: Is intimacy the right word in this context?
Tat: the right word...
Tit: I took you off track.
Tat: Maybe you just asked a better question. What is the word for that thing in this relationship?
Tit: That thing?
Tat: Your right its not intimacy.
Tit: No.
Tat: That would require an equitable attachment.
Tit: This is not equitable?
Tat: (incredulous) really? You think it is?
Tit: I didn't say that.
(The pause here is heavy, awkward. They look intently at each other. They are "choosing their words"and the emotions behind them.)
Tit: Let's return...
Tat: The therapist and client relationship cannot be equitable
Tit: Because of the money exchanged?
Tat: No, that's too simple. This would still feel inequitable even if it was free.
Tit: Its hard to set a price on what happens here.
Tat: Free doesn't sound equitable on your side? Point. But I still want to explore this idea of intimacy,
for lack of a better word.
Tit: What attracts you to this idea?
Tit: Or better put, what is it that you experience here that is unique, different that the "intimacy" of your other primary relationships?
Tat: Thats curious to me.
Tit: What is?
Tat: What you just said. Over the course of ten years, you have repeated variations on the theme of the otherness of this space, this time, this rapport. The unique quality, untenable and never yet named that you always use as a kind of force field around the sacred guru that sits cross-legged on the ground floor of your identity as a therapist.
Tit: A sacred guru, wow. I like that.
Tat: Of course, you like that. Its your fortress, your fortress of silence.
Tit: But certainly not a fortress of solitude.
Tat: Silence is wrong?
Tit: I let my clients in. Certainly, YOU feel that. You are family to me.
Tat: Family? Meaning you are nice to them whenever they show up, keep all of the secrets of your life completely out of your conversation with them, and are relieved when their visits come to an end?
Tit laughs a little, nervously.
Tat: We are family.
Tit: You know what I mean....
Tat: Family generally gets guilted in to going to every wedding they are invited to.
Tit: Ah.
Tat: Yup, back to this.
Tit: You obviously have more to say about the matter. I think it is fairly obvious the dangers inherent there.
Tat: Certainly to you.
Tit: How can you expect me to share your view of such an event with requisite sympathy when I was present and had my own experience?
Tat: You mean after the fact?
Tit: Yes.
Tat: Well that would never happen, would it? Because this convenient retreat exists. And you don't have to make an assessment or evaluate your position, because your position is a tenet of your faith.
(a long pause)
Tat: the dome of silence...
Tit: You dislike the line.
Tat: No. Well, perhaps I have. But this is something different. I long ago accepted the line. You were clear.
Tit: Then why the invitation?
Tat: Indeed.
Tit: A test? Did you want to see if the boundaries were still in place.
Tat: I expected nothing. The invitation was a gesture not even a desire.
No comments:
Post a Comment