[ Previous ]   [ Next ]

American optimism

C.B.T.

In this week’s New Yorker Louis Menand writes about depression: ‘Two new books, Gary Greenberg’s “Manufacturing Depression” (Simon & Schuster; $27) and Irving Kirsch’s “The Emperor’s New Drugs” (Basic; $23.95), suggest that dissensus prevails even among the dissidents. Both authors are hostile to the current psychotherapeutic regime, but for reasons that are incompatible. Greenberg is a psychologist who has a practice in Connecticut. He is an unusually eloquent writer, and his book offers a grand tour of the history of modern medicine, as well as an up-close look at contemporary practices, including clinical drug trials, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and brain imaging. The National Institute of Mental Health estimates that more than fourteen million Americans suffer from major depression every year, and more than three million suffer from minor depression (whose symptoms are milder but last longer than two years). Greenberg thinks that numbers like these are ridiculous—not because people aren’t depressed but because, in most cases, their depression is not a mental illness. It’s a sane response to a crazy world.
Greenberg basically regards the pathologizing of melancholy and despair, and the invention of pills designed to relieve people of those feelings, as a vast capitalist conspiracy to paste a big smiley face over a world that we have good reason to feel sick about. The aim of the conspiracy is to convince us that it’s all in our heads, or, specifically, in our brains—that our unhappiness is a chemical problem, not an existential one. Greenberg is critical of psychopharmacology, but he is even more critical of cognitive-behavioral therapy, or C.B.T., a form of talk therapy that helps patients build coping strategies, and does not rely on medication. He calls C.B.T. “a method of indoctrination into the pieties of American optimism, an ideology as much as a medical treatment.”’

There is the right to be indifferent, but there is also the right to be unhappy.

Perhaps here we have an answer to a question I posted a couple of days ago:

Why read literature when it doesn’t make you happy?

Because unhappiness has something to offer.

There is joy to be found in melancholia.

The rejection of pleasure can be extremely exciting.


36 comments Last_comment
It's like the pleasure-delayer; part of the pleasure lies in the delaying.
Only happy when it rains
As soon as I read this article excerpt, which I think is fabulous by the way for the way Mr. Greenberg words it, a song by Scottish-American band Garbage started singing round in my head. Forgive me for not being able to resist to copy the lyrics here, particulary to everybody here who knows it well. Watch / listen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdodc1Eu1nA

I'm only happy when it rains
I'm only happy when it's complicated
And though I know you can't appreciate it
I'm only happy when it rains
You know I love it when the news is bad
And why it feels so good to feel so sad
I'm only happy when it rains

Pour your misery down, pour your misery down on me
Pour your misery down, pour your misery down on me

I'm only happy when it rains
I feel good when things are going wrong
I only listen to the sad sad songs
I'm only happy when it rains

I only smile in the dark
My only comfort is the night gone black
I didn't accidentally tell you that
I'm only happy when it rains
You'll get the message by the time I'm through
When I complain about me and you
I'm only happy when it rains

Pour your misery down,
(pour your misery down on me)
Pour your misery down,
(pour your misery down on me)
Pour your misery down,
(pour your misery down on me)
Pour your misery down,
(pour your misery down on me)
Pour your misery down
You can keep me company as long as you don't care

I'm only happy when it rains
You wanna hear about my new obsession
I'm riding high upon a deep depression
I'm only happy when it rains

(Pour some misery down on me)
I'm only happy when it rains
(Pour some misery down on me)
I'm only happy when it rains
(Pour some misery down on me)
I'm only happy when it rains
(Pour some misery down on me)
I'm only happy when it rains

(Pour some misery down on me)
(Pour some misery down on me)
(Pour some misery down on me)
(Pour some misery down on me)

I'm only happy when it rains
(Pour some misery down on me)
I'm only happy when it rains
(Pour some misery down on me)
I'm only happy when it rains
(Pour some misery down on me)
Masochistic joy
So let's see: joy seekers and outwardly happy persons may well just be a masochists who are denying themselves the happiness of unhappiness? I admit this would explain their happiness.
Dens
Postponement is not the same thing as rejection.
Carlos
If you read my entry carefully you will discover that I agree with the obvious as well:
Sometimes happiness can be found in happiness.
If you eat fish on Friday it doesn’t mean that you can’t eat meat on Saturday.
Well, it never hurts to underline the obvious.
it´s scary, i´ve heard such a theories before, do these authors offer, by any chance any kind of solution except making people to THINK? I guess this is the solution and thinking hearts
Can you really reject pleasure? Is there one moment where you can say "from now on, I reject pleasure"? Or is the rejection a temporarily thing? And if it's temporarily, isn't it a delayment?
One can say that delaying is bound to one thing. Or that rejection is, but I don't know.
Arnon
Sometimes you seem to miss my humor.
Rejection junkie
However exciting the rejection of pleasure may be, being rejected by pleasure is always more exciting. One has the right to suffer, and one will do so. Not for the reason that joy is to be found in melancholy. Unhappiness or the act of intense suffering has something else to offer. It offers the joy of ultimate denial - a self imposed indoctrination in disguise.
There is joy to be found in order (for instance perceiving that a certain phenomenon is clearly an "injustice" is locating that occurence into an order), and maybe melancholia can provide such order.
I hate to admit it but there is sometimes also joy in other people's unhappiness.
Suffering
Maybe curiosity plays a big part in this. How would it feel to suffer intensely? What can the experience of suffering give me: insight, wisdom, knowledge? Exciting indeed.
If i suffer genuinely, it nearly always gives me nausea (or vice versa) which I'd like to get rid of as soon as possible. Melancholy, more often than not, is sheer self-pity. It's playing suffering.
Juliane
Melancholy can be a playful affair.
G T
This is called Schadenfreude.
Juliane
When is suffering real and righteous - when you cut your finger or do you have to break your leg?
Bernard
You have a far too ramantic idea about suffering. Being in pain doesn't make you a better person, after a while all you want to do ,is to retaliate.
Melpractitioner
It’s not clear where the rejection of pleasure ends and pleasure starts rejecting you.
How should we imagine pleasure rejecting a person? A woman, a mother, the department of Human Resources?

And it's not at all clear to me that unhappiness is denial.
Dee
Don't give up.
Juliane
Nobody asks you to suffer genuinely.

It is sometimes a matter of good taste to feign suffering.

I would appreciate it highly when you could feign suffering while we are having sex.
Arnon
When pleasure rejects a person, it intensifies the suffering, because now the suffering is something that is inflicted upon the individual rather than chosen by the individual.

In actuality pleasure never rejects a person, but a person can definitely be led to believe this is not the case. A woman or a mother can make herself believe this is not the case. So can any department of Human Resources.

This is why unhappiness is the ultimate denial. This is also why depression is a multi-billion business.
Arnon
It's not clear because both are the same, but one is designed to make the suffering even more unbearable.

You can start imagining by watching very depressed people closely.
Teresa / Arnon
@ Teresa
It just has to be truly unpleasant. There's nothing wrong with being melancholic, though. I myself love to wallow in self-pity from time to time or mimic a grave argument with loved ones.

@ Arnon
I certainly don't want to appear tasteless. If you do things wrong I wouldn't even have to feign suffering even though that is among the common female repertoire, I'm sure. Every woman has phrases like "Careful, you're hurting me with it." at the ready.
@Mieke
I am afraid I was a romantic toddler.
People should have the right to be melancholic, but they can't be in public life. Someone else then will get the job/the highest grade/the money/the girl/the boy/the car/the sympathy/etc. In order to be succesfull you have to be optimistic and smiling. (There are exceptions ofcourse). Personally I think one should act this optimistic joy, this blindness for all the things that aren't right in this world, for two reasons: 1 a smile on your face, whether genuine or fake, will give a signal to your brain that you are feeling okay, happy. Hence, you will start feeling okay, or at least better then before. 2 if you want to do something about all the pain and sorrow in this world, you should try to get in a position where you have some power, and the way to get there is not by being a pain in the ass.
And I do not think that psychopharmaceuticals are the answer. They're just a way to control the nation. The answer lies in having two faces or masks, one that you put on in public life and another that you only show to the people that are close to you and whom you can trust.
Melp
Perhaps it’s a good idea to read the article in The New Yorker. You can find the link in my entry.
Juliane
Aha! While making love to your boyfriend you whisper, “oh no, you’re hurting me.”
No wonder your relationship resembles hell.
I was thinking of more joyful suffering. Let’s discuss this in private.
Do you really believe that all men need reassurance?
Jo
If Prozac is controlling “the nation” (all nations?) then I must say that Prozac is a very benign dictatorship.
Let’s ask the Afghan people: “What do you want Prozac or Taliban?”
Let’s assume that the army of the future consists of psychiatrists armed with anti-anxiety drugs and antidepressants, some of us may cry “Orwell” but I dare to say this is improvement.
Don’t kill them, force-feed them antidepressants. Or Viagra for that matter.
Arnon
You're beginning to sound like Jim Channon, originator of the US Army's "First Earth Battalion".

Indeed, why shoot "enemies" with bullets? That's just so twentieth century. Let's shoot them with psychedelic drugs instead. Let's bombard them with gas that turns them into horny promiscuous homosexuals (a onetime actual US military research project). Let's become part of their solution not their problem. Let's make them happy. After all, their unhappiness has become our problem.

I would suggest distributing Prozac, but research studies have shown that, for the vast majority of people, its effects are indistinguishable from those of a placebo.

For more on PSYCHOPS see Ron Jonson's excellent "Crazy rulers of the world".
http://www.veoh.com/search/videos/q/crazy+rulers+of+the+world

And the fiction-based-on-fact movie "Men who stare at goats".
Dee
Since I’ve been informed that you have a vivid sense of humor I know how to respond to your comment:
Yes, I’m recruited by the NSA – they would like to know if they can influence the elections in June in the Netherlands by widely distributing certain anti-anxiety drugs. Of course I’m not the only agent responsible for this ultra secret pilot project. Influential thinkers within the NSA have reached the conclusion that democracy can only survive if psychiatrists will actively regulate the electorate.
Arnon
Everybody wants to reap the fruits of their labour. So yes, I do think that all men need reassurance as do all women.
drugs
@Arnon
Not Orwell, Huxley, if I remember correctly.
Arnon/Bernard
Skinner is also possible.
I said I don't think psychopharmaca in the sense of anti-depressants are the answer. I didn't say anything about LSD of Viagra for that matter. But here we approach Huxley's novel, which I found very disturbing, although my teacher in English tried to convince me that Soma was the best thing that could ever happen to mankind.
I think no one should be dragged to heaven by violence, i.e. no one should be drugged in order to experience heaven. But if they, in their misery and warfare, infringe upon the freedom of others, then maybe we should soothe them with some drugs.
Bernard
Huxley. Yes. Of course.
I stand corrected.
Thanks!
Arnon
I am glad you are also on board.

Of course democracy cannot survive without some manipulation. After all, most people don't have the faintest idea what they really want. It is funny that they don't even realize how suggestible they are.

What better way to influence elections through man's erections? It is exactly for these situations - a US ally and investor threatening to go "ape" - that SSPASM (Stimulated SPontaneous orgASM) was developed. Little did Wilhelm Reich know the part he would play in the salvation of the West. Not by sitting in a funny wooden box getting charged up on "orgones", but through his ideas about the "sex economy".

What do human beings want even more than money? Yes, everyone knows it is SEX. Now that SSPASM sattelites have been deployed we will be able to cause simultaneous mass stimulation to orgasm. Of course, this will take people by surprise the first time. But they will become used to it. In fact a daily stimulated orgasm will condition them to expect the "moment". All day, their thoughts will anticipate the waves of the pleasure beamed from above. We will have created new flower children, dancing naked in the sun, incapable of aggression and happily leaving their affairs to "those who know best".
Dee
Were you recruited by the NSA as well?