Book Reviews and other Accidents

Read on for a review of The Given Self by Dr. Monte M. Page

Got the paper and brought it in my room. It’s 6:17 and I’m not really disappointed. It’s kind of funny really. The whole “Sunday Life” section of the paper is strangely about half the size of usual and Mary Ann Grossmann has no book column at all. The usual book “page” isn’t even a column long, and most of that is NY Times Best sellers. Below that there is the Literary Calendar of the Week with six items, of which my book signing is one. The order is alphabetical. Underneath that, which I swear I never saw before, are "Hot Tickets", the first of these being the Café Accordion Orchestra; and "Movies opening Friday", which begins with “Youth in Revolt”. That’s it. That’s the book page for today. Oh well. I would have been disappointed on a normal Sunday; disappointed even if I wasn’t hoping to be a little more a part of the book page than this:

Mari Perron: Minnesotan celebrates publication of “The Given Self,” her new book about living authentically. 7 p.m. Thursday, Barnes & Noble, Har Mar Mall, 2100 N. Snelling Ave., Roseville.

Life is accidental in so many ways. I remember writing a while back, that I’d hope a January 7 launch date wouldn’t be in the midst of freezing cold or a blizzard and that people might be ready, after the holiday rush, to think about newness in the new year. I’ve got a feeling the Pioneer Press staff is on vacation. They must be tired after having to fulfill all those deadlines for Christmas books and then the inevitable 10 best of the decade lists for the beginning of 2010.

I think that for me, the “book page” is a little about recognition among peers. You read something like that so faithfully for so long; see the advent of small presses and self-published books beginning to get more space; see the respectful way that good writing and fresh ideas are lauded; the way local authors get some space, and if you’re a writer, you hope to be there someday.

So I don’t know what to call the way I feel, since I wasn’t really expecting much and my feelings more general than specific, more of a longing for that peer recognition than for unknown folks to show up at a book signing.

Peer recognition feels like an honest sort of desire, a natural human longing to be counted among those you are drawn to and admire. You don’t have to be a writer to appreciate good writing or the kind of book review that tells you more than what a book is about. And so with that in mind, I post the only book review that The Given Self has received. It’s one of those that “tells you more.”

The Given Self by Mari Perron
A Review by Monte M. Page, PhD

I am a 74 year old retired Psychology Professor. I have spent a lifetime reading books trying to find out who I am, what the world is and how the two are related. Of course I’ve also tried to experience life full force in a quest for answers to those same questions and it’s been over 30 years since I realized that my quest was a spiritual quest. I don’t read nearly as many books as I used to. Quite frankly, I have found that most authors don’t have the answers to the questions I am asking. I read mostly channeled books these days as I find them to have the seriousness and the depth I’m looking for. For a long time, A Course In Miracles (ACIM) was the center of my spiritual quest.

It was about five years ago that I first encountered the name Mari Perron. She was the “scribe” for a series of channeled books starting with A Course Of Love (ACOL). I have called these books more advanced sequels to ACIM (see my article in “Miracles Magazine” May/June, 2009) Mari tells us that ACOL is intended to do for the heart what ACIM does for the mind (see her article in “Miracles Magazine” Jan/Feb, 2009). ACOL came to me, synchronisticly, just at a time when I was realizing that the heart was more important than the head in spirituality. Indeed, ACOL taught me that the goal of the spiritual quest was wholeheartedness or the integration of head and heart. ACOL was written in a formal, philosophical voice that claimed, along with ACIM, to be Jesus.

Now Mari is back, only this time speaking in her own voice. I had wondered what her life would be after the momentous experience of scribing ACOL. Would she be able to put it into practice or would she end up resentful and depressed as Helen Schucman, scribe of ACIM, had done. The Given Self answers that question. She is doing just fine and has some profound insights to share with the rest of us. She is presenting a new vision of spirituality that is less perfectionistic, lest otherworldly, more feminine, more compassionate and more livable. She is not recommending that we return to the small, separated and fearful self called “ego”.

At the same time she is debunking the myth of enlightened perfection. We have a true self and a given self that should be embraced along with our given world after we have purged the ego. She is really talking about a very advanced spiritual state called “the elevated self of form.” This comes right out of ACOL which, in the latter portions, challenged us to live free and wholehearted and to create a new self and a new world. I have thought for a long time that the upcoming shift in consciousness would be led by women and this book is an example of that. It’s interesting that the scribe of ACOL is the first one to write a book about really putting it into practice.

It is surprising how different in voice and style the ACOL is from “The Given Self”. This is one thing that convinces me that the channeled writings are miraculous. Mari’s own voice is very personal, autobiographical and subjective. This is on purpose and part of her message. She is illustrating that it’s ok to be who you uniquely are, your given self, in her very writing style which I like a lot. She also shows a bit of “attitude” at times. I think this is also deliberate to show that you can be spiritual, have attitude and really care about earth-plane stuff.

As a psychologist, I taught Theories of Personality for over 40 years. A central theme in modern personality theory for over a hundred years, starting with Freud, was the nature of the human self. Freud started out with a very small and almost insulting but somewhat accurate vision of the ego as an adaptive mental structure designed to both cope with and defend against internal and external stress. This is called the modern psychodynamic approach and without this foundation, neither ACIM nor ACOL would be understandable.

The psychodynamic point of view was perpetuated into a second generation called “Neo Freudians” and a third called “Ego Psychologists”. They gave the ego a more positive, powerful and creative spin but they were still talking about a “healthy ego”. Then, along came Humanistic Psychology which elevated the ego to almost saintly status with “self-actualization” and the “fully functioning person” (Carl Rogers).

Alongside this obsession with the ego self, there was a parallel and less mainstream development (starting with Freud’s best student, Carl Jung, moving up through Abraham Maslow and into Transpersonal Psychology) that saw human selfhood as more than mere ego. Jung, for example, saw the ego as a necessary and inevitable part of the human condition, but not who we really are. The” higher Self” (capital S self) was the true goal of human development. The Self was more balanced, whole and spiritual and emerged in the second half of life for those lucky enough to grow into what he called the “individuation process”. Mari’s given self reminds me somewhat of Jung’s Self. It also has the flavor of Rollo May’s “destiny” concept. The given self is the draw that pulls us towards our highest transpersonal development, but at the same time it is our unique and creative response to the genetic, environmental, personal, familial, cultural and national influence on our lives. No human being is without a given self, but it can be ignored, denied or repressed. It can also be confused with the ego.

There are two competing views of the spiritual goal. The first is what I call the “no self” option. I know a great deal about this one having spent nearly five years stuck in the crown chakra of the higher mind and thinking that was the goal of spiritual attainment. This has been imported into contemporary spirituality largely through Buddhism; or at least an Americanized interpretation of Buddhism. This point of view over emphasizes meditation which is merely a tool for opening the higher mind. This point of view says the world, including ourselves, is an illusion so ascend to the mountain top; take an other worldly perspective and leave the mess behind. I’ve been against that perspective for many years and at one time I developed quite a bit of “attitude” about it. I felt that this point of view involved an attachment to higher consciousness and “being enlightened” that was potentially unhealthy and not very practical as a solution to the human condition. I adopted the term “romancing the void” to describe this state of consciousness.

Mari subscribes to the other point of view. Towards the end of her book she states, “where we find ourselves is not a place of higher consciousness devoid of self, but a place of self imbued with higher consciousness.” This understanding goes beyond the open mind to the open heart. The goal of the spiritual life in this point of view is to embrace your true Self, your given self and the world in compassion.

These two points of views may not be incompatible. Rather than being in competition, they may be sequential stages. To me it is very important to get rid of the separated ego and this is a big deal that historically few have achieved. However, with the up-tic in spiritual interest and the advent of teaching tools like ACIM, this is something that is more frequent now. I view ACIM as a high-powered solvent for the ego. It makes sense that purging the mind of the ego would leave an experience of no self. But, is that really the goal of spiritual life? Or do we need to go on and open our hearts and reclaim our given selves as Mari is advocating? This is also, in my view, what Jesus Christ was and is all about.

I have one slight reservation with Mari’s presentation. She conceptualizes our loss of self as “identity theft “and the embrace of the given self as if it were a recovery of what was stolen from us. This is a catchy way of putting it but it doesn’t match my experience. My identity wasn’t stolen by contemporary alternative spirituality; I couldn’t wait to give it away. I did it because I was still rebelling against this crazy world. We are all responsible for our own choices. I think Mari knows this and for the most part we are on the same page, but I just think the identity theft theme might be misunderstood.

This is a very radical book. It probably will be quite controversial. Not everyone, even those in the new consciousness and alternative spirituality movement, will be ready for such a demythologized and liberating point of view. The author admits the book is not perfect. I say that the first editions of anything tend to be flawed. Mari has produced a masterpiece and the flaws are part of what makes it a masterpiece.

Mari is calling for a movement of people who have embraced their given selves and are “coming out” for God and as their given selves. This is not a call for crass and insensitive evangelism but a call to be authentic and to teach by the way we live. But, wait a minute, we can’t just “come out” to those who aren’t ready or won’t listen. Or can we?

I think I like this book so much because it speaks to my heart. It gives me words to understand myself and my own spiritual journey. I’m one who climbed the mountain of higher consciousness. I rode the ascending currents of the subtle mind until I attained “beginners mind.” I became attached to “choiceless awareness.” I became stuck in “the experience of no self.” Eventually I discovered this was a foothill and not the mountain. I then became a recovering mystic on a quest to reclaim my “given self.” On this second more sober trip, with the help of ACIM, ACOL and other tools, I allowed my heart to open and forgive this crazy world. I don’t feel like an “enlightened sage” anymore, but as plain old open-hearted me. I am much happier and much easier to live with.