Hmm, I said something a bit like this last week and you implied that there was something wrong with me for feeling this way.
You say Jake seems to want to work it out. What makes you say that he wants to - I think he just wants it worked out, but I don't see him making much of an effort to work it out. No more than Amy is that's for sure. Yes, he is more emotional, but does that mean he is wanting to work it out? He doesn't do anything that Paul says, nor does Amy.
What I am trying to say in this post is that it's beginning to seem to me that Jake and Amy had different agendas when they came to Paul in the first place. I am suspecting that Amy already knew she wanted out of the marriage and was agreeing to therapy to satisfy herself she had tried and in hoped that it would help Jake see why divorce was necessary. Jake came wanting to stay married and unaware of where Amy was in her feelings.
So Jake's suspicions about therapy -- believing it will lead them to divorce because he has unconsciously picked up on that piece of Amy's agenda -- are correct, not because of the therapy but because of Amy's disengagement which happened before the therapy began.
For Jake to cooperate, to really engage in therapy is to allow this thing he doesn't want to unfold. So he fights and resists.
That's what patient do in therapy -- resist. None of us rolls over and takes in whatever the therapist says because, no matter how we believe we want to change, we defend against change until we can't any longer. Humans, like all organisms, strive for stability and resist change.
I didn't tell you that you were wrong last week, only that we, as viewers project onto the characters. All of us do that. There are multiple ways to look at ay of them. There are viewers who will feel allied with Jake and others who feel allied with Amy and in each case that feeling of alliance, of identification is about us. It isn't right or wrong at all.
neat blog. i know this is TV and not "really" therapy so i like to keep that in perspective... but... i really hope Paul/the story gets at the fact - or at least question- of jake's "love" for amy... what I see is co-dependent need-based etc etc toxic form of love--call it what you will, it seems rather dysfunctional in that "i can't live without you" way... that works when you are 16.. but really now... so anyway, since this IS tv-and the media thrives on dysfunction (just listen to the lyrics of so many songs where "I will die without you"... etc etc)... anyway, thought i'd add that and hope paul gets to it as it is a smart show.
thanks for your blog!
The thing is that even what we might call dysfunctional love can actually survive in a marriage. What I see as a problem in this marriage is that it rests on the shaky foundation of having begun in an affair while Amy was married to another.
Paul won't approach it as a co-dependent relationship as that is not within his theoretical framework. He can help them to see what it is that brought them together and to look together to see if they have enough to stay together. We all chose partners based on our inner needs and issues, even when we think we are being clear-eyed and conscious.
i hear what you are saying just ... i wish that society in general through the discourse (sic!) the media offers, would start to evolve out of these need-based relationships, maybe even as evidenced by paul who clearly states he thinks they love each other... that is a big statement, when in fact, he could use that to say "i think you need e.o, I dont know about love."
if it's enough within hihs framework to offer his opinions, then choose them wisely.
guess i am hoping for a general consciousness shift around co-dependency and when this show is so popular (and thought about as "real") i'd hope it could have an impact...
alas, it is TV, yes-and I trust it is having the impact it has-whatever it is. thanks for all-hope it's pretty in Maine.
I hope I don't disappoint you with this, but I don't see co-dependency as the issue here and I am not in accord with the way that term has come to describe nearly any relationship with problems. For me, it is fails to take into account the nature of human beings to continue to try to rectify their childhoods in their most intimate relationships. I see this not as a bad thing but as offering a way into something better -- *if* we pay attention and recognize that we can make new choices.
Commenting by HaloScan
