Golden era productions

121

122

13 FEBRUARY 1958

Male voice: Mm-hm. Would there be a point where you could say, "Well, now I've got him halfway or three-quarters of the way, he will now flatten out"?

Yes, there is a point when he can make things not go away, hold still and be more solid in mock-ups by postulate alone. And you can let him cruise out at that point. He's not confirmed and so forth, and you will have to pick him up again somewhere along the line and check him up. But that is the point up from which he will drift. But I don't know how long it would take him to drift up from that very, very minimum point.

Male voice: Gives me an idea. Thank you.

But that's the minimum point, for sure. Well, all right.

Tomorrow is the last lecture. Saturday is the last day. And I don't even think Saturday's an official course day, is it?

Male voice: No, it's just testing.

But you'll take your tests. And then there is a Clear questionnaire sheet that'll be handed out, and it'll have to be filled. And then I will—I have a Clear check sheet and I will check those out in the afternoon that want to be checked out on this.

Male voice: What time?

Oh, that will be in the afternoon after you've finished up your ... It will certainly be after one o'clock—yeah, Saturday. But—up in my office. It doesn't take very long.

There are and will be this co-auditing, professional co-auditing that we're trying to get squared away here. And any of you, of course, are welcome to continue co-auditing here after the course officially ends if you wish to do so.

I think that there are some here that could stand a little bit more. And you may wish to do this in the same atmosphere, rather than to get wracked around and go someplace else and do something else.

Also, HGC schedule is pretty crowded, but some professional auditing is, of course, available from the HGC at your professional rates if you want to do it up the quick way, without paying for it with any auditing.

HGC staff, of course, goes back together again after this ACC. ACCs are always ruinous to the HGC. Always. See? Take some of its people away and throw the administration haywire and so forth.

For some reason or other we normally have more preclears during an ACC.

Okay. Yes?

Male voice: Are you going to repeat this ACC or any of the data on it, in London?

Highly probable. Later at the end of summer, perhaps.

The 20th ACC, by the way, has an advance enrollment of one hundred and five people.

Audience: Wow! (whistles)

The news has gotten around!

Audience: (various responses, laughter)

Male voice: Anybody from Chicago in it?

Oh yeah.

Pretty wild, huh?

Audience: Yeah!

Because usually—usually not more than half of an ACC pre-enrolls, and that, two months before. And this is what? Six months before, almost. Five months ahead of the time, and a hundred and five pre-enrollments. Therefore, I would say that there's some possibility of having an ACC that's almost as big as a congress.

OTHER PROCESSES, THE HELP BUTTON: Q&A PERIOD

Audience: (various responses)

Pretty wild, isn't it?

Yes?

Male voice: What are you going to do, hire a hall?

We don't even have this building.

Male voice: No?

What we will do with that is in the lap of the gods.

Audience: (laughter)

Yes?

Male voice: Ron, in the normal run of events field auditors do not get HCO Bulletins, but since a lot of the graduates of this ACC, for example myself, people I can think of who are a little outlying, will be spending quite a lot of their time clearing up field auditors — clearing field auditors—would it be possible for us to receive HCO Bulletins concerning Clear Procedure, since we've got most of the understanding of it?

Well I think that you can receive HCO Bulletins on this in terms of compilations. That's what I am doing right now.

Male voice: Mm-hm.

They are available in any event at the HCO.

Male voice: Got a few of those ?

Second male voice: No, Ron. You can't get those . . .

Pretty hard to pry them out, huh? Well I can promise you compilations. Rapid, rapid compilations.

Now, one of the things is these—the notes you're taking, for instance. There will be a set of notes compiled and sold on these lectures which are just past. There will be that already because this is a fairly broad subject that we have just embraced. And what I have given you is pretty snap-up-to-PT and it will probably continue so for quite a while. For instance, the 20th ACC will probably run on the exact pattern of this ACC. Probably almost the exact thing. Their technique or procedure will probably be better, to some slight degree, from what we've learned from this one. But that's always the case.

But I wouldn't say there'd be all that difference that there was between, for instance . . . The 18th, you know, was a training ACC, and people who went through the 18th learned how to train. They learned how to validate. And it's very possible that we may alternate ACCs — a training ACC, a processing ACC—one, two, one, two, something on this order.

Now, I am trying to get together some system of compilation whereby these materials will be readily and easily available. Now, I can't tell you exactly what that system will consist of because the communication lines will only stand so much. But I think some arrangement could be made to give you these materials rather easily.

Male voice: Okay, so we'll just sit tight on it and expect that something will come out.

Yes. It certainly will be done.

I'll tell you, the secret of success is the subject of the next—of an article in the next Ability magazine, and this might interest you, "The Secret of Success." A lot of people believe that the way to be a success is to grab hold of some materials and sit on them. Well, they act that way. Somebody has some tapes and he wants somebody to come in and hear them, and he says, "Well, that'll be two hundred dollars apiece." You know? I mean, something on this order.

123

124

13 FEBRUARY 1958

Now, the truth of the matter is that this doesn't pay—doesn't pay. It doesn't work out that because you have the materials you will necessarily triumph unless you hand them out. The secret of success, then, is passing them along. And the more and faster you can pass them along, why, the more successful you are. Now, this has proven to be the case over a long period of time.

For instance, almost anything that was really known about Dianetic auditing was included in Book One. Some people, a year later, read Book One and said we hadn't covered it at all during the year. In other words, there were a lot of things in Book One that were in advance of what we were teaching. And that was quite interesting. But as long as we just handed processes out and everything out, just wholesale, you see, auditors had preclears, the Foundation was jammed and so forth.

After a while people started to sit on materials and hold them down, and the whole parade slowed down.

The secret of success is: Pass it along. Fortunately, as I was telling you earlier in the lecture, it is possible to pass them along now without getting your block knocked off by the AMA or somebody.

Thank you very much.

A LECTURE GIVEN ON 14 FEBRUARY 1958

Thank you.

Well, here we are with the last lecture of the 19th ACC. We at least got to the last lecture. I don't know where else we might have got, but we got there. It's February the fourteenth, isn't it?

Audience: Yes.

AD 8. Okay.

Now, today—today I ought to really just moralize. I do have a few things to say along that line. We're finishing up with about 50 percent of the class Clear, which agrees with my postulate, thank you.

And now that we're all through, practically—just a few more hours of auditing to go—it would be timely for me to come up with a solution to all those cases that hung fire. So I will do so.

The responsibility for a mock-up will solve almost anything. Now, apparently it washes out by taking responsibility for it, but that's actually an inversion. You should be able to make a mock-up stand there even if misowned. And there are a lot of people around who get rid of mock-ups whenever they own them, and that's most people at large.

The truth of the matter is, this misownership via is not necessary to perpetuate a mock-up. You see that? It's not necessary to say, well—for the preclear to make it and then say, "Joe made it," in order to get the mock-up to persist. In other words, misownership. That's not necessary.

A person can simply postulate it and say that it'll persist. Of course, if he doesn't say that it persists as he postulates it, it won't, which probably causes him a great deal of upset—that if he doesn't say so, it isn't. Lot of responsibility being king in your own universe, you know? Nothing happens automatically. You don't get caved in suddenly on Saturday afternoon and, you know, that sort of thing.

Now, what about such a process of responsibility for mock-ups? All you have to do is process a person who "cannot mock something up" in this wise, to really see some fireworks and comm lags. Runs like this: "What mock-up could you take responsibility for making?"

Very crude wording there—that's not any final wording for a command, but it gives you the gist of the situation.

Now, an extreme . . . Now, go on, don't—stop making mock-ups, now. Come on, now. Wait till after the lecture. (laughter)

125

126

14 FEBRUARY 1958

The extreme case would be this: We have a person who is professionally a railroad locomotive engineer. (Evidently, by the way, he can't call himself an engineer here in the District of Columbia because he'll get arrested. That's because he's an engineer, you see?) Now, supposing this fellow—supposing this fellow came into your hands as a preclear and everything was all foggy, and you were having an awful time and so on. You know that you could get some relief on the case just from backtrack 1954 Havingness—by having him mock up railroad locomotives. You know that would be easy. And maybe you could just have him mock up railroad locomotives until he was able to mock something up. I mean, this is highly probable, although he'll tend to jump around on the track.

I did that to one fellow; he—had him mock up the machine he'd been married to for about twenty years. The next thing you know, he mocked up a destroyer—destroyer, Battle of Jutland. He was an American, this pc, and

he mocked up a des , all of a sudden was mocking up a destroyer. And

we tried to get back onto engines and we couldn't do that. I mean, it was just physically impossible, and he kept mocking up the destroyer. So I said, "Well all right, let's mock up the destroyer twenty times and get back onto machines."

And midflight he says, "Gor, gorblimey!" He was in the Royal Navy, way back when, Battle of Jutland. Got himself killed. Destroyer was sunk out from underneath him with a few well-placed salvos from a battlewagon. And that was the end of his destroyer. And that took his havingness right on out the bottom and cost him one body, too.

So he says, "The devil with the British Empire," and he promptly flitted across the Atlantic, evidently, and picked up an American baby. Then he became a machinist, the jerk; and there he was standing looking at gray steel. Gray steel, gray steel.

Well, that case to a marked degree cracked up. This boy was having a hard time being a professional auditor; after that, he didn't have any difficulty at all.

But supposing we had asked this fellow this sort of a command (this is a very extreme case, you see? I mean, this was a rough case), we'd ask him, "What part of a machine would you be responsible for mocking up?" or ". . . could you be responsible for mocking up?" See?

Now, we would have encountered one of the beefier comm lags—one of the more interesting comm lags. And he would have gotten very, very far afield before he finally came up with an answer. And the answer wouldn't have been any part of the machine. It would have been something else. Oh, he could be responsible for the wrench that set the machine up in the first place or something like this. Or he could be responsible for the place the machine had been, providing it wasn't there anymore. Vague, abstruse answers.

Now this, hammered on for quite a while often—now, underscore that word often; this is not one of these open-and-shut propositions because there are too many vagaries. For instance, it's your choice as an auditor what you pick out of the preclear to run, you know? And although he obviously must be hung up in a Cadillac in this life, it probably is a jet plane two hundred thousand years ago. You get the idea? I mean, you can err in trying to pick the lock. But the lock can be picked just that expertly if you E-Metered it enough. You know, you'd have to pick the right lock to just bang the bank into fragments and have him be able to mock up again.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR MOCK-UPS

But you could eventually lead him forward, lead a preclear forward with this process, and it'd be most often the case that he was thereafter able to mock up something—which is to say, willing to.

And you're on your willingness button. For instance, a painter of pictures might very well be very diffident about mocking up any part of a picture. But look, this man's business is the painting of pictures. Well, when he was young and foolish he was very happy to be responsible for any part of a picture he mocked up. And then he ran into the critics, see? And then he'd been married eight or nine or twelve times, or whatever the accepted number of times is for an artist at this day and age.

It's actually not their fault. They're not paying any attention to the women. And the woman comes around and sees all this beautiful attention and doesn't get any, and she leaves; another woman takes her place and the guy doesn't even notice.

Now, here—here you'd say, "Well! Well, this boy—this boy certainly can take responsibility for a picture because he's still painting."

Well, they have something—they say something about an artist. An artist, by the way, is a better example than an artisan for this reason: He is normally under a heavier stress critically, one way or the other, and he normally isn't working with the same masses. The mass actually, far from being a liability, is rather a saving grace.

Now, this boy, this artist, is still painting pictures but his quality has declined to the degree that he is not taking responsibility for what he paints. Criticism, starvation and the number of awards he didn't get for continuing his work and so forth, all add up to moving him back off into an irresponsibility, you see?

Unless he takes responsibility for what he paints, he can't make it. Well now, when you ask him to mock up something, he will run directly into this refusal to take responsibility.

And the first thing he'll think of, if you ask an artist who is having a hard time with his profession, first thing he'd think of, he'd say, "Well, the one thing I can mock up," he will say—ta-da, ta-da, ta-da, "is a picture."

You could say, "Go ahead." And he'll get copies, copies, you know, flicker-flack, and then all of a sudden it'll all go. He himself is no longer able to mock the things up.

Now, if you just had him mock up something he would take the responsibility for mocking up, and you graduated him—you see, you don't have to hit, whambo, into the middle of his particular profession, but you would come back to it; he'd take responsibility for mocking something up. We would walk him back with his mock-ups into his basic profession, and we'd still have a picnic.

But when he was at length able to mock up something and take responsibility for it, he would again get mock-ups. And more important, he would be able to handle his profession.

Now, this would also go for an admiral, you see? It would also go for a lawyer, it would go for a piano player, it would go for a fellow who sharpens lawn mowers. It would go for anybody. It's the one thing he has done long enough so that he can be driven off of it, you get the idea?

The actual science of life as practiced by Time magazine, the better part of the criminals of the country and so forth, this is that any time anybody is doing a good job, cut his stinking throat. Drive him back off of it, you see? Make him finally say that he's unwilling to be responsible for it. Got it?

127

128

14 FEBRUARY 1958

Now, if you could just drive him back hard enough, why, you'll get him so he won't mock it up anymore, and you're not troubled with living things around. See? After all, we all know the difficulty is that things are alive and move. And sometimes smile, goddamn them! The cure for that, of course, is to make somebody so unhappy about what he is doing that he'll stop doing it. Now, to ask him to take responsibility for it is something else.

And now, this is peculiar. This is, of course, a professional type of address, and this is peculiar to the case of an auditor. And an auditor very often gets into this sort of thing where—well, let's say he's stupid enough to be auditing in Hollywood. Let's say he's stupid enough to be doing this or stupid enough to be auditing in Greenwich Village. There we get nothing but spun-in l.ls. There's no other type of case in the whole area, you see? I don't wish to make any sweeping statements, but. . . Occasionally one of these l.ls sinks to a lower level.

But you run in, actually, in those two areas, into a predominant number of cases—it's just too many to be comfortable about. Person comes in, he's apparently very well dressed, he's apparently in charge of some part of his life, and he sits down. And the next thing you know—the second you just trigger his case a little bit, you get a blast on the subject of "Aw, you're a fake and you're a quack, you know da-da, and you're doing no good" and so forth. I mean, he just—just routine. Person is a 1.1 in that the moment that you shake his control to any degree at all, why, you find you're sitting on a venomous volcano.

Now when an auditor runs into too many such cases, if he himself is not aware of the mechanism—of course, all you've got to be is aware of the mechanism and you'll laugh like mad. The man is unwilling to help—that's all that's wrong with him. But if you ran into too many of the cases or an auditor ran into too many such cases, and if he had criticism from Father and criticism from Mother and criticism from the wife or criticism from the husband, you see, and criticism locally and wah-da and the magazines came out and they said everything he was doing was all bad, next thing you know he would be unwilling to take responsibility for a preclear. Got it? He'd be driven back off.

Now, all you'd have to ask him to do is "What part of a preclear would he be willing to mock up." And this other stuff starts flying off the case.

There's probably no such process as—I wouldn't say this finally, but as far as I know—there's no such process, "What part of a preclear would you be irresponsible for?"

As a matter of fact, I have run this. I've run irresponsibility tests and I have never yet found an auditing combination that would demonstrate there was such a thing as irresponsibility—that is to say, that it was a thing. There is, however, lack of responsibility. But the negative of responsibility is not operative in processing. Do you see that?

Therefore, the rehabilitation of responsibility in any zone of livingness or activity is the rehabilitation of a person's effectiveness and ability in that area.

Now, you've often heard me mention this fellow who we give an ability back to, such as the fellow who wants to be able to speak Arabic and cannot seem to learn it.

Now, of course that's a can't-reach-must-reach, can't-withdraw—must-withdraw situation. He's been speaking Arabic in one life or another, and things happened and he is no longer willing to take responsibility for Arabic—that's all there is to that.