COMMENTARY: Who’s really on the fringe here?

c. 1996 Religion News Service (EDITORS: Check RNS Online for a photo of Pythia Peay.) (Body & Soul is a regular column exploring the interplay between spirituality and psychology. Pythia Peay is the author of”Putting America on the Couch,”to be published by Riverhead Books in 1997.) (UNDATED) Did Bob Woodward of the Washington Post and […]

c. 1996 Religion News Service

(EDITORS: Check RNS Online for a photo of Pythia Peay.)

(Body & Soul is a regular column exploring the interplay between spirituality and psychology. Pythia Peay is the author of”Putting America on the Couch,”to be published by Riverhead Books in 1997.)


(UNDATED) Did Bob Woodward of the Washington Post and Watergate fame neglect to do a”deep background”check on the public pulse while researching his new book”The Choice?” In his provocative look at the 1996 presidential election campaign, Woodward writes about first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s relationship with leading-edge thinker Jean Houston. But his account of how Houston guided Clinton through imaginary conversations with Eleanor Roosevelt exposes his unfamiliarity with terms and practices rooted New Age philosophy, but are now widely accepted.

The Houston-Clinton episode accounts for no more than 10 pages of a 462-page book, but it stirred up a media frenzy nonetheless.

On NBC’s”Dateline,”Woodward maintained that Houston was”on the fringe.”Newspapers dubbed Houston”Hillary’s spiritual guru.”Commentators wondered whether there had been a seance in the White House.

But Woodward’s notion of fringe thinking is off-base.

Like cultural Rip Van Winkles, some he and others in the press acted as if they have been asleep these past 20 years. Their portrayal of Houston revealed nothing more than how out-of-touch some journalists are with a grass-roots movement that has had an enormous impact on people’s lives.

By misrepresenting Houston’s solid reputation in the field of psycho-spiritual exploration, they lampooned the beliefs of many ordinary Americans who are far more accepting of New Age beliefs and practices.

Even my proper Episcopalian mother uses a visualization technique suggested to her by her 80 year-old doctor as a method to help lower her blood pressure. She also complements her daily prayers with a form of meditation to deepen her experience.

To my 67-year-old mother _ and many of her friends, she adds _ Houston’s White House visits are no big deal.

Ronald Peterson, a Bethesda, Md., investment banker and devoted family man who utilizes creative imaging techniques in his business, is equally sanguine about Houston.”So she’s no back-room, cigar-smoking politician,”he says.”Is that so terrible?” Nor are Peterson and my mother alone. New Age beliefs are held by”hundreds of thousands of adherents, millions, in the United States alone,”says J. Gordon Melton, director of the Institute for the Study of American Religion in Santa Barbara, Calif.


Further evidence of this is the presence of books such as”The Celestine Prophecy”and”Women Who Run With The Wolves”atop the best-seller lists.

But New Age is an ill-defined catch-all phrase for a variety of concepts and activities ranging from the flaky _ acting as if you’re the incarnation of an ancient spirit _ to those grounded in time-honored philosphies, such as holistic healing or belief in reincarnation.

In this maelstrom of ideas, Houston’s methods are hardly bizarre. Her use of imaginary conversations, for example, is a well-established psychological practice employed in a variety of therapeutic techniques.

In an attempt to heal family conflict, for example, Gestalt therapists may ask clients to carry on discussions with relatives who are not present. Jungian analysts engage in”creative imagination,”a technique whereby images from dreams are woven into a personal narrative to yield insight.

In an interview, Houston, said that what she did with Hillary Clinton was a”classic problem-solving imagination exercise”widely used today by corporate America. Houston has used this same technique as a consultant to such leading corporations as Xerox, AT&T and General Motors.

Houston has also travelled the globe on behalf of international relief agencies-UNICEF, for example-to help enhance creativity and learning. For years she has worked with religious orders such as the Roman Catholic Sisters of St. Joseph to help build a sense of community.


Houston says her reputation has been damaged by the”irresponsible, jokey”way she has been portrayed. A lifetime of work, she says,”has been shattered.”Lectures have been cancelled and a grant rescinded. Her encounter with Woodward, she says, has convinced her that some journalists live”in an ivory tower with no human experience,”leading to their misreading the inner experiences of those who are not caught up in the political scene.

Take Woodward’s statements that Houston regards the Greek goddess Athena as her personal”archetypal predecessor”and that Hillary Clinton sees Eleanor Roosevelt as her”archetypal, spiritual partner.”Though subtle, the wording implied that Houston and Hillary Clinton were”channelling.” But in Jungian psychology such archetypes are not considered predecessors, or partners. They represent universal principles such as compassion or courage.

So the first lady closed her eyes while she”visualized”Eleanor Roosevelt, according to Woodward. Those who are familiar with such exercises, know that it is difficult to”see”interior images unless one’s eyes are shut.

Why must that be sensationalized? If ordinary people and professional organizations have managed to develop a sophisticated appreciation for such unconventional forms of wisdom, why can’t the press?

The real issue, it seems, is not the credibility of Jean Houston or Hillary Clinton. Instead, it is the way many in the media trivialize the evolving beliefs of a society in transition.

END PEAY

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!