'folie aux duex':   "The same disease shared by two people." is the definition I first read. This is a psychiatrically defined mental condition that clearly points towards a  condition in which a couple share a united mind state.

 Another name is 'induced psychosis'. I had no knowledge of those terms when this incident I'm going to relate happened. The main point to notice and then keep in mind is that I became aware  myself of being enmeshed in a 'folie aux duex' without knowing it existed.  I could not  describe my situation  in psychiatric terms because I didn't know them. Also  what I said was not premeditated, the words came out during a therapy session, automatically. I heard myself say them, but had not thought about what I said. The diagnosis points towards and reveals that in virtually any binary relationship there is an unconscious level of mind at work.

This event really happened and it happened in the beginning of a very great change, a change that really was the result of this condition, although I could not have suspected that. I believed I had a head injury and other causes that explained the differences in my mind and body.   I have to be direct and forthright because the facts are personal but  they are required information that is necessary to understand what I have to write about.

I went into therapy in 1983 when I was in a strange, new to me, kind of misery that seemed to have no physical causes. I had many new to me symptoms which I could not describe because there was no physical cause other than that I'd been told I was having 'post menopausal syndrome' after a complete hysterectomy.

I had seen Dr. Phillip Rehngren a couple of times when this incident happened in his office. My husband had been with  me in the previous visits, because he wanted to know what was the cause of the problems I'd been having.  He was not there when this happened.

During a session I suddenly said something that I had not thought about at all: . I heard myself say: "I think I'm seeing the world through XXX's  (my husbands') eyes. Its like his viewpoint is on top of mine and I'm looking up through it, and out of it, seeing everything the way it looks and sounds to him." ("It looks like there's another level up there." Today is 3-28-2012, I'm adding something that I'd forgotten about this incident, which returned to my mind yesterday.  "It looks like there's another level up there."  I'd forgotten that last remark but something happened yesterday   that retrieved that part of the incident.

After I said the words the telephone rang. He excused himself and answered it. After a minute or so I picked up a book laying near me on his desk and riffled through it. The book was a dictionary but not a typical dictionary. At some point in my browsing I paused to read the definition of a term that arrested my attention. but the definition didn't make sense. When Dr. Rehngren returned to me, I asked him what the definition meant:

 folie aux duex: the same disease shared by two people.

He read the definition aloud, then threw back his head and laughed. "Say, I'll bet that's what you and XXX have."

Think of this and realize what happened: The telephone interrupted what we were talking about. While he answered it I picked up a book laying on the desk near me. I have a deeply entrenched habit of  reading in every spare moment and at that point I had a book with me all the time when I had to wait in line or wait anywhere. I riffled through the book, noticing it was some kind of dictionary, not of words but containing phrases. One term caught my attention. After he returned his attention to me I asked him what the term meant. He read the definition then he slapped his knee as he threw back his head and laughed: "Say! I'll bet that's what you and your husband have."

That was not the first 'event' in which a professionally educated individual told me something that ought to have made me ask for more information.

This had already happened about two years prior to that incident I just described: . I had attempted  to  end myself  prior to seeking psychiatric help because I'd begun to feel like I had no right to be alive. That was a feeling so painful it cannot be described and it was almost a constant feeling. One night I had decided to end myself and as a result I was taken to Cabrini Hospital where I spent a week or so. It was the first time I'd been in any kind of psychiatric care situation and I knew nothing about psychiatry then except that it takes a long time. It's not like going to a doctor and getting a diagnosis, but I had not thought about why such a long time would be required.

When we left the hospital, it was to go directly to a therapist, Charles Landis. I remember that he asked me to tell him what was going on but apparently what I said made no sense to him so he asked my husband to tell him what he thought my problem was.

I remember that my husband leaned back, put his hands behind his head and began to talk easily, fluently and even enthusiastically."Betty has a problem, she's had a problem ever since we married. I have been a perfect husband, done everything a perfect husband would do, but Betty cannot let other people live their own life; she cannot let other people, 'spend their own nickel'. She is a domineering person, always interfering, is never happy about anything, is never content in her heart about anything, etc, etc, etc."

I remember thinking at that point that he was not describing me, he was describing himself. He was describing himself perfectly, for the first time in his life but he believed he was describing me! I said nothing and it did not occur to me until years later that  for the first time I had observed him at peace, relaxed and able to say what he really was believing. His normal conversation was halting, stilted and usually quite brief. I didn't name anything non-physical at that point. (For reasons that took several years to become aware of, there is a  mindset that  relates only to  what is 'physical' and that was reality to the person I was most intimately associated to.)

The point is:  HE  HAD NEVER SAID THIS BEFORE, NOR HAD HE EVER SAID ANYTHING SIMILAR. NOTHING IN THE PAST HAD BEEN SAID ABOUT BEING A 'PERFECT HUSBAND' .  Charles Landis didn't know that, and at the time I couldn't tell him what I was thinking about. (There is another important detail about what he said that day, it took years for me to know this: He has no memory of what he said that day. When I tried to talk about it, he tells me he's not the kind of person that would say things like that. To this day he denies saying what I heard him say and then saw a change in his behavior to me that I felt in my body, recognized and tried to talk to him about. There was also a  reversal of an attitude he'd had during our marriage! He became care free, mountains were reduced to molehills almost overnight! I had to discover this fact, my sister in law gave me a clue one day in 1989 when we visited them. She told me her husband seemed to forget a lot, he denied doing things she and their children saw him do, and heard him do.

 I'd had a few incidents happen and I'd begun to read some books authored by Jungian authors, Nathan Salant Schwartz and Sylvia Perera Brinton that seemed to be extra ordinarily relevant. I began to use a term for this 'ideas of relevance',  that term just came into my thought.

 This was the first time we had seen this man, so the psychologist had no way of knowing this was a 'first time' event. It was several years before I realized the implications of what the therapist said to me later. He diagnosed a 'problem' after listening only a few minutes and for some years he seemed to be correct.

 He told me in private that he had to be honest with me, he'd never had success in treating a person that had my husband's particular problem. Hearing what he said did not cause me to ask for more information, but a part of me heard, remembered, but was speechless, hearing from the depth that  had heard and seen this incident.

                                                                                                         88888888888888888

Induced psychosis or  another name for the same thing is: folie aux duex and yet another name is participation mystique: The basic idea in this condition is that one person is influenced by another person's 'unconscious' and this effect is experienced without awareness.

From experiences of my own, I know there is a  new way to understand it, because it formed at a certain point a kind of 'cloned mind', where one person's viewpoint really began to overlay and actually govern another person's mind. This was obvious because my habits changed, attitudes reversed into the opposite in my husband, although the effect on me was that nothing changed in our relationship!! That requires more information but I felt the change in my body.  It was literally a kind of replication, but the most important details cannot be told at this point without quite a digression. A change in my  thought as well as my body had barely begun to become evident the day I chanced to read the definition of 'folie aux duex'. My mind was quite different, I had begun to experience a new kind of 'mental event', which was not familiar and which made no sense to me. My mind was noticing license tabs, trying to make sense of the combinations of letters and numbers  which seemed absurd and was bothersome, even when one license tab ETW 651 produced an immediate translation: Extra Terrestrial Woman 651.

A lot happened that concerned ETW 651 at the time but also  several years later when I had the third 'mindquake' and those numbers were suddenly exposed in the first block of pi decimals as they were arranged in Petr Beckmann's book, The History of pi. The pattern that created 'meaning' so suddenly had obviously begun to accumulate content when I was in grade school but my first memory at age 2 1/2 was the real beginning.

However little I was aware of it consciously, I had begun to 'see the world the way my husband saw it' but I had also begun to experience in my body, the same body condition that 'contained' him. It was several years later that I understood this 'contained' sense was one that has a name, 'being up tight', experiencing 'tunnel vision', and beginning to be driven by a terrible curiosity that was focused on small details that  I'd not noticed previously. My 'focus' had been quite different, rather skimming along the surface of everything in a superficial glance. One of our children actually described this one day, that my husband and I 'complemented' each other, what I could do easily , he could not, and the reverse.

I had acquired 'tunnel vision' and become somewhat similar to a microscope focused on minute details. This is a process that can only be a 'replication of self', in another person.

I had also acquired something that had 'driven' my husband, something that he'd experienced privately without speaking directly about it. It was about that point in Time that the change in my hearing caused me to realize, to recognize that he was quite often  making comments that actually described what was going on between us, but in a different level, where psychological meanings arise.  He described our interactions using a depth of language from his unconscious mind. I had begun to hear other people, certain specific people who seemed to  be reading my thought in the early 1980's but I didn't realize this interface had occurred throughout my marital life with   my husband. "Betty, you  can't bat it back to me. You have to eat it." ; and 'You are out of your territory." which meant I was not being the female I was supposed to be.

There had been remarks in the past that he'd said occasionally, but repetitiously,  that really made no sense to me , but I could not have guessed they were about what he 'saw' within! They were about his 'inner world', they described quite literally the psychological processes he was 'using' When I disagreed with him he's say something like:  "Don't bat it back to me, you have to 'eat' it'. This was quite strange to me, but I didn't question it.

 It was a particular kind of mindset that I acquired,  and it was recognizable to me because habits that I had never had but which I'd observed in him, suddenly replaced the content, of my 'normal' habits! I saw myself do things I'd never done but which he had always done , and over a period of time a most amazing thing happened: I began to become aware of 'knowing' where the habit had it's origin. It was usually in a childish relationship to his mother. Wanting to 'help', wanting to save her from having to work so hard. His habit was to reach for a dirty cup rather than a clean one to make coffee, when he was a man in his late forties! Tucking me against his shoulders at night, arranging the covers in the dark, I noticed that the result of this was that half my nose was always sealed of in some way so that I could not breath freely, nor could I remain tucked snuggly close to him. I wondered how he could see to cover one part of my nose in the dark in such a variety of ways. It was years later that I remembered that when we were first dating he wanted to 'breathe' into me, actually wanting me to let him give me breathe! I had not cared for that, and eventually he gave it up.

                                                                            88888888888888888888888

1986 I was feeling extremely confused all the time, having to make continual great effort to keep some kind of normal life activity going. By then  I had become focused on trying to explain something  that was happening to me,  to the psychiatrist I was seeing.

Until 1983 I'd never come into contact with psychiatrists or 'psychiatric' terms beyond what I'd read in books or heard in movies.

This 'new thing' was very compellingly interesting to me.  I didn't know the words to use to try to describe what was happening, so I used the only words available to me then, actually creating some words in my own normal language. This 'compellingly interesting thing'  was extremely vague and I couldn't pinpoint what it was because it was everywhere, in every moment of my life by 1986.

I was hearing differently by then, all the time. I was seeing something but it had no tangibility. Somehow I felt driven by  a motor  within me and I couldn't turn it off although I could certainly feel it as an authority  that had taken over my life. There was a distinct change in how everything looked and sounded but  I realized it was the  'motor' that was obviously powering me to do many things that ordinarily I would never have done. I heard myself saying things I had not thought about. It was a great change but  I was not curious at first, nor did I  think about why I  heard myself say things that I'd not thought about until several years later.  I could see after a time that what I was doing in my home in particular was not actually what I wanted to do, and in the situation at home, what I really intended to do was avoid the terrible scenes that had begun to happen every day.

I became aware of being 'sidetracked' from my own purposes and intents continually by this new thing, between 1984 and 1989. After 1989 I was aware the causes for my new mindset were beyond personal relationships, they were from outside of Time, in a pattern I'd noticed when I was a young girl.

 I felt the presence in my body of something alien to me, some thing that assumed control of my speech, my habits, my activities and more than anything ,my passivities. I heard myself in a new way, new kinds of thought was occurring into my mind and I wondered if  I was generating it. I could not say anything about this to the psychiatrist however, I was talking about the accident, the blow on my head, the effects of the operation, wanting help with the miseries that made my body extremely uncomfortable. Eventually it became obvious this 'new presence' was what had governed my husband, and at that point he had become quite unworried about everything, or anything. This was a real role reversal. He even mentioned it one day himself, and this happened at least 3 or even more years before I could articulate it myself. I recognized there had been a role reversal on two levels but it was not easy to detect later that he understood only one. I had gotten a job at Boeing and he told me he was going on a 3 month vacation soon. We had two cows, no heat in the house, I was not sleeping at all, but  dimly, somewhat foggily I realized I'd been driven to get a job when I felt so bad. I'd been forced to do things I would never have done. I saw myself do the opposite of normal for me, but not complaining because there had been no conversation about what was going on in my mind. 

I'd gotten a job at Boeing in 1985 and was really  having  to work harder than I'd ever done in my life. I was unable to sleep at night, so working full time without being able to sleep seemed impossible but somehow I had to keep doing it. I was outraged from what I saw and heard from my unconscious mind for about 7 years, 1982 -1989. But what was painful was that I  felt like I had no right to live, to call myself a woman. Some very ugly words came out of his mouth although there was no physical violence from him, I was the one that began to throw things.

 I began to notice what was causing me to at times feel like a teakettle on a hot burner, usually when I tried to explain something about our finances, which at that point was a real problem. Often I felt misinterpreted and tried to explain what I meant. He pre-assumed so much and I could not get him to really look at our financial situation. We always paid cash for everything so then after the fire in a  rental we owned, and he'd been having his check deposited in an account that didn't have my name on it,  I didn't have enough money to pay bills at times. He spends almost nothing himself.

I was told  the only way I could address that problem was to get a divorce.

I felt bottled up, literally. That is how I began to grasp that certain 'odd' terms really describe body conditions!  'Bottled up' means 'contained, restrained, prohibited, confined, limited' but I would not have understood this could re-align activities and passivities, so painfully and so drastically.  "Tunnel vision"  means narrowed down vision, limited and focused precisely onto whatever small detail is important at that moment. Another way to consider it, now that I understand it, is that a laser-like focus of attention has been 'installed', without any warning, except that it happened by increments.

Having a good memory of one's own past is what makes it possible to trace the rather slow installation process that had obviously begun when we first met, and were 'on the same wave length' almost immediately.

One of his most commonly repeated  remarks was that we did not live in the same world, were not on the same wave length had nothing in common..

 I had not heard of Occam's Razor or the general theory derived from it: that everything extraneous has been deleted from the moment, and only whatever is significant is 'perceived'. Trying to define this new change, I had no language of my own to use although I'd been an almost voracious reader....of any kind of fiction, mostly masculine oriented fictions. I read Zane Grey, The Hardy Boys and every pulp fiction magazine my father bought. He bought them all but a dime was a lot of money then. He hid them and I had to find them, read them in secret (at night under the covers with a flashlight or by streetlight at times). I don't remember asking why he didn't want me to read them, but I know I don't remember everything. I read fictions until I began to feel a 'drive' to read non-fictions even though I didn't 'like' them.

The drive seemed to insist that I try to describe what I saw, to name what I saw and that I try to write about my life.  (At this point, in 2012, I need to make an association to Adam who had to 'name' everything brought before him, that pattern may have begun when Adam had no help, he was alone in the Garden with only God.)

 I believed that a terrible blow on my head had caused this change, although I'd been told by the surgeon that did the operation, that I was having 'severe menopausal syndrome' symptoms after having had a total hysterectomy.  That operation was  a surprise to me, because I was supposed to have one ovary removed. Dr. Stephen Heller told me later, when I didn't recover to my normal self and went back to him,  that he'd removed all reproductive organs because believed that he was saving me from having cancer of the cervix. Which it was his understanding would follow the removal of one ovary, within six years. He told me a small percentage of women would have 'severe menopausal syndrome', but that it was impossible to know exactly who would or would not have this problem.)

 I'd had that operation late in 1979, we'd had a terrible uninsured fire a few days after I got out of the hospital. This had caused a real problem financially. The auto accident happened early in 1981  so the only way I thought about my problems was that the surgery, the financial problems and the accident were what had caused the many changes I was trying to deal with by 1986. That's when the incident happened in which I heard my self blurt out that I was seeing the world through XXX's eyes and hearing the world the way he did. Another very unusual situation had caused me to become aware of a certain 'literalness' in his way of hearing: Dr. Rehngren had told me that he knew another psychiatrist that XXX might be able to relate to because this man had the same personality that my husband had!!!

When I made an appointment with that psychiatrist I noticed immediately he had no help in his office, he did everything himself. We had a few sessions with him together, and to my amazement I saw a very different relationship between my husband and this man. He was a short Oriental man, whereas Dr. Rehngren was tall, quite good looking for his age. My husband had been polite, deferring to him. That did not happen from the first moment in the new 'therapist's office. This new therapist took mercy on me one day when he mentioned that I seemed to be confused, and that I was seeking validation. He said: "While you may have some problems, they are not a extensive as your husband's problems." He had listened to my husband describe my 'long history of mental illness' (and I had no such history, let me make quite distinct) with obvious pleasure and Dr. Chinn looked at me as he said: "Oh, it's THAT GOOD, eh?" He seemed to want to be sure I noticed the eagerness and ease and pleasure on my husband's face. He had no way of knowing that for some time my husband had begun to read articles in the newspaper about some one that ended themselves after a 'long history of mental illness'. That was a distinct change.

I did not ask for more information. He made a remark that somewhat took root  later, but which I didn't  understand at that point, as he looked quite pointedly at me:  "He means exactly what he says." My husband had asked him what he thought my problem was, and the psychiatrist replied in a fairly short sentence,  (which I didn't understand myself at that point) then said: "Can you repeat back what I just said?" My husband looked somewhat blank for a few seconds then said something that was not a response to the question. It was NOT: "Can you repeat what you said? I didn't get it." i

By the  time this all happened I'd had several unusual incidents happen in connection to the two square dance groups we belonged to, and they were connected to what the psychiatrist intended to convey to me when he said: "He meant exactly what he says."

 More than a decade passed and many experiences happened (of the strange kind) before I realized he could have told me that my husband had a 'literal sense, that he was a 'concrete thinker', that he had no ability to use slang, to  'metaphorize' or to 'symbolize' or to use 'joking remarks'.(Or 'get' the way people often make a joke that is literally what they couldn't say seriously! That kind of statement was new to me, it made me feel 'dizzy' when it began to happen, even in 1982 when the man in The Dream seemed to be able to read my thoughts.)  I felt outraged when I began to realize this psychiatrist could have bluntly given me information rather then 'clues', that meant nothing at the time, and would never have meant anything if there had not been a process at work in my life that was making every event turn towards me, as a kind of instruction, and that this process was what had governed my husband.

When I went into therapy. I remember that the psychiatrist asked questions sometimes about my marriage but I know these questions seemed strange to me until finally I realized he was trying to make some kind of 'point'. What the point was I could not see but because he persisted I finally began to realize his focus was not on what I was saying to him, not on what I was trying to talk about, and in fact that what I was saying was being completely disregarded! This realization did not hit me quickly, it took about 6 years between 1982 and 1988 for me to realize that what I was saying was being totally ignored! The psychiatrist was focusing me onto his 'idea', which I did not realize was that I did not know or understand the man I was married to, and I did not realize that the 'effects' I was trying to describe were being associated to my marital situation, by this psychiatrist, Dr. Philip Rehngren whose office was in Renton, Washington then.                                   

 I was talking to him about how I could not sleep at night because of continual 'non-stop thinking' that went on all the time.  Being unable to sleep was only one of my problems. I couldn't remember anything I read, words seemed to fall into a black hole of some kind. I was getting lost when I went to familiar places, I seemed to find Dead End streets as though I was trying to find them, which was extremely frustrating to me because I had not had that problem myself, before. I could not learn a simple dance routine even after months of trying to do it.

We were in a session one day and I was talking to Dr. Rehngren about a book I'd read recently that had caused me to feel very strange while I read, The Imagined World by June Goodfield. There had been certain words on the jacket that I'd read before I borrowed the book  that had impressed me  strangely. As soon as I read them I decided to read the book. What I read was this: '...she caught a sudden glimmer of possibility; she observed a pattern that had hitherto been unnoticed or ignored and she began to think of explanations for what she'd seen......thanks not only to tenacity but to inexperience---a mind uncluttered by preconceptions...."She saw something that had become invisible because it has always been ever-present" '  The last words were not on the jacket, they followed in my mind as though they were on the jacket!  It took several years to be able to relate to this 'added content', when it happened, and not much later. This kind of 'added content' was distinct to me, but somehow the location in mind where all this was taking place, it's depth in mind, it's  lack of connection (it seems to me now) to speech, where ever speech and articulation becomes possible could be 'seen/heard' but not related to in  the 'now' when it actually happened. This added content on the jacket of a book was only somewhat new to me, it had happened before but I'd not been able to identify it.

 I couldn't tell him what I'm writing now  because I didn't know myself why a few sentences on the jacket of a book had caused me to read a book that ordinarily I wouldn't have read. I was trying to describe something about this experience to him then I heard myself say something I'd not thought about previously. The words came out of my mouth spontaneously: "I think I'm seeing the world through Jan's eyes. It's like his viewpoint is sitting on top of mind and I'm looking up through it, out at the world."

That's when the phone rang. He excused himself to answer it. While he was on the phone I reached for something to read while I waited, a book laying nearby. I riffled through it and saw that it was some kind of dictionary but it was not like Webster's dictionary.

I read a few terms but as I riffled through the book a term in italic, bold print French caught my attention. I read the definition which didn't explain anything to me: folie aux deux, the same disease shared by two people.

When he got off the   phone I asked him what it meant. He read the definition then did a strange thing: He slapped his knee and laughed in a peculiar way as he said to me: "Say, I'll bet that's what you and Jan have." Apparently what I'd said before the telephone rang linked to the  very odd term.  What could 'the same disease shared by two people' have to do with that I had said to him before the phone rang.

He did not mention that this was a very unusual thing to happen to an individual that knew nothing about psychiatric terms. The word 'coincidence' did not occur to me, then or later. It was one definition in a rather large book and it had caught my attention because it mentioned a 'disease' a 'disease' shared by two people. That ' mindset could be a disease was unknown to me. So I asked him no questions, I did not ask him to explain anything, but later I remembered how   strange it was to have that one term register so strongly that I asked about it, but did not ask him why he thought my husband and I had that 'disease'.

I did not ask him why he laughed, nor did I ask him what 'the same disease shared by two people' meant.  The reason I didn't ask for more information was very simple: I knew nothing about the kind of disease this term defined. I knew absolutely nothing about psychiatric ideas or terms. Primarily however, it would never have occurred to me that my husband could have a communicable 'disease' and the definition indicated a communicable disease. Later, years later I realized there was another reason I could not ask for more information, and why none was volunteered to me. According to traditional psychiatric thinking the  PSYCHIATRIST THAT I WAS SEEING AT THAT TIME, did not 'want' to know or talk about the issue of 'a disease shared by two people'. The word 'want' as I've used it implies another psychiatric term, 'denial'. I don't believe either term is a legitimate way to describe information that exists in the 'unconscious mind', but not in the conscious mind. The implication that a mental state can be shared is obvious. How is it possible to 'deny' something you don't know is there whether it's individual 'denial' or collective denial?

I remember asking him one day if he had been divorced when he was in his late forties and if he had remarried soon after. He giggled slightly as he asked me if I was a mind reader. The ''denial' was actually due to a collective lack of knowledge about 'male menopause'.  I had never heard the two words 'male' and 'menopause' linked together until the day I chanced to read a chapter titled, Male Menopause, in a book, a recent event.  After reading the first two pages in the book I asked my husband to read them, because I recognized that one day he had said to me, basically word for word what I read on those two pages!  He told me to not believe what I read in books, to think for myself, and walked away. 

This remark: "Don't believe what you read in books, think for yourself." was not new to me, it was one I heard frequently, particularly when I mentioned something I'd read somewhere.

It did not occur to me that the 'disease' was really a shared mindset and that it was particularly unique in this case because of his nationality (Newtonian/European/Dutch); his gender which was quite different from mine.

There was no discussion from him about this 'disease', or its effects on me or on my family, it was a topic that came up but it was not explored in any way. Except in my mind, as I began to accumulate experiences, of hearing myself say something unplanned, spontaneous, then I remembered what I'd said later. All of the 'spontaneous' activity began to make a kind of sense, but it was so spontaneous I felt controlled, manipulated, maneuvered, and actually governed by this new authority, which I realized was actually an authority that had governed him, in the same way it was now governing both of us. It was particularly discernable whenever I tried to talk to my husband, I always was sidetracked from what I wanted and intended to say onto line of experience that was not mine at all but which was pre-assumed to be, me.  It that became agonizingly frustrating to me. Helplessly I noticed myself repeat the last words he said to me many, many times until he got angry and insisted I stop it.

 I could  and did seethe with frustration and knowing its cause, feeling myself being continually sidetracked away from my intents to get help with my situation, then becoming aware of being prevented from saying what I needed to say...on levels and in situations with the legal (??) process where I expected the truth would come out.

From his speech there were indications he was also able to see the situation we were in,  in a particular way, because he described to me, what I couldn't have put into words myself: what was happening at times; "Your mind is playing tricks on you." he said. "You don't understand. There hass been a role reversal." He has not lost his accent, so even the word 'divorce' sounds like DeVorss and that's the name of a publishing company that now publishes a booklet, The Impersonal Life, which was somehow alive in our lives.

It did not occur to me that the psychiatric mindset and the knowledges in psychiatry were well known, stored away in the unconsciousness of 'man',  especially European man and that  thru  this 'shared mindset', it was also installed into mine. It had not been there prior to 1984. It was new to me, but fairly rapidly many habits that had not been 'normal' for me  but which I began to notice had been somehow 'installed' in my body made it quite distinct to me that a kind of replication of 'self in another person' had occurred.

It was several years before I realized from experiences with several psychiatrists that the same sense of being actually prevented from saying my own words happened. I would plan what to talk about then leave the session having been 'side tracked' very efficiently.

There is much more about this that needs to be written, but a distinct new kind of replication had obviously occurred, Dr. Rehngren ought to have recognized  that I had noticed its effects in my body myself, without any 'diagnosis' from him or anyone else. Even though all I could say was: "I think I'm seeing the world through Jan's eyes. It's like his viewpoint is sitting on top of mine and I'm looking up through it, out at the world." there was an implication this 'condition' was visible in a way and that I was describing how it altered everything, putting distance between me and what was outside of my body.

The 'collective unconscious' is about the past and the experiences of 'others'. This is not a simple thing to understand that I became aware quite slowly of being 'gripped' by something, owned by something that had begun to 'drive' me and it had been active in the life of my husband before it 'gripped me'. This was not distinct for several years and I had many very unusual experiences during that span of Time, but it became evident the 'shared mindset' included a pattern that was already at work in his life. Eventually I felt that a kind of 'motor'  was focusing my attention,  and that something other than my own 'wishes'  had assumed authority over my body, all of it.

I heard myself say what I said about 'seeing the world through some one else's eyes', without ever having thought about what was implied by what I said. It was several years later that I really began to notice what I'd said in such isolated events at this one which happened in the beginning.

(There is a factor about spontaneous speech, that I have only begun to be aware of, in relation to finding myself saying what I'd not thought about, and didn't have a reason to say:  It had begun and I'd not noticed the few events when it happened until much later. I believed that noticing 'loss of control' of my speech began in the early 1980's  because  I had begun to notice that I could not initiate a conversation with my husband on any topic. At that point there was much that we needed to discuss. I would try to initiate a discussion about issues, money issues mostly, and I could not get beyond the first sentence. The sense of being 'sidetracked' or 'shunted away' onto a 'track' that did not address what I wanted to began to make me feel extremely helpless and anguished...and voiceless.

One day I remember thinking: "There must be someone I can talk to." As the thought occurred into my mind a memory of his face and his voice saying exactly those words came into my mind. I remembered that  he'd said the same words  one day  several years in the past. We were on vacation. The children and I had been playing a game, he seemed to be off in his own world, uninterested enough to join us, but this was not unusual. He'd blurted out the words: "There must be someone I can TALK TO!" I'd looked at his face and saw a very rare expression of intense emotions, anguish was in his voice and on his face. I wondered if he had felt the same way I felt when the thought words occurred into my mind.)  At a point I remember he said to me: "I wish someone else could hear what you just said, I wish I had a tape recorder so someone else could hear this." What I did was get a tape recorder and try to get a communication going, then after that I began to try to type a letter that put everything on paper. That's when I found out I could not type even one word on our manual typewriter and the frustration from this puzzling new situation. It is also relevant to this topic to write that he had often listened to me after he'd asked me something, and his response was: "I cannot believe what I am hearing you say. This is Chaos itself, that I am hearing you say." Oddest of all circumstances is that the thing he heard me say was not what I had said, because of his particular way of relating to me and speech that seemed to be my speech. I became aware that it was impossible to say anything that was not a response to what he said to me. That condition has not changed.:

The change added 'me' to what I could see, but it was a different kind of sight, and this was not the real beginning as I found out later. After 1975 a few incidents happened that focused my attention on certain thoughts that had re-occurred into my mind and some habits I had.

The sense I had then of being both audience and 'actor' , of being 'on stage' in a peculiar new way took several years to really be certain about. Later (over a period of about 9 years) the sense of being 'witness' to what my body was doing changed. The first phase  began in 1975 when I was gradually made aware of certain habits I had and I saw my mind create a complete thought that was abstracted in a visible way from two books I'd read. The thought was assembled in a visible way but I was not at that point able to get the point, or relate to that content. There's really only one 'phase', it began when I was born and it's not ceased happening that I 'hear' the voice that many have identified as the 'voice of the planet itself.

That kind of replication of 'self' requires some kind of explanation of chemistries between individuals that science has not yet studied, but anything individually experienced is not scientifically verifiable. I did not know anything about scientific paradigms, or any kind of paradigm at all, until I'd observed my self, heard myself and other people within the configurations of this particular complex. I believe it's important to identify it as an other intelligence, a third party in this case that was related to throughout h is life,  instead of relating to me and perhaps to any woman at all. It made me feel invisible until I read about Cassandra, whom nobody believed. And about Athena, born fully grown from a man's head.

It makes sense that a man's 'head' is history itself, all of it and that in becoming aware of the effects of this 'historically active' Other, on myself, after I acquired it in the way I did, I lived not only Cassandra's life but Athena's, born fully grown from a man's 'head'. I was Echo before I knew the myth is about a certain aspect of reality. that being the mind produces material of it's own by a mechanism that 'reflects' content.  I believe books that have a long bibliography are assembled by the author, and the process of 'abstraction' that I've experienced with awareness and a degree of attention is what I have now. It was not conscious attention until about 1996 when a new phase began at Boeing. I could relate to thought immediately by 1996 that had been in the very remote 'depths of mind'.  

 There are ideas about women that I had not read about, ideas that I didn't realize were installed within the mind of 'man'. I suggest that anyone that is interested enough to want to find out a few of them, read Francis Schiller's book, The Moebius Strip. I would never have read the book except that the moebius band on the jacket caught my attention, and I'd had an experience with moebius bands when I was 9  years old. The book is  about fin de siecle neuropsychiatry at the beginning of the 1900's. That's when many men, including Paul Moebius were  writing the 'new' sense they were experiencing themselves. Different versions came from   Freud, Jung, Ouspensky, Gurdjieff but it seems to me there is a hierarchy in those versions, according to their particular ability to assimilate what they experienced and convert it into words.

 When I read Tertium Organun by Ouspensky I noticed as I read the book that he didn't seem to realize he had written a book that he didn't realize was about what he was trying to find, the 'miraculous'!!! I had begun to go to meetings held by the very small Swedenborg group in Seattle, and heard a sermon about the 'three churches', the Most Ancient Church, the Ancient Church, and the Church of Adam, but I'd also begun to be fascinated by a foxglove that I'd almost mowed down but which produced three levels of bloom on its stalks. Three-ness was everywhere, in my life after 1989.  Ouspensky introduced his book with this strange statement:  There was the first  Organun of Aristotle, the second Organun of Bacon, but this is the third and the third was prior to the first." Somehow I understood this to mean that there were stages, but a plan, a goal had been established before even Aristotle lived and wrote. I knew very little history.

The thing itself is not easy to deal with, but at least I am aware that it comes through other people, many, many other people who could if they remembered more of what they say and do, also become aware of their activities when they are 'in the flow' of this hidden vein of human endeavor. It seems to me it brings out of the darkness, what needs to be seen, then named and described.