WORRY AND OBSESSION

So much are men enured in their miserable estate, that no condition is so

poore, but they will accept; so they may continue in the same.

_Florio's Montaigne_.

"You may as well be eaten by the fishes as by the worms," said the daughter

of a naval commander to me one day, when discussing the perils of the sea.

Such philosophy, applied to each of the vexatious and dangerous situations

of daily life, would go far toward casting out worry.

We have already referred to two important elements at the foundation,

and in the framework, of the elaborate superstructures we rear with such

material as worry, doubts, fears and scruples. The first is _exaggerated

self-consciousness_, the second the tendency to succumb to the compelling

thought or impulse, technically termed _obsession_.

With regard to self-consciousness, the worrier will generally realize that

even as a child he was exceptionally sensitive to criticism, censure,

ridicule and neglect. He was prone to brood over his wrongs, to play the

martyr, and to suffer with peculiar keenness the "slings and arrows of

outrageous fortune." I remember once leaving the table on account of some

censure or careless remark. I fancied I had thrown the whole family into a

panic of contrition. On the first opportunity, I asked what they had said

about it, and was told that they had apparently not noticed my departure.

This salutary lesson prevented repetition of the act.

To the self-conscious person the mere entrance into a public vehicle may

prove an ordeal. It is hard for him to realize that the general gaze has no

peculiar relation to himself, and that if the gaze is prolonged this is due

to no peculiarity of his beyond the blush or the trepidation that betrays

his feeling. If he can acquire indifference to this feature of his case,

through the reflection that to others it is only a passing incident, the

blush and the trepidation will promptly disappear, and a step will have

been taken towards gaining the self-control for which he aims.

The usual cause of stage-fright is exaggerated self-consciousness. The

sufferer from stage-fright can hardly fail to be a worrier. A certain

shyness, it would seem, may also result from too acute a consciousness of

one's audience, as in the case of Tennyson, whom Benson quotes thus:

"I am never the least shy before great men. Each of them has a personality

for which he or she is responsible; but before a crowd which consists of

many personalities, of which I know nothing, I am infinitely shy. The great

orator cares nothing about all this. I think of the good man, and the bad

man, and the mad man, that may be among them, and can say nothing. _He_

takes them all as one man. _He_ sways them as one man."

This, I take it, hardly spelled stage-fright. At the same time, it

is improbable that one so sensitive to criticism meant to convey the

impression that it was of his audience alone he thought in shrinking from

the effort.

It appears that Washington Irving suffered from actual stage-fright.

In the Library edition of Irving's works appears the following anecdote

from the reminiscences of Mrs. Julia Ward Howe, then a young woman of

twenty-three:

"I was present, with other ladies, at a public dinner given in honor of

Charles Dickens by prominent citizens of New York. The ladies were not

bidden to the feast, but were allowed to occupy a small ante-room which,

through an open door, commanded a view of the tables. When the speaking was

about to begin, a message came suggesting that we take possession of some

vacant seats at the great table. This we were glad to do. Washington

Irving was president of the evening, and upon him devolved the duty of

inaugurating the proceedings by an address of welcome to the distinguished

guest. People who sat near me whispered, 'He'll break down,--he always

does.' Mr. Irving rose and uttered a sentence or two. His friends

interrupted him by applause, which was intended to encourage him, but which

entirely overthrew his self-possession. He hesitated, stammered, and sat

down, saying, 'I cannot go on.'"

Cavendish, the chemist, suffered from a constitutional shyness attributable

only to self-consciousness. He is said to have carried so far his aversion

to contact with others, outside of his colleagues, that his dinner was

always ordered by means of a note, and instant dismissal awaited the female

domestic who should venture within his range of vision.

Lombroso cites, among his "Men of Genius," quite a list--Corneille,

Descartes, Virgil, Addison, La Fontaine, Dryden, Manzoni, and Newton--of

those who could not express themselves in public. Whatever part

self-consciousness played in the individual case, we must class the

peculiarity among the defects, not signs, of genius. "A tender heel makes

no man an Achilles."

To the second faulty habit, obsession, I wish to devote special attention.

This word we have already defined as an unduly insistent and compulsive

thought, habit of mind, or tendency to action. The person so burdened is

said to be obsessed.

Few children are quite free from obsession. Some must step on stones;

others must walk on, or avoid, cracks; some must ascend the stairs with the

right foot first; many must kick posts or touch objects a certain number of

times. Some must count the windows, pictures, and figures on the wallpaper;

some must bite the nails or pull the eye-winkers. Consider the nail-biter.

It cannot be said that he toils not, but to what end? Merely to gratify an

obsession. He nibbles a little here and a little there, he frowns, elevates

his elbow, and inverts his finger to reach an otherwise inaccessible

corner. Does he enjoy it? No, not exactly; but he would be miserable if he

discontinued.

An unusual, but characteristic obsession is told by a lady in describing

her own childhood. She thought that on retiring she must touch nothing with

her hands, after she had washed them, until she touched the inside of the

sheets. In case she failed she must return and wash the hands again. The

resulting manoeuvres are still fresh in her mind, particularly when her

sister had preceded her to bed and she had to climb the footboard.

It is during childhood that we form most of the automatic habits which are

to save time and thought in later life, and it is not surprising that some

foolish habits creep in. As a rule, children drop these tendencies at need,

just as they drop the rôles assumed in play, though they are sometimes so

absorbing as to cause inconvenience. An interesting instance was that of

the boy who had to touch every one wearing anything red. On one occasion

his whole family lost their train because of the prevalence of this color

among those waiting in the station.

The longer these tendencies are retained in adult life, the greater the

danger of their becoming coercive; and so far as the well-established case

is concerned the obsessive act must be performed, though the business,

social, and political world should come to a stand-still. Among the stories

told in illustration of compulsive tendency in the great, may be instanced

the touching of posts, and the placing of a certain foot first, in the

case of Dr. Johnson, who, it appears, would actually retrace his steps and

repeat the act which failed to satisfy his requirements, with the air of

one with something off his mind.

A child who must kick posts is father to the man who cannot eat an egg

which has been boiled either more or less than four minutes; who cannot

work without absolute silence; who cannot sleep if steam-pipes crackle; and

who must straighten out all the tangles of his life, past, present, and

future, before he can close his eyes in slumber or take a vacation. The boy

Carlyle, proud, shy, sensitive, and pugnacious, was father to the man who

made war upon the neighbor's poultry, and had a room, proof against sound,

specially constructed for his literary labors.

The passive obsessions are peculiarly provocative of worry. Such are

extreme aversions to certain animals, foods, smells, sounds, and sights, or

insistent discomfort if affairs are not ordered to our liking. A gentleman

once told me that at the concert he did not mind if his neighbor followed

the score, but when he consulted his programme during the performance it

distressed him greatly.

Such instances illustrate the fact that when our obsessions rule us it is

not the noise or the sight, but our idea of the fitness of things, that

determines the degree of our annoyance. A person who cannot endure the

crackling of the steam-pipe can listen with pleasure to the crackling of an

open fire or the noise of a running brook.

It is said that the sensitive and emotional Erasmus had so delicate a

digestion that he could neither eat fish nor endure the smell of it; but

we are led to suspect that obsession played a part in his troubles when we

further learn that he could not bear an iron stove in the room in which he

worked, but had to have either a porcelain stove or an open fire.

If we can trust the sources from which Charles Reade drew his deductions

regarding the character of the parental stock, Erasmus came fairly by his

sensitive disposition. In "The Cloister and the Hearth" we find the father

of Erasmus, fleeing from his native land, in fear of his life on account of

a crime he thought he had committed, frozen, famished and exhausted, unable

to enter the door of a friendly inn on account of his aversion to the

issuing odors. Forced by his sufferings at last to enter the inn, he visits

each corner in turn, analyzing its peculiar smell and choosing finally the

one which seems to him the least obnoxious.

I have heard somewhere, but cannot place, the story of a prominent writer

who was so disturbed by the mechanical lawn-mower of his neighbor that he

insisted upon the privilege of defraying the expense of its replacement by

the scythe.

Peculiar sensitiveness to sights, sounds and smells seems to be a common

attribute of genius. This sort of sensitiveness has even been credited with

being the main-spring of genius, but it is improbable that the curbing of

such aversions would in any way endanger it. However this may be, such

supersensitiveness ill becomes the rest of us, and these extreme aversions

surely clog, rather than accelerate, our efforts.

* * * * *

The natural tendency of the healthy mind is to accustom itself to new

sensations, as the ring on the finger, or the spectacles on the nose. The

obsessive individual resists this tendency; he starts with the fixed idea

that he cannot stand the annoyance, his resentment increases, and his

sensations become more, instead of less, acute. His reaction to criticism,

slight, and ridicule is similar; he is prepared to start, blush, and show

anger on moderate provocation, and can often reproduce both the sensation

and its accompanying physical signs by merely recalling the circumstance.

The passive as well as the active obsessions can be overcome by cultivating

the commonplace, or average normal, attitude, and resolving gradually to

accustom one's self to the disagreeable. This change of attitude can be

made in adult life as well as in youth. "You cannot teach an old dog new

tricks," we are told. The reason is not that the old dog cannot learn them,

but that he does not want to. I met in Germany a British matron who was

obsessed with the belief that she could not learn the language. At the

end of four years' sojourn she entered a store and asked the price of an

article.

"Four marks," was the answer.

"How much in English money?" she inquired.

"Why, madam, a mark is the same as a shilling."

"I don't know anything about that; how much is it in English?"

"Four shillings."

"Ah, quite so; you might have told me at once."

Experience has shown that no time in life precludes the acquirement of

new knowledge and new habits by one who thinks it worth while to make the

attempt. The elderly person will be surprised at his progress if he will

bring to bear upon a new subject a mind free from doubts of its usefulness,

doubts of his own ability, worry lest he is wasting valuable time, regrets

for the past and plans for the future.

It is not always possible to say just where useful habit merges into

obsession. A certain individual, we will say, invariably puts on the

left shoe before the right. This is a useful habit, fixed by constant

repetition, useful because it relieves the brain of conscious effort. But

suppose he decides some morning to put on the right shoe before the left;

this new order so offends his sense of the fitness of things that he finds

it hard to proceed; if he perseveres, his feet feel wrong to him; the

discomfort grows until finally he is impelled to remove the shoes and

replace them in the usual order. In this case an act which started as a

useful habit has been replaced by an obsession.

Suppose, again, a person obsessed by the fear of poison is prevented from

washing his hands before eating. He sits down, perhaps, fully intending to

proceed as if nothing had happened, but the thought occurs to him that he

may have touched something poisonous, though his reason tells him this

is most improbable. He reviews the events of the day and can find no

suggestion of poison; still the thought of poison obtrudes itself, and he

finds it impossible to put anything which he touches into his mouth. He

next wonders if he has not already put something into his mouth. This

thought produces a mental panic, the blood mounts to his head, he becomes

incapable of coherent thought or speech, and the task of finishing his

dinner would now be beyond his power even if he had not lost all taste for

it.

Such illustrations of obsession in daily life, by no means rare, could be

multiplied indefinitely, and may be perhaps better appreciated than the

text-book illustration of the man who neglected to flick off with his whip

a certain stone from the top of a wall, and who could not sleep until he

had returned to the spot and performed the act.

Suppose a man has always worn high boots and is accustomed to a feeling of

warmth about the ankles. The desire for warm ankles may finally so dominate

him that he not only cannot wear low shoes in mid-summer, but he cannot

wear slippers, even in a warm room; and finally, perhaps, finds that he

must wear woollen socks to bed. By this time the desire for a certain

sensation is in a fair way to become an obsession. When you assure him that

many wear low shoes throughout the winter, he asks if their ankles really

feel warm. That is not the question. The question is, can one accustom

himself to the ankles feeling cool, just as he accustoms himself to his

face feeling cool. If he can, he has conquered a sensory obsession, and has

made a step toward fitting himself to meet more serious vicissitudes with

equanimity.

Similar instances can be adduced in all realms of sensation, both general

and special. One person cannot bear the light, and wears blue glasses;

another cannot breathe out-door air, and wears a respirator; another cannot

bear to see a person rock or to hear a person drum.

If a family or circle of friends is so constituted that some are obsessed

to _do_ certain things and others are obsessed _not to stand them_ the

foundation is laid for a degree of irritability inconsistent with mental

health. Mrs. X. simply cannot stand hearing Mr. X. tap the floor, and if he

continues, her discomfort becomes acute; the sound so dominates her that

she can think of nothing else and can accomplish nothing until the sound is

stopped. She can stand _anything_ but _that_. The daughter, Miss X., hardly

hears the tapping, and is irritated and impatient to the last degree on

account of her mother's "silly" notion. What Miss X. simply cannot bear is

hearing her brother continually clear his throat, and if he does not stop

she must leave the room or "go wild." Unfortunately, meantime, Mr. X. is so

obsessed to tap the floor that he cannot follow his task without it, and

Master X. _must_ clear his throat every few moments with a peculiar note

because he "has catarrh."

Here we have a common starting-point for family discomfort, and here we

have a clue to the advice of the physician who advises isolation as a step

toward the cure of the member of the family who first breaks down, not

simply under the stress of occupation, but of occupation plus the wear and

tear of minor but constant sources of irritation.

* * * * *

It is said that the victim of jiu jitsu, by breaking one hold, places

himself in the greater danger from the next. Similarly, after having

conquered a few obsessions, one is overwhelmed with the obsession to set

every one straight. Soukanhoff was right in warning the obsessive to beware

of pedantry.

The question here presents itself whether this line of thought does not

foster, rather than lessen, the pedantry and the self-study which it is

intended to combat. Why not simply drop the worry and the doubt without

further argument? The difficulty is that the mental processes of the

over-scrupulous person are such that he cannot summarily drop a habit of

thought. He must reason himself out of it. There is no limit to his ability

if properly directed; he can gradually modify all his faulty tendencies,

and may even finally acquire the habit of automatically dismissing worry,

but it would be too much to expect that he suddenly change his very nature

at command.

Soukanhoff's description of obsessives is peculiarly apt: "over-scrupulous,

disquieted over trifles, indecisive in action, and anxious about their

affairs. They are given early to morbid introspection, and are easily

worried about their own indispositions or the illnesses of their friends.

They are often timorous and apprehensive, and prone to pedantism. The

moral sentiments are pronounced in most cases, and if they are, as a rule,

somewhat exigent and egotistic, they have a lively sense of their own

defects."

A common obsession is the compulsion to dwell upon the past, to reproduce

the circumstances, and painfully to retrace the steps which we took in

coming to an erroneous decision which led to a foolish, unnecessary, or

perhaps even a wrong decision. One of my earliest impressions in golf was

the remark of a veteran who was good enough to make a round with me. "If

I had only approached better, I should have made that hole in five," I

remarked, after taking seven strokes for a hole.

"Perhaps not," he replied; "if you had _approached better_, perhaps you

would have _putted worse_ and taken _eight_ strokes for the hole. At all

events, that hole is ancient history now, and you will play this one better

if you leave that one alone."

He little realized how many times his advice would recur to me elsewhere

than on the links. Retrospective worry can be absolutely eliminated from

the most obsessive mind by the practice of the veteran's philosophy.

Mercier says the greatest intellectual gift is the ability to forget.

The conscientious self-analyst spends too much time in weighing his ability

or inability to perform some task. Between his fear, his worry over the

past, and his indecision whether the task should be attempted, he starts

with an overwhelming handicap. If he learns to say, "Other people fail;

it will not matter if I do this time," he will find the task already half

accomplished.

The Rev. Francis Tiffany has observed that if a ship could think, and

should imagine itself submerged by all the waves between here and Europe,

it would dread to leave its moorings; but in reality it has to meet but one

wave at a time.

The tendency of the average American in this bustling age, whether he is

obsessive or not, is to live at least several hours in advance. On the

train he takes no comfort and makes no observations, for his mind is upon

his destination rather than on his journey.

* * * * *

Though the immediate object of these chapters is the promotion of the

mental, and indirectly the physical, health of the individual, I cannot

forbear referring to the effect of this training on the position of the

individual in society and his relation toward his surroundings.

The endeavor to overcome obsessions is likely to be ignored by two classes:

the self-centered individuals who see no reason for learning what they do

not want to learn, and the individuals who have no time for, or interest

in, self-training because of absorption in subjects of wider relation, as

art, or science, or reform. The philosophy of Haeckel applies to both:

"Man belongs to the social vertebrates, and has, therefore, like all social

animals, two sets of duties--first to himself, and secondly to the society

to which he belongs. The former are the behests of self-love, or egoism,

the latter love for one's fellows, or altruism. The two sets of precepts

are equally just, equally natural, and equally indispensable. If a man

desires to have the advantage of living in an organized community, he has

to consult not only his own fortune, but also that of the society, and of

the 'neighbors' who form the society. He must realize that its prosperity

is his own prosperity, and that it cannot suffer without his own injury."

The individual who is ruled by his obsessions not only paves the way for

needless and ultimate breakdown, but is in danger of gradually narrowing

his field of usefulness and pleasure until he is in little better case than

Simeon Stylites, who spent nearly half a century on the top of a monument.

Nor has he even Simeon's consolation that he could come down if he chose;

for it seems that the authorities sent messengers demanding his return,

with orders to let him stay if he showed willingness to come down--and he

stayed.

Why Worry? · 第 16 / 44 题