Love, Open Awareness, And Authenticity- A Conversation With William Blake and D. W. Winnicott

http://jhp.sagepub.com

Journal of Humanistic Psychology

DOI: 10.1177/0022167805281189 2006; 46; 9 Journal of Humanistic Psychology

Will W. Adams Love, Open Awareness, and Authenticity: A Conversation with William Blake and D. W. Winnicott

http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/46/1/9 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Humanistic Psychology

can be found at:Journal of Humanistic Psychology Additional services and information for

http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://jhp.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/46/1/9 Citations

by William Stranger on April 1, 2009 http://jhp.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://www.ahpweb.org/

http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jhp.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/46/1/9


10.1177/0022167805281189Conversation with Blake and WinnicottWill W. Adams

Art and Science at the Crossroads

LOVE, OPEN AWARENESS, ANDAUTHENTICITY: A CONVERSATION WITHWILLIAM BLAKE AND D. W. WINNICOTT

WILL W. ADAMS holds an M.A. in psychology fromWest Georgia College and a Ph.D. in clinical psychol-ogy from Duquesne University. He previously servedas a clinical fellow in psychology at McLean Hospital/Harvard Medical School. He works as an associateprofessor of psychology at Duquesne University andas a psychotherapist in independent practice. Dr.

Adams is concerned with fostering collaborative dialogue across scholarlydisciplines (especially philosophy, ecology, religion, and the arts) and theo-retical traditions (especially existential, phenomenological, humanistic,transpersonal, Buddhist, and psychoanalytic psychology). Special inter-ests include ecopsychology, spirituality, meditation,art and literature, andpsychotherapy.

In being loved,we become more open. In being open,we become moreauthentic. In being authentic, we become more loving and creative.Love, open awareness, and authentic existence are intimately inter-related. They co-arise interdependently and together comprise acoherent structure of well-being, allowing one to be most fullyhuman and most fully and uniquely oneself. Psychology and litera-ture are complementary approaches to understanding the meaningof human existence in our shared life-world. In this spirit, a herme-neutical conversation with William Blake and D. W. Winnicott ispresented. Blake’s work and life are read in light of Winnicott’s the-ory of development and psychotherapy, and Winnicott’s theory isread in light of Blake, thereby illuminating the significant inter-permeation of love, openness, and authenticity.

Keywords: love; awareness; authenticity; Blake, Winnicott

9

Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Vol. 46 No. 1, January 2006 9-35DOI: 10.1177/0022167805281189© 2006 Sage Publications



In being loved, we become more open. In being open, we becomemore authentic. In being authentic, we become more loving and cre-ative. Love, open awareness, and authentic existence are intimatelyinterrelated. In the present study, I explore the way in which thesekey qualities of psychospiritual health co-arise interdependentlyand cohere in a mutually supportive manner. To illuminate thisexploration, I will develop a hermeneutical conversation with Wil-liam Blake and D. W. Winnicott. Each man created a brilliant bodyof work and, considered together, they complement one other beau-tifully. By reading Blake’s work and life in light of Winnicott, andexplicating Winnicott’s theory of development and psychotherapyin light of Blake, I hope to inspire a fruitful inquiry into theinterpermeation of love, openness, and authenticity.

For a parent, intimate partner, or dear friend, it is obvious thatlove fosters well-being. Yet, because it is often useful to reconsiderwhat is generally taken for granted, I would like us to explore fur-ther by inquiring: How does love contribute to our health anddevelopment? This question is immensely complex. Thus, I regretthat many significant issues—such as the potential for authentic-ity following love’s absence—can appear only as allusions in thepresent study. For example, how does someone like Kafka workthrough haunting relationships with both parents while becominga creative genius in the process? Or much more commonly, howdoes an abused child grow up to be a loving friend, spouse, and par-ent? What mysterious interactions—of alternative loving support,resiliency, courage, hard work, temperament, genetics, and otherinfluences—give rise to such intriguing affirmations of the humanspirit? Here, more modestly, my aspiration is to illuminate one spe-cific gift of love, namely, the way that being loved facilitates open-ness to direct experience, and to explore how such open awarenessfosters authentic existence.

Although love, openness, and authenticity are distinct phenom-ena, each one is also an aspect of the others. Together, they com-prise a coherent structure of well-being, allowing one to be mostfully human and most fully and uniquely oneself. Buddhist psy-chology demonstrates that all phenomena co-arise interdepen-dently (Rahula,1974),and such interpermeation is especially clear

10 Conversation with Blake and Winnicott

Author’s Note: Please address correspondence and reprint requests to Will W.Adams, Ph.D., Duquesne University, Department of Psychology, 544 College Hall,Pittsburgh, PA 15282; e-mail: [email protected].



with these three.Thus,when focusing on only one or two of the phe-nomena, let us stay mindful of the implicit presence of the other(s).

LOVE IN WINNICOTT’S FACILITATING ENVIRONMENT

“There is no such thing as an infant,” declares Winnicott (1960b,p. 39). This view may seem strange for an expert in infant develop-ment. Yet, he goes on to clarify, “meaning, of course, that wheneverone finds an infant one finds maternal care, and without mater-nal care there would be no infant” (p. 39). In this evocative way,Winnicott emphasizes that we become human and develop our fullpotential in and through loving relationships. He explores the sig-nificance of love in child development through his concept of the“holding” or “facilitating” environment. This special environ-ment—or more precisely this special relationship—includes hold-ing and feeding an infant but goes much further to involve all of theparents’ love, attention, affection, support, guidance, encourage-ment, and responsiveness.

With loving devotion, a “good-enough” parent (Winnicott,1960a) is exquisitely sensitive to the spontaneous expression of achild’s distinctive way of being: the coming into being of this uniquechild in this unique time and place. (Following Winnicott, we see asimilar process transpiring in the relationship between a psycho-therapist and patient.) To be attuned in this way, parents musttemporarily set aside their egocentric wishes. Thus, as we shallunderstand more clearly as we proceed, with good-enough par-enting, the baby can first be open to and aware of his or her presentexperience and then be guided (in feeling, thought, and action) bythis unfolding awareness.

As these interactions recur reliably, they foster the developmentof an authentic way of being, the “true self” in Winnicott’s lan-guage. In discussing authentic existence, I do not mean to connotesome objectified entity as suggested, contrary to his intention,by Winnicott’s term, the “true self.” Also, the true self/false self,authentic/inauthentic distinction should not be taken as an abso-lute separation or as unambiguous or unvarying. Life is never thatsimple. In the complex, ambiguous, multifarious venture of humanexistence, at times we are more authentic and at others less. With-out reifying or romanticizing the concept, let us take authenticityas a metaphor for various modes of being—often an orienting aspi-

Will W. Adams 11



ration, at times more or less a reality—wherein we bring forth ourbest in this shared life and world:Beyond habitual, egocentric exis-tence, we are alive, aware, loving, wise, creative, and living inaccordance with our distinctive capabilities and our present cir-cumstances. When existing in this way, one is most fully humanand most uniquely oneself.

In contrast, not good-enough parenting occurs when parents—out of their own suffering—give priority to their unfulfilled, ego-centric wishes, unfulfilled in the past (especially in childhood) and/or the present. Thus, such parents relate anxiously with their childbased on an experienced narcissistic lack (such as insecurity, pain,fear, or craving). Not good-enough parenting can involve severeneglect, abandonment, or abuse but more commonly it takes a sub-tler form: pressures (expressed consciously or unconsciously) forthe child to conform to the parents’ egocentric wishes. Anxious,insecure, depressed, addicted, or narcissistic parents are often sopreoccupied with themselves (and their sense of lack) that they areunable to recognize what is going on with their child. Thus, thechild is forced to compensate for whatever is going on with the par-ents. Here, the parents’ neediness impinges on the child’s ability toopen and relax into ongoing experience.

In practice, parents’ motivations usually arise from some mix-ture of their own needs and those of the child. However, when par-ents react to their child primarily out of their own wishes, the childwill begin to set aside (and may never develop) his or her own wayof being. Rather than being true to (nascently authentic) expe-rience, the child will likely devise a habitually defensive mode ofliving, conforming to perceptions of what the parents need him orher to be. For both Winnicott and Blake, this is the genesis of thecompliant, conformist “false self.” Herein, we are alienated fromour direct experience, from our own self, from others, and from theworld. As Winnicott (1960a) says,

The good-enough mother meets the omnipotence of the infant [i.e.,the infant’s authentic “spontaneous gesture”] and to some extentmakes sense of it. She does this repeatedly. A True Self begins tohave life. . . . The mother who is not good-enough is not able to imple-ment the infant’s omnipotence, and so she substitutes her own ges-ture which is to be given sense by the compliance of the infant. Thiscompliance on the part of the infant is the earliest stage of the FalseSelf, and belongs to the mother’s inability to sense her infant’s needs.(p. 145)




Love or its lack, and the good or ill that follows: Winnicott madethis the central focus of his life’s work, so crucial it is in humanexistence.

LOVE IN BLAKE’S CHILDHOOD

William Blake was born in 1757 and died in 1827. He lived mostof his life in London, working as a hired engraver when he couldfind employment while devoting his genius to visionary poetry,painting, and printing. Blake will be a major voice in our presentconversation because his life and art vividly demonstrate the in-terrelationship of love, openness, and authenticity.

Blake (1789c) wrote reverently of “Love, the human form divine”(p. 13), and a few loving relationships certainly played a crucialrole in his life, providing a facilitating environment within whichhis authentic creativity could flourish. I will first explore the foun-dational love he received from his parents and later turn to his spe-cial relationship with his wife.

Because Blake’s astonishing art emerged from a deep visionaryability, his account of one of his first visions is especially signifi-cant. Walking along as a boy of 8 or 10 he sees “a tree filled withangels, bright angelic wings bespangling every bough like stars”(Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 7). He returns home and, undoubtedlywith great enthusiasm, tells his parents what he saw. Initially, hisfather accuses him of lying—people do not see angels in trees, wecan imagine him thinking—and intends to give his son a “thrash-ing.” Instead, Blake’s mother steps in on his behalf and he receivesno punishment.

Blake told this story as an adult, long after the original experi-ence. Therefore, this event (and surely many more like it, althoughperhaps not so dramatic) must have held great formative signifi-cance for him early in life. When his mother intervened, she notonly protected him from a spanking but, much more crucially, shevalidated his extraordinary experience and especially his distinc-tive way of experiencing. Her sensitive, loving response gave youngWilliam the vital message that his direct experience was valu-able, that he should attend to and honor his own perceptions evenwhen they transgress the commonly accepted conventions of soci-ety. She thus created a supportive space for further experiences ofthis kind.

Will W. Adams 13



Importantly, Winnicott reassures parents that they need not beperfectly attentive, not that this is even possible. Instead, theyshould aspire to be “good-enough” parents. Although Blake’s fa-ther threatened to spank him in the incident above and Blakeclaimed that on one occasion his mother did “beat him for runningin & saying that he saw the Prophet Ezekial under a Tree in theFields” (Tatham, c1832, p. 519), by all accounts his parents weregenuinely affectionate and supportive.Blake’s mother appreciatedhis joy in making art and lovingly reflected his enthusiasm backto him. Thus, young William “was privately encouraged by hismother” (Cunningham, 1830, p. 477) and “it was his chief delight toretire to the solitude of his room, and there make drawings, andillustrate these with verses, to be hung up together in his mother’schamber” (pp. 480-481).

Blake’s father owned a haberdashery shop (above which thefamily lived) and he hoped William would follow him in his busi-ness.Nonetheless, recognizing William’s passion and talent for art,he joined his wife in encouraging the artistic endeavors of his son.When Blake was 10, his parents sent him to London’s most re-spected school for young artists, and at age 14, his father arrangedan apprenticeship with an esteemed engraver. Clearly, love fromboth parents created an important facilitating environmentwithin which he could be himself. For Blake, being himself meantbeing open to visionary experience and eventually creating the artwe admire two centuries later.

BEING ALONE IN THE PRESENCE OF AN OTHER:LOVE GIVES RISE TO OPEN AWARENESS

Blake’s inspired and inspiring art, like all authentic existence,emerged from his open awareness of self and world. Although fewof us are gifted with genius such as his, Blake emphasized that anauthentic life—springing forth from open experience—is availableto everyone. Winnicott, a creative genius in his own right, wouldstrongly concur. The openness celebrated by Blake and Winnicottis a meditative-like awareness of everything arising in our experi-ence, moment by moment. All sights, sounds, feelings, thoughts,images, and so forth are welcomed and allowed to present them-selves to us. Herein, we “consent to the present moment” and “con-fide ourselves into the present moment,” as the Zen teacher Bruce




Harris (2002, personal conversation) puts it so beautifully. Under-standing the way love fosters such open awareness is a primarytask of this study.

Winnicott (1958) emphasized the importance, in parenting (andpsychotherapy), of helping the child (or patient) have experiencesof being alone in the presence of an other, thereby fostering the openawareness necessary for growth and authenticity. This requiresthe loving choice as a parent to set aside one’s egocentric wishes, tofade into the background yet still be there attentively with one’schild. This frees the child from the need to search for and react toshifts in the parent’s mood or behavior. It allows the child to let goof the need to guard against impingement or abandonment. Withthe child subtly feeling and trusting the parent’s silent loving pres-ence, the parent implicitly encourages the child to relax and open:first simply to be, then to be aware of his or her own direct experi-ence, and eventually to be guided by this experience as it emergesspontaneously in the present moment. Patiently attentive, neitherneglectful nor intrusive, the parent intervenes only when awareof danger or when sensing that the child’s nascently authenticexpressions need recognition, mirroring, and support. Notice thatthe child’s being alone with his or her direct experience meansbeing intimately engaged with the surrounding world and withfeelings, thoughts, desires, and so forth, as they are arising.

Of course, this way of relating with one’s child is only one ofmany appropriate modes of parenting, modes that vary accordingto the requirements and opportunities of the present circum-stances. There are plenty of other times when good-enough par-ents must attend to their own needs, actively guide or challengetheir child, or set clear and firm boundaries, and the child mustlearn to respond accordingly. Thus, to cite another classic series ofdevelopmental studies, Baumrind’s (1967, 1995) “authoritative”parenting style is consistent with Winnicott’s “good-enough” par-enting, whereas her “permissive” and “authoritarian” styles arevariations of not-good-enough parenting.

As Winnicott (1958) shows, being alone in the presence of an-other encourages a profoundly open mode of awareness:

The infant is able to become unintegrated, to flounder, to be in a statein which there is no orientation, to be able to exist for a time withoutbeing either a reactor to an external impingement or an active per-son with a direction of interest or movement. (p. 34)

Will W. Adams 15



This description of nonintegration may initially sound disturb-ing. For the infant, however, sensing the parent’s loving presence,this is a pleasurable, vital, liberating mode of awareness. Thus,Winnicott celebrates such openness as the source of authentic ex-perience and behavior:

In the course of time there arrives a sensation or an impulse. In thissetting the sensation or impulse will feel real and be truly a personalexperience.

It will now be seen why it is important that there is someoneavailable, someone present, although present without making de-mands. . . . It is only under these conditions that the infant can havean experience which feels real. (p. 34)

Similarly, praising love’s power to open and free us, Blake (1988b)proclaims, “Love . . . breaks all chains from every mind” (p. 472).

When graced with love, the infant can simply confide him or her-self into whatever is arising in present experience: the cat with itssoft fur, a vibrant surge of bodily energy, the red ball, the sound andsmell of the wind. In such interactions, the infant’s spontaneous,curious, playful openness to the world arises in resonant commu-nion with the world’s spontaneous natural presentation of itself.These experiences prepare the way for increasingly authentic self-world engagement as development progresses.

CATHERINE BLAKE’S LOVE

Loving relationships continue to foster our ability to be openthroughout our lives, from infancy and childhood to adolescenceand adulthood. Our growing autonomy and independence arealways relative, and we never outgrow our relational nature. Thus,let us consider the special relationship between Blake and his wifeCatherine. Although his attention was devoted to his art, Blakewas certainly a loving husband for Catherine. He would get upearly before she awoke, start a fire, and put a kettle on for herbreakfast (Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 358). He also taught Catherineto develop her own creative visionary and artistic abilities. Myfocus here, however, will be on the way Catherine’s love providedBlake with a crucial facilitating environment for his creative work.

An early biographer describes the relationship between thecouple:




Mrs. Blake, the artist’s companion at almost every hour of thetwenty four . . . cheerfully accepted the lot of a poor man’s wife as fewgifted men’s wives are prepared to do. . . . She shared his destiny andsoftened it, ministering to his daily wants. (Gilchrist, 1880/1969,p. 358)

The following is the same writer’s report of a conversation with agood friend of the Blakes:

And “his Kate” was capable of sharing, to some extent at all events,the inner life too, and of yielding true sympathy. “Having never beena mother,” says the same cordially appreciative friend, who sawmuch of her in later years, “to this devoted wife Blake was at oncelover, husband, child. She would get up in the night, when he wasunder his very fierce inspirations, which were as if they would tearhim asunder, while he was yielding himself to the Muse, or whateverelse it could be called, sketching and writing. And so terrible a taskdid this seem to be, that she had to sit motionless and silent; only tostay him mentally, without moving hand or foot: this for hours, andnight after night.” (Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 359)

The Blakes never had children (for reasons unknown) andCatherine chose to give her full attention to the husband sheadored. From the time of their marriage when Blake was 25 untilthe moment he died at age 69, her loving presence allowed him togive himself over to his intense visionary experience. Confrontedwith economic and psychological challenges through much ofadulthood, it is disturbing to imagine what Blake’s life and artwould have been without Catherine’s love.

HOLDING OUR OWN EXPERIENCEWITH LOVING ATTENTION

Although those close to Blake appreciated the greatness of hisart, his genius was never widely recognized during his life. Heoften lived in poverty, struggling to earn enough money merely tosurvive.Furthermore,some of his contemporaries deemed him mad.(These seem to be people who had heard about him but never methim. Although it appears that Blake did undergo phases of maniaand depression, those who knew him well did not consider himinsane.) Worse yet, most simply ignored his work. Blake knew hisgifts were real and profound and this lack of regard troubled him.

Will W. Adams 17



Nonetheless, even with adversity impinging, Blake alwaystrusted his authentic and creative experience. This is a testimonyto his own courage and integrity coupled with the loving supporthe received from his parents and wife. In the course of his develop-ment, Blake surely internalized the love provided by his parentsand later by Catherine, incorporating and building on it as anaspect of his very self. Thus, in opening himself for visions andcreating his art, Blake was able to do with himself what hismother had done for him when she protected him after his vision ofangels: to establish a reliable, open, receptive space of conscious-ness within which his extraordinary experience could emerge andbe held with loving appreciation. As Winnicott (1958) says, “In thecourse of time the individual becomes able to forgo the actual pres-ence of a mother or mother-figure.This has been referred to in suchterms as the establishment of an ‘internal environment’ ” (p. 34).And still we continue to be nourished by our connections with oth-ers. Thus, Blake’s ability to hold himself, so to speak, was enhancedby Catherine’s devoted presence.

As Blake knew well, life is painful at times. Even when we areinfants (much less as adults), our needs and hopes are not alwaysfulfilled. No parent (even when good-enough) is perfectly attentiveto their child or perfectly understanding in interpreting expres-sions of need. In these moments, the child must find a way to bear(for some time) the pain or anxiety of unmet needs. Furthermore,good-enough parents are sensitive to their child’s evolving auton-omy and therefore learn to give over to the child (ever so gradually)increasing responsibility for caring for him or herself and respond-ing to difficult situations. Both of these circumstances—one acci-dental and one intentionally created by conscious parenting—canbe distressing for the child. However, not only are these chal-lenges not traumatizing for the child (as long as the parents arereliably loving) but they actually encourage the development ofself-structure. The child learns to serve him or herself in the waythe parents previously served him or her. And the child’s self deep-ens each time he or she does this successfully. This prepares thechild to manage those inevitable times when the world impingespainfully, both in trauma and in the ordinary trials of daily life.

Later, in adulthood, most of us are not given such total lovingattention as Blake received from Catherine. Nonetheless, thank-fully, there are occasions when others do consciously create oppor-tunities for us to give ourselves fully to open experiencing: a hus-




band and father plays with the children while his wife makespottery; she answers the phone while he meditates; and in an inti-mate conversation, their shared love is so evident that both feelinvited to bring forth their deepest being. Much more commonly,however, our ability (now relatively stable and mature) to hold our-selves—to open our heart and mind for the emergence of authenticexperience—is more subtly or implicitly supported by the loving-kindness of family and friends. Agency and communion are alwaysinterdependent. Thus, our evolving autonomy, including the abil-ity to welcome our experience with a tender embrace, is comple-mented by our involvement in loving relationships.

BEING OPEN IN THE PRESENT MOMENT

Winnicott often presents cryptic insights for readers to contem-plate. Thus, he asserts, “After being—doing and being done to. Butfirst, being” (Winnicott, 1971a, p. 85). According to Winnicott, inoptimal infant development, being precedes doing and being facili-tates doing. In this context, “being” means being free from the needto react defensively to external impingement and being free foropen awareness of one’s evolving experience in the present mo-ment. Winnicott (1963) calls this open mode of existence, simply,“going-on-being” (p. 86).

Being (in this sense) is fostered by love. Confidently trusting theparents’ devoted loving attention, an infant can let go of the need tofocus on the parents’ behavior, can be alone in their presence,thereby allowing his or her awareness to drift openly and pur-posely,attuned to the surrounding world and to private experience.The parents’ love, says Winnicott (1962), frees the infant fromstriving to integrate prematurely or defensively, thereby letting amore authentic self emerge:

The opposite of integration would seem to be disintegration. This isonly partly true. The opposite, initially, requires a word likeunintegration. Relaxation for an infant means not feeling a need tointegrate, the mother’s ego-supportive function being taken forgranted. (p. 61)

This open, unintegrated mode of consciousness is a condition forthe evolution of child’s sense of being real and of being him or her-self, and for the further evolution of authenticity as life progresses.

Will W. Adams 19



Not only in infancy but throughout life, open being precedes au-thentic doing.

At best, open awareness is facilitated initially by parents in theholding relationship, gradually internalized and integrated as anaspect of the child’s self, and then supported in adulthood by one’sfamily and friends. However, even when not developed originallydue to the all-too-common absence of good-enough parenting—anda more defensive, reactive existence is formed instead—laterinvolvement in loving relationships can still foster openness andauthenticity. Feeling cared for by someone we trust, say a spouse,close friend,or psychotherapist,we are invited to open to our experi-ence, just as it is, and to bring forth our very being, just as we are.

Thus,Winnicott (1971c) describes his approach to psychotherapy:

The person we are trying to help needs a new experience in a special-ized setting [viz., being alone in the attentive presence of a trustedother]. The experience is one of a non-purposive state, as one mightsay a sort of ticking over of the unintegrated personality. I refer tothis as formlessness. (p. 55)

Extending this line of thought, Winnicott connects openness withcreativity: “This gives us our indication for therapeutic procedure—to afford opportunity for formless experience, and for creative im-pulses, motor and sensory” (p. 64).

Winnicott speaks of “being,” “going-on-being,” “formless expe-rience,” being “unintegrated” or “non-purposive,” and all of theseare versions of what I am calling openness. Such open, attentiveawareness has been honored across cultures and eras by the greatdisciplines of human development and transformation, from theworld’s spiritual traditions to psychoanalysis, existential phenom-enology, humanistic psychology, and transpersonal psychology.Elsewhere, I explored this important affinity, showing how evenlysuspended attention, the phenomenological attitude, and medita-tive awareness are kindred practices of openness discovered inde-pendently within these respective traditions (Adams, 1995).

BLAKE’S OPEN AWARENESS

Blake spoke with great enthusiasm about being open to thedepths of self and world. The quintessential formulation of this




view is his celebrated testimony: “If the doors of perception werecleansed every thing would appear to man as it is: infinite.For manhas closed himself up, till he sees all things thro’ narrow chinks ofhis cavern” (Blake, 1793, p. 39).

According to Blake, we close our doors of perception by relyingrigidly on preconceived knowledge about our self and the world; bydepending exclusively on rational (versus imaginative) thinking;and by complying uncritically with the conventional, normalizingdemands that others, society,and we ourselves place on us.Also,weoften close down when faced with external demands, and once inforce, these defenses tend to become consolidated into consistent(and self-limiting) ways of being.

We keep ourselves closed down, but it need not be so. One ofBlake’s great teachings is that much of our suffering is unneces-sary, that we can become liberated from the tyranny imposed on usby others and from our self-imposed tyranny. The shackles bind-ing us are not absolute givens of our existence but instead are, inBlake’s (1789a) powerful phrase, “mind-forg’d manacles” (p. 27).

Regarding our overattachment to what we think we alreadyknow, Blake (c1788a) asserts, “As none by traveling over knownlands can find out the unknown. So from already acquired knowl-edge Man could not acquire more” (p. 1). When dominated by ourpreconceptions and expectations, in every potentially new experi-ence we merely see what we expect to see. It is not that Blakewanted to abandon the quest for knowledge but he did want it to bean inspired quest, one guided by openness to direct experience. Incontrast, excessive reliance on habits, conventions, and defensestends to imprison us. Thus, Blake (1793) says, “The man who neveralters his opinion is like standing water, & breeds reptiles of themind” (p. 42).

Although one cannot manufacture deep creative experiences byforce of will, Blake could choose to open himself for revelatoryvisions.With conscious attention (and with Catherine at his side to“stay him mentally” [Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 359]), he would be-come receptive for experiences emerging from the depths of selfand world, knowing that what might come was far beyond his will-ful ego-centered control. Speaking in a letter about a long mythicwork, he states, “I have written this Poem from immediate Dic-tation . . . without Premeditation & even against my Will”(Ackroyd, 1995, p. 238). Similarly, he says, “I dare not pretend tobe any other than the Secretary; the Authors are in Eternity”

Will W. Adams 21



(Ackroyd, 1995, p. 238). Such open receptivity served as the me-dium for his great art.

As described above,Blake’s creative experiences were so intensehe sometimes felt they would “tear him asunder” (Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 359). A passage from The Marriage of Heaven and Helldemonstrates Blake’s unwavering openness to direct experience,no matter how chaotic or terrifying. He describes a visionaryencounter with an angel who (in this case) represents the oppres-sive limitations of conventional religion and conformist, material-istic society. The angel accuses Blake of being evil, saying, “O piti-able foolish young man! . . . Consider the hot burning dungeon thouart preparing for thyself to all eternity” (Blake, 1793, p. 41). Blakeboldly confronts the angel, saying “shew me my eternal lot” (p. 41).Then they embark on a shamanic-like journey:

down the winding cavern we groped our tedious way till a voidboundless as a nether sky appeared beneath us & we held by theroots of trees and hung over this immensity; but I said, if you pleasewe will commit ourselves to this void, and see whether providence ishere also, if you will not I will. (Blake, 1793, p. 41)

Blake does open himself to the “infinite Abyss,” dwelling unknow-ingly with the unknown. Soon they encounter a series of dreadfulthings: a black sun, “vast spiders” attacking their prey, a cascade of“blood mixed with fire,” and “the scaly fold of a monstrous ser-pent” with “beams of blood, advancing toward us with all the fury”(Blake, 1793, p. 41). At this sight, the angel rushes away in fear, butBlake perseveres alone, at which point the terrors disappear andhe finds himself beside a river enjoying the song of a harpist.

Afterward, the angel asks how he managed to survive, andBlake (1793) replies, “All that we saw was owing to your meta-physics” (p. 42). Blake realizes, long before Freud and Jung’s in-sights into projection, that many of our fears are actually disownedaspects of our own being, aspects made terrifying by the beliefs or“metaphysics” of our own alienated mind. In defending againstthese fears we unnecessarily inhibit ourselves.

Blake’s courageous willingness to commit himself to the bound-less void—confiding himself into whatever his experience mightoffer, intuiting the implicit presence of divine “providence”—is adefining characteristic of his life and art. Here we can see thatBlake’s relationship with God provided another facilitating envi-ronment. That is, as in the example above, God provides love (or




“providence”), which fosters Blake’s openness and allows his cre-ativity to emerge. Yet, to understand the nature of this facilitatingrelationship we must appreciate Blake’s experience of God. ForBlake, providence does not mean the guiding intervention of apurely transcendent deity separate from himself. When askedabout the “Divinity of Jesus Christ,” Blake (1825/1946) responded,“‘He is the only God’—but then he added—‘And so am I and so areyou.’ ” (p. 680). In the same conversation, Blake declared, “We areall coexistent with God; members of the Divine body,and partakersof the Divine nature” (p. 680). God is a facilitating environment inthis sense: Blake entrusts himself to the loving presence of hisdeepest being, which is God, and is thereby free to be open for cre-ative visionary experience.

As Blake’s encounter with the void attests, it can be terrifying toallow ourselves to become unintegrated, unknowing, nonpur-posive, receptive to everything that presents itself in our experi-ence. Therefore, although being open (or “formless” or “uninte-grated”) is vital for authenticity, love better prepares the way foropenness. As Winnicott (1971c) emphasizes,

The searching [for and eventually as one’s true self] can come onlyfrom desultory formless functioning, or perhaps from rudimentaryplaying, as if in a neutral zone. It is only here, in this unintegratedstate of the personality, that that which we describe as creative canappear. This if reflected back, but only if reflected back, becomes partof the organized individual personality. (p. 64)

Alone in the loving presence of a trusted other, the child (or patientor artist) can give him or herself over to unfolding experience,attuned to whatever the world (including one’s body, feelings,thoughts, images, etc.) is naturally presenting. In this resonantcommunion of open self and open world, there may arise a sponta-neous revelatory experience and a spontaneous action in response,an awareness and response that feel vital, alive, fresh, real, true.This experience, integrated with countless others like it, has thepotential to evolve into a more stable, authentic way of being.

For this developmental possibility to become actualized, thechild’s spontaneous gesture (coming forth from open awareness)should be recognized by another person and affirmatively reflectedback, thereby enabling the child to more fully appropriate his orher own experience. As Winnicott (1971c) says, “the sense of selfcomes on the basis of an unintegrated state which . . . is lost unless

Will W. Adams 23



observed and mirrored back by someone who is trusted and whojustifies the trust and meets the dependence” (p. 61). Therefore, inone of his most profound formulations of this process, Winnicott(1967) remarks,

What does the baby see when he or she looks at the mother’s face? Iam suggesting that, ordinarily, what the baby sees is himself or her-self. In other words the mother is looking at the baby and what shelooks like is related to what she sees there. (p. 112)

Appreciating the baby’s nascently authentic presence, the parent’sloving expression holds the baby’s being—actually is the baby’svery being, as the conventional self-other separation disappears—and offers this authentic being back for the baby to realize morefully. Thus, Winnicott celebrates “the mother’s role of giving backto the baby the baby’s own self” (Winnicott, 1967, p. 118).

We can imagine Blake’s mother joyfully receiving her son’sdrawings (and thus William’s authentic self) and enthusiasti-cally displaying them on her bedroom wall. Likewise, today, lov-ing parents create an art gallery on their refrigerator door, a re-presentation most deeply of their child’s very being. And here wecan recall Catherine Blake sitting attentively with her husbandwhile he was immersed in intense visionary experience. As onebiographer put it, prefiguring Winnicott, “always his glowingenthusiasm was mirrored in the still depths of his wife’s nature”(Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 113). Through such mirroring, an inter-personal resonance is created in the relationship between parentand child (or therapist and patient or lover and beloved), a reso-nance that affirms and deepens the direct experiential resonanceof the open relationship between child/patient/lover and world.

LOVE DISSOLVES NARCISSISM

A vast folklore exists about parenting and child development,and mixed with great wisdom are equally great misconceptions.For example, we commonly hear that too much attention will“spoil” children and make them “selfish.” If such critics spoke inpsychological jargon they might worry about making a child nar-cissistic. Although this belief is misguided, it does raise an appar-ent paradox. Without being overly permissive, good-enough par-ents do (for a time and place) set aside their own needs and devote




themselves fully to their infant. They create a secure, loving envi-ronment wherein the infant can focus on direct experience andspontaneous actions. This kind of parenting does encourage theinfant to be “self-centered” in one sense, but one that is far fromselfish or greedy. A developmental perspective may help clarify thesituation. What we commonly understand as a “sense of self” isalmost completely absent in early infancy. In fact, the infant needsto be self-centered to develop a stable, coherent, differentiated self-sense in the first place. In this context, being “self-centered” meanscentering one’s awareness on whatever feels alive, real, and mean-ingful in one’s present experience (just as we’ve been exploring).Parents are surely wise to help their infant do this.

The same issue may be approached from a different perspective.Human existence is “two-sided” (so to speak), always involving aunified self-world or self-other relationship. (At times, as in thenon-dual awareness of mystical or spiritual experience, it becomesclear that the two “sides” are ultimately one.) However, the “self-side” of this relationship emerges fully into being only in the courseof development. The love parents give their infant strengthens thenascent self of the self-world unity. This is a key component in theprocess of differentiation and individuation in infant development.When the self-side of the self-world relationship is emphasizedearly in life via loving care, it grows into a relatively consistent andreliable way of being. This is what we mean by a self. (Significantly,by this process, the infant and later the child progressively developthe ability to manage impinging events without being trauma-tized.) When parents protect their infant from threats and encour-age him or her to be centered on direct, evolving experience, a cru-cial opportunity is provided. The infant becomes free to explorewith ever-greater awareness; to see the world with increasingopenness, intimacy, and clarity; to receive and process whateverthe world presents; and to respond with growing authenticity.Herein, the infant’s self is created from love and open experiencing.

One important aspect of this developmental progression is thatover time the young child begins to realize that mother and fatherare individuals—distinct from but like oneself—with their ownfeelings, thoughts, needs, and motivations. Such empathic under-standing of the real otherness of the other, and the related abilityto take the other’s perspective, is evidence of a decline in primitivenarcissism and an increase in healthy self-esteem, autonomy, andagency. This developmental transformation is a necessary precur-

Will W. Adams 25



sor to mature mutual love. Thus, love dissolves narcissism: Beingloved fosters our ability to love.

However, if the nascent self-sense is not supported, the infantremains at the mercy of whatever is imposed by the world and oth-ers. Here, the “world-side” of the self-world unity dominates andimpinges traumatically on the infant. In this case, the infant’s selfis created from defensive reactions to perceived dangers. ForWinnicott, this is the genesis of the false self. With parental intru-sion or neglect, the world-side takes priority and the infant be-comes excessively shaped by the world before having the opportu-nity to become an authentic individual. In Winnicott’s (1960b)words, “If maternal care is not good enough then the infant doesnot really come into existence, since there is no continuity of being;instead the personality becomes built on the basis of reactions toenvironmental impingement” (p. 54). Thus, far from spoiling achild with devoted attention, “It is only when alone (that is to say,in the presence of someone) that the infant can discover his ownpersonal life. The pathological alternative is a false life built onreactions to external stimuli” (Winnicott, 1958, p. 34).

BEING VERSUS ANNIHILATION

In contrast to the open awareness facilitated by loving care,when the child is not protected from impingements, he or she isforced to erect protective defenses. Although these reactions mayhelp one survive temporarily, they tend to become consolidatedinto ongoing ways of being that narrow down both self and world.Sadly, this diminished existence often continues throughout adultlife. Winnicott (1960b) puts it powerfully:

The alternative to being is reacting, and reacting interrupts beingand annihilates. Being and annihilation are the two alternatives.The holding environment therefore has as its main function thereduction to a minimum of impingements to which the infant mustreact with resultant annihilation of personal being. (p. 47)

Blake was deeply troubled by the way we lose trust in our sponta-neous experience, desires, and creativity (or never develop thistrust to begin with) and instead substitute a defensive or compli-ant false self. Indeed, he considered this one of the great disastersof human existence. Abdicating our real abilities, doubting our




true powers, bowing to conventional expectations, we subsist in astate of fear, weakness, and deadness. Blake believed this hadbecome the unquestioned norm of his society. Thus, what was nor-mal was not healthy but merely a state of suboptimal functioning.Attacking the oppressive forces of conventional authority, Blakedeclared, “there are probably men shut up as mad in Bedlam, whoare not so: that possibly the madmen outside have shut up the sanepeople” (Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 369).

Long before the field of developmental psychology was created,Blake understood that our early relationships can open us up orclose us down, facilitate trust in our spontaneous experience orpush us toward a reactive, defended existence. With these con-cerns, he sounded a vehement warning:

He who shall teach the Child to DoubtThe rotting Grave shall neer get out . . .If the Sun & Moon should DoubtTheyd immediately Go out. (Blake, 1988a, p. 492)

And writing about his own childhood, Blake says,

Thank God I never was sent To SchoolTo be Flogged into following the Style of a Fool.(Bentley, 2001, p. 16)

Blake would surely lament (with Winnicott) the suffering of one ofWinnicott’s patients, a woman whose “childhood environmentseemed unable to allow her to be formless but must, as she felt it,pattern her and cut her out into shapes conceived by other people”(Winnicott, 1971b, p. 34). Indeed, we suffer terribly when we turnaway from our open experience or never find access to it in the firstplace.

AUTHENTICITY AND CREATIVITY

Like parents worried about spoiling their child, some may arguethat this emphasis on being open to experience may support nar-cissistic styles of existence. However, quite the contrary is true, asBlake and Winnicott help us see.Having explored how open aware-ness fosters authenticity, consider that two of the deepest manifes-

Will W. Adams 27



tations of authentic existence are love and creativity, and that bothtake us beyond our narrow egocentric concerns.

Urging us to break free from the “mind-forg’d manacles” of ourfears and defenses, Blake (like Winnicott) held that openness wasa key to authentic creativity. He believed we each have great cre-ative potential, but most of us never actualize it because we losetouch with our own experience. We let ourselves be oppressed byothers, or we oppress ourselves. “You have the same faculty as I(the visionary), only you do not trust or cultivate it,” Blake wouldtell his friends (Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 364). Calling for trust inour own direct experience (especially when lured by the apparentcomforts of convention), Blake (1793) asks, “Is he honest who re-sists his genius or conscience, only for the sake of present ease orgratification?” (p. 39).

Although his creative experiences were absolutely real to him,Blake certainly did not confuse his visions with physical reality.He“would candidly confess they were not literal matters of fact; butphenomena seen by his imagination: realities none the less forthat, but transacted within the realm of mind” (Gilchrist, 1880/1969, p. 363). Talking with people at a party, Blake recounted arecent vision:

“The other evening,” said Blake, in his usual quiet way, “taking awalk, I came to a meadow and, at the farther corner of it, I saw a foldof lambs. Coming nearer, the ground blushed with flowers; and thewattled cote and its wooly tenants were of an exquisite pastoralbeauty. But I looked again, and it proved to be no living flock, butbeautiful sculpture.” (Gilchrist, 1880/1969, pp. 362-363)

A woman overheard Blake’s comment and, thinking this would bea wonderful sight for her children, inquired, “ ‘I beg your pardon,Mr. Blake, but may I ask where you saw this?’ ‘Here, madam,’ an-swered Blake, touching his forehead” (Gilchrist,1880/1969,p.363).

For Blake, the reality of open imagination—this mental or spiri-tual reality,as he called it—was more real than the purely materialworld. Yet he did not devalue the reality of human existence in thislife and this world. Quite the contrary, he venerated the spiritualnature of everyday life. Thus, he proclaims, “Eternity is in lovewith the productions of time” (Blake, 1793, p. 36) and “He who seesthe Infinite in all things sees God” (1788b, p. 3). In fact, Blake privi-leges open perception and creative imagination because he cher-




ishes our ability to be authentic agents in shaping the meaning ofour daily lives.

Criticized by those with exclusively materialistic views, Blakecounters with an experience that might initially seem strange:

What it will be Questioned When the Sun rises do you not see around Disk of fire somewhat like a Guinea [as the materialistswould have it]. O no no I see an Innumerable company of the Heav-enly host crying Holy Holy Holy is the Lord God Almighty. I questionnot my Corporeal or Vegetative Eye any more than I would Questiona Window concerning a Sight. I look thro it & not with it. (Blake,1810, pp. 565-566)

Blake is able,according to convention, to see the sun as a disk of firethat looks something like a gold Guinea coin. But, looking throughthe physiological organ of his eye,he sees more deeply and discoversa multitude of angels—the heavenly host—celebrating the holi-ness of creation. Thus, does Blake revere the creative, life-chang-ing, world-transforming abilities of authentic human conscious-ness. He knows that what we see is not ready-made unilaterally bythe natural world, existing objectively apart from us, but is alwaysco-constructed by our awareness. “A fool sees not the same treethat a wise man sees,” says Blake (1793, p. 35). The meaning of ourperception, just as the meaning of our life, is discovered/created inthe inseparable relationship between our self and the world.

Winnicott (1960a) likewise affirms the centrality of such cre-ative experience: “Health here is closely bound up with the capac-ity of the individual to live in the area that is intermediate be-tween the dream and reality” (p. 150). This comment is certainlyapt for Blake’s blending of personal dream and the world’s self-presentation in his perception of the sun as a heavenly host ofangels. While appreciating such artistic genius, Winnicott givesprimary value to the ordinary creativity of spontaneous engage-ment in daily life. This everyday creativity is a mature analogy tothe infant being openly aware in the present moment. For theinfant, the artist, or the ordinary healthy person (each accordingtheir own level of development), authentic existence involves theopen intimate communion of one’s unique self with the uniquemanifestation of the world. In Winnicott’s (1971c) words,

We experience life in the area of transitional phenomena, in theexciting interweave of subjectivity and objective observation, and in

Will W. Adams 29



an area that is intermediate between the inner reality of the individ-ual and the shared reality of the world that is external to indi-viduals. (p. 64)

This beautifully describes the optimal authentic (and creative)relationship, wherein self and world participate together in a rela-tively balanced way, each offering their distinctive contribution tothe discovery/creation of experience. Stated differently, authenticexistence is truly revelatory, and what is revealed is partly self andpartly world: through open awareness a new manifestation of ourbeing emerges in resonant communion with a new manifestation ofour world. More precisely, the self-world unity itself is discovered/created anew. In contrast, suffering arises when this mutual rela-tionship is unbalanced. For example, the world-side of the self-world relationship dominates when an infant is forced to react totraumatic impingement or when adults anxiously lose themselvesin uncritical, compliant conformity. On the other hand, the self-side dominates in psychosis (at the extreme) and narcissism (in itsvarious manifestations).

This is why, for Winnicott, creativity (as the mutual interweav-ing of self and world) is a key expression of one’s true self. He statesit strongly: “It is creative apperception more than anything elsethat makes the individual feel that life is worth living” (Winnicott,1971a, p. 65). For people to see the world creatively, this is “thecharacteristic that makes them human” (Winnicott, 1971a, p. 68).A vignette from Blake supports Winnicott’s high praise of the cre-ative life.

The spirit said to him “Blake be an artist & nothing else. In thisthere is felicity.” His eye glistened while he spoke of the joy of devot-ing himself solely to divine art . . . “I wish to live for art—I want noth-ing whatever. I am quite happy.” (Bentley, 1969, pp. 311-312)

AUTHENTICITY AND LOVE

Along with being creative, being loving is one of the suprememanifestations of authentic existence. Indeed, there is a deep affin-ity between love and authenticity, one that I can only suggest here.Mature love consists of being exquisitely sensitive to the uniquebeing of our partner while simultaneously being true to our au-thentic self (far beyond our ego) and acting in accordance with this




sensitivity. In other words, authentic love involves the kind of bal-anced, resonant, self-world communion we explored above. Suchlove is a mature version of what is prefigured in the child’s growingawareness of the real otherness of the other.

“The most sublime act is to set another before you” (Blake, 1793,p. 36), proclaims the poet-artist. Blake was a profoundly spiritualman whose experience resonates with the great mystics, saints,and sages across the ages. It is all the more significant, therefore,that he presents love as the highest expression of the sublime orspiritual life.

Authenticity and love are intertwined in another significantway as well. When (in living authentically) we transcend our ego-centric habits, conventions, and defenses and open ourselves to ourpresent experience, two things become clear: immense sufferingand immense beauty pervade the world, and both suffering andbeauty evoke a loving response. One of life’s most profound chal-lenges is finding a way to honor these two great existential givensof the human condition. Thus, Blake (1988a) attests,

It is right it should be soMan was made for Joy & WoeAnd when this we rightly knowThro the world we safely goJoy & Woe are woven fineA Clothing for the soul divine. (p. 491)

Dwelling with open awareness, the world presents itself to us in allits wonder and horror, beauty and suffering. Through our authen-tic presence, whether joyful or woeful, we are called to offer ourvery being with love,needing no inducement from external author-ities or doctrine. Thus, having cleansed his doors of perception,Blake (1789b) saw life with deep empathy and compassion:

Can I see another’s woe,And not be in sorrow too.Can I see another’s grief,And not seek for kind relief . . .Can a mother sit and hear,An infant groan an infant fear—No no never can it be.Never never can it be. (p. 17)

Will W. Adams 31



This is a poem of tragic irony because Blake was painfully awarethat countless infants are left to groan on and on, unheard by theirparents. Yet, nonetheless, Blake still reveres the awe-inspiringbeauty of the world: “When thou seest an Eagle, thou seest a por-tion of Genius. lift up thy head!” (Blake, 1793, p. 37).

Ready—openly, gratefully—to embrace life just as it is, and tolet go lightly, Blake sings:

He who binds to himself a joyDoes the winged life destroyBut he who kisses the joy as it fliesLives in eternity’s sun rise. (Blake, 1793, p. 470)

Ultimately, with great love for our beautiful and terrible world, hecelebrates the glory of life, proclaiming, “For every thing that livesis Holy” (Blake, 1793, p. 45).

LOVE FOSTERS LOVE

At the beginning of this study, I acknowledged that love, openawareness, and authenticity are obviously keys to health and well-being. Taking the obvious as a point of departure, we engaged in amore in-depth inquiry. Now, from this new point in the hermeneu-tic spiral, we see more clearly: Love fosters openness; openness fos-ters authenticity; authenticity is being loving and creative. Andthe process of their interdependent co-arising evolves on and on.

Stated even more concisely: Love fosters love. Is there anythingmore important than this?

TO SING AS WE DIE

William Blake died singing. And as countless wise ones haveattested, the culminating manifestation of an authentic life is theability to embrace our own death with awareness, acceptance,and integrity. The way we live is usually the way we die, and thiswas definitely the case with Blake. Indeed, Blake lived an extraor-dinarily authentic life and died an extraordinarily authentic




death. The intimate interrelationship of love, openness, andauthenticity—so characteristic of this great man’s life and art—isevident in his final days and minutes.

Approaching death with deep peace, gratitude, and joy, Blakeremained centered on art and love, just as he had been throughouthis life. Speaking intimately with his beloved wife, he confided, “Iglory . . . in dying, and have no grief but in leaving you, Katherine;we have lived happy, and we have lived long; we have been evertogether, but we shall be divided soon” (Cunningham, 1830,pp. 501-502). Just before dying he saw her crying and said, “StayKate! . . . keep just as you are—I will draw your portrait—for youhave ever been an angel to me” (Cunningham, 1830, p. 502). Uponcompleting the drawing, he began singing beautiful verses andhymns, ecstatic “songs of joy and Triumph” as Catherine calledthem (Tatham, c1832, p. 528). Turning to her, he vowed they wouldnever really be parted,and then he died “like the sighing of a gentlebreeze” (Tatham, c1832, p. 528).

Aware that the end of his glorious life was imminent, Blake feltprofound gratitude for the grace of his wife’s great love, andthrough open heart and mind, he brought forth one last loving giftto his wife and to the world, a gift we are still sharing today.

References

Ackroyd, P. (1995). Blake: A biography. New York: Ballantine.Adams, W. (1995). Revelatory openness wedded with the clarity of un-

knowing: Psychoanalytic evenly suspended attention, the phenomen-ological attitude, and meditative awareness. Psychoanalysis and Con-temporary Thought, 18(4), 463-494.

Baumrind, D. (1967). Child-care practices anteceding three patterns ofpreschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43-48.

Baumrind, D. (1995).Child maltreatment and optimal caregiving in socialcontexts. New York: Garland.

Bentley, G. E. (1969). Blake records. London: Oxford University Press.Bentley, G. E. (2001). The stranger from paradise: A biography of William

Blake. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Blake, W. (1788a). All religions are one. In D. V. Erdman (Ed.), The com-

plete poetry and prose of William Blake (Newly Rev. Ed.) New York:Anchor Doubleday.

Blake, W. (1788b). There is no natural religion. In D. V. Erdman (Ed.), Thecomplete poetry and prose of William Blake (Newly Rev. Ed.). New York:Anchor Doubleday.

Will W. Adams 33



Blake, W. (1789a). London. From Songs of innocence and of experience. InD. V. Erdman (Ed.), The complete poetry and prose of William Blake(Newly Rev. Ed.). New York: Anchor Doubleday.

Blake, W. (1789b). On another’s sorrow. From Songs of innocence and ofexperience. In D. V. Erdman (Ed.), The complete poetry and prose ofWilliam Blake (Newly Rev. Ed.). New York: Anchor Doubleday.

Blake, W. (1789c). The divine image. From Songs of innocence and of expe-rience. In D. V. Erdman (Ed.), The complete poetry and prose of WilliamBlake (Newly Rev. Ed.). New York: Anchor Doubleday.

Blake, W. (1793). The marriage of heaven and hell. In D. V. Erdman (Ed.),The complete poetry and prose of William Blake (Newly Rev. Ed.). NewYork: Anchor Doubleday.

Blake, W. (1810). A vision of the last judgement. In D. V. Erdman (Ed.), Thecomplete poetry and prose of William Blake (Newly Rev. Ed.). New York:Anchor Doubleday.

Blake, W. (1946). From Crabb Robinson’s reminiscences, 1869. In A. Kazin(Ed.), The portable Blake (pp. 675-694). New York: Viking. (Originalconversation between Blake and Robinson, 1825)

Blake, W. (1988a). Auguries of innocence. In D. V. Erdman (Ed.), The com-plete poetry and prose of William Blake (Newly Rev. Ed.). New York:Anchor Doubleday.

Blake,W. (1988b).How to know love from deceit. In D.V.Erdman (Ed.),Thecomplete poetry and prose of William Blake (Newly Rev. Ed.). New York:Anchor Doubleday.

Cunningham, A. (1830). From Lives of the most eminent British painters,sculptors, and architects. In G. E. Bentley (Ed.), Blake records. London:Oxford University Press.

Gilchrist, A. (1969). Life of William Blake (Vol. I). New York: PhaetonPress. (Original work published 1880)

Rahula, W. (1974). What the Buddha taught. New York: Grove Press.Tatham,F. (c1832).Life of Blake. In G.E.Bentley (Ed.), Blake records.Lon-

don: Oxford University Press.Winnicott, D. W. (1958). The capacity to be alone. In The maturational pro-

cesses and the facilitating environment. Madison, CT: InternationalUniversities Press.

Winnicott, D. W. (1960a). Ego distortion in terms of true and false self. InThe maturational processes and the facilitating environment. Madison,CT: International Universities Press.

Winnicott, D. W. (1960b). The theory of the parent-infant relationship. InThe maturational processes and the facilitating environment. Madison,CT: International Universities Press.

Winnicott, D. W. (1962). Ego integration in child development. In Thematurational processes and the facilitating environment. Madison, CT:International Universities Press.

Winnicott, D. W. (1963). From dependence towards independence in thedevelopment of the individual. In The maturational processes and thefacilitating environment. Madison, CT: International UniversitiesPress.




Winnicott, D. W. (1967). Mirror-role of mother and family in child develop-ment. In Playing and reality. New York: Tavistock.

Winnicott, D. W. (1971a). Creativity and its origins. In Playing and reality.New York: Tavistock.

Winnicott, D. W. (1971b). Dreaming, fantasying, and living: A case-historydescribing a primary dissociation. In Playing and reality. New York:Tavistock.

Winnicott, D. W. (1971c). Playing: Creative activity and the search for theself. In Playing and reality. New York: Tavistock.

Will W. Adams 35



Love, Open Awareness, And Authenticity- A Conversation With William Blake and D. W. Winnicott

Documents

Transcript of Love, Open Awareness, And Authenticity- A Conversation With William Blake and D. W. Winnicott