First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Bruce Deile

Prescott, AZ

#21 May 1, 2013
I have a copy of 'Dysfunction Junction, How's That Function'(see in entirety on thread by same name) on the bulletin board at a local Starbucks. Someone took it down after the first day, but posted another copy and its been up for about a week. Lo and behold, AA members were congregated out on its patio yesterday with Big Book set out on the table before them.

Spoke with them, referred to "Dysfunction Junction...", and they seemed well aware of it. The one young woman responded by quoting Big Book verses on Step 3 (that follow 'How It Works' in more specifically explaining how to take Step 3). The verse about it only being a beginning, etc.

Looked at that just now, and although I've read it many, many times over the years, hadn't noticed that it too involves absolutism: "...voicing it *without reservation*...".

I hadn't argued with the young woman, simply acknowledged the group of them were not interested in discussing constructive criticism but seemed to have the usual dogmatism--believing they had the correct view of AA and anyone questioning matters was uninformed. So left them there and sat around the corner so as not to engage in argumentation.

But thought about it some more, and they were only interested in emphasizing caveats explaining away the absolutism (but as noted above, even in doing so uncovered further absolutism in the caveats). The point I hoped to get across, had they been open minded to discussion, is that even those additional caveats are not what receives emphasis. The most emphasis is on the absolutism.

For example, it is the absolutism particularly at the beginning of 'How It Works' that is recited at the start of every AA meeting. So for a new person, say attending "30 in 30" (30 meetings in 30 days--the recommendation for newcomers), also attends appx. 25 meetings in the next 3-4 months before taking the 3rd step with a sponsor: that's 4 months of hearing daily the absolutism as it is emphasized in the reciting of How It Works. Any thing else, such as in the Big Book watering down the absolutism to some degree, is only read perhaps anywhere from 5-8 times before the taking of the 3rd step. Meaning the repetitive absolutism has received far greater emphasis on the person preparing to take the 3rd step.

And no wonder people share of being scared to take the 3rd step--that pressure to do it absolutely (or else!) has been firmly implanted in their head: ex.; the result was nil unless we let go absolutely--half measures availed us nothing-- etc.

So it's unfortunate to see that group of young women yesterday not show willingness to discuss these matters fully. But I know there are other people that are willing to look at this in a different light than we've been led to believe for so long.

Bruce Deile

Prescott, AZ

#22 May 1, 2013
Pardon me. Just re-read my last post and sounds a bit like I'm finger pointing at the young women. But it's not so different than I would have responded over the years--in the past I would defended AA too as though it were almost infallible. So now I'm beginning to see the challenge of attempting to question the validity of AA's teachings and not be counted as anathema by those in AA.
Bruce Deile

Prescott, AZ

#23 May 2, 2013
This might make things clearer:

If the alcoholic (purportedly) lets go absolutely, with no half measures, lets go of all "old ideas", since to not do the results would be nil, fulfilling such imperatives would make the 10th step--a daily moral inventory--absolutely unnecessary. Meaning if the alcoholic lets go absolutely so that there are no old ideas (original sin) to bedevil them, they would be living in perfect communion with God 24/7. So there would be no faults to admit and make amends for on a daily basis--daily moral inventory.

But of course that isn't humanly possible. So why does AA insist upon it as though it not only is possible, but imperative?
Bruce Deile

Prescott, AZ

#24 May 2, 2013
Because if old ideas creep back in at any point after having let go absolutely that means the alcoholic has not let go absolutely to begin with. Absolutely means absolutely. Mentioned this point on another thread, but wonder if it wouldn't have helped to include it in 'Dysfunction Junction...'.
Which, btw, someone removed from Starbucks bulletin board. I again posted another copy. Let's see how long that stays up.
Bruce Deile

Prescott, AZ

#25 May 2, 2013
This is another really good one of Marcella Bella (maybe as good if not better than Mina's); love the flutes:

Marcella Bella - Io vivrò senza te

video by LuisaMirella
Bruce Deile

Prescott, AZ

#26 May 2, 2013
Oops! May have spoke too soon...just viewed Mina's version and it's quite grand--big band and all; prototypical Mina (love that it's still in b/w even though 1974):

Mina _ Io vivrò senza te _ Live 1974
.
video by swan5046

(I still love Marcella's cover too though--even though she wasn't nearly as accomplished a singer as Mina was at that time her version is still really good--may even prefer it overall-will see after some more comparison in time)
Bruce Deile

Tucson, AZ

#27 May 5, 2013
I like both versions very much. Love the flutes behind Marcella, and the big band, chorus, and trumpet especially behind Mina is incredible.
Bruce Deile

Tucson, AZ

#28 May 5, 2013
Yeah, the trumpet wailing away nearing the songs end while Mina sings brings to mind George Benson playing through the tumult at the end of White Rabbit.
Bruce Deile

Tucson, AZ

#29 May 5, 2013
Saw this comment (posted 2 years ago) under Mina's video and wondered if it was a backhanded compliment as it seems like Mina's voice cracks just before the 4:30 mark:

richl 2 years ago

I watched and cried ...

even when she is in full power, she is totally on key and controlled .

A marvel

I love her.
Bruce Deile

Tucson, AZ

#30 May 5, 2013
I keep comparing the two versions. Both are really great. Just found a 1977 SanRemo performance by Marcella Bella--hadn't realized how good she is--she's super:

Marcella Bella - ABBRACCIATI (Sanremo 1977).avi
.
video by neyaraujossa·1
Bruce Deile

Tucson, AZ

#31 May 6, 2013
Here's more of Niebuhr in that interview with Mike Wallace (juxtapose w/court-ordered AA):

WALLACE: Dr. Niebuhr, the first question I'd like to put to you is perhaps a very obvious one, but I would like a kind of a capsulized answer, if I may. We hear about the necessity for a separation between church and state. If religion is good, why should our society be based upon a separation between the church and the state?

NIEBUHR: Your "if" is a very big one -- if religion is good, it may be very good and it may be bad. The separation of church and state is necessary partly because if religion is good then the state shouldn't interfere with the religious vision or with the religious prophet.

NIEBUHR: There must be a realm of truth beyond political competence, that's why there must be a separation of churches, but if religion is bad and a bad religion is one that gives an ultimate sanctity to some particular cause. Then religion mustn't interfere with the state-- so one of the basic Democratic principles as we know it in America is the separation of church and state.
Bruce Deile

Tucson, AZ

#32 May 7, 2013
This is Mina's color version from 1972--the color works well, though thinking the b/w version in 1974 is best:

IO VIVRO'(Senza te)- Mina

video by VideoBoxMusic
Bruce Deile

Tucson, AZ

#33 May 7, 2013
One more comparison: Marcella Bella doesn't have the stage presence Mina commands, but her voice is superb throughout the entire song. And just viewed Mina's color version again, and it may be equally as good as the b/w in '74. Both great in different ways.
Bruce Deile

Tucson, AZ

#34 May 7, 2013
No. Changed my mind again. The 1974 b/w of Mina's is preferable to the from '72 in color.
Bruce Deile

Campbell, CA

#35 May 14, 2013
Spoke at Tucson City Council May 7, 2013 during public comment. Video available online though they muted the sound of hecklers behind me. When I spoke of Noam Chomsky pointing out U.S. tax and transfer rate abysmal in reducing poverty in comparison to all other industrialized countries, and went on to say marijuana causes schizophrenia--the pro-marijuana group sitting behind me laughed loudly at that in a ridiculing manner. So loud it provoked me to respond and say mental illness is not a laughing matter. Another man then shouted "prove it!" (that marijuana causes schizophrenia). I replied I didn't have the studies with me but it has been proven. What's interetsing is htat you do not hear the hecklers hardly at all on the video--they were muted. These city council public comment videos are definitely being manipulated.

Anyhow, just found another really good French video by Gigliola Cinquetti. Love many of her French songs, even without understanding the words. Her voice sounds especially nice in French:

Gigliola Cinquetti - La Légende De La Nonne ( Victor Hugo / Georges Brassens )

video by Elodie Guerandet
Bruce Deile

Campbell, CA

#36 May 14, 2013
Oops...forgot to explain in last post I used the Noam Chomsky as a reason against taxation of marijuana (and even though Chomsky favors legalization of marijuana).
Bruce Deile

Campbell, CA

#37 May 14, 2013
Just viewed that Council video again. I'm a terrible speaker, but to view the video Google "Tucson City Council meeting" and scroll down a few links to "Tucson 12 Programs Mayor and Council". It's part 1 video at 50:25 when I begin to speak. The people behind me should have been much more audible, because they were loud in interrupting me. Videos were manipulated in Bellingham (City Council meetings/public comment), and in Seattle, so definitely wondering if same here. Because when you attend enough of these meetings, you pick up on alot of "political theater", and events being orchestrated deliberately.
Bruce Deile

Campbell, CA

#38 May 31, 2013
MICHELE TORR "Ma mére a pleuré"
Bruce Deile

Boise, ID

#39 Jun 6, 2013
Made a mistake in "Dysfunction Junction...': when writing "Caveats rescinded...": on further thought realized the major problem, the major deception employed, is that the absolutism in 'How It Works' is stated imperative. Which means it cannot be rescinded. The caveats only appear to rescind the imperatives, as Appendix II "Spiritual Experience" (Big Book; 3rd Edition) proves.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Ferndale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
UN rights expert accuses Israel of 'ethnic clea... (Mar '14) 10 hr Mandela 2,032
Review: All American Hearing (Aug '13) 10 hr Carl 3
PETA offers humane education in wake of teen's ... 19 hr cheapo 5
WA Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Washingto... (Oct '10) Sep 22 Go Blue Forever 719
Looking for a good child day care facility arou... Sep 15 Lorelord 1
Cops and helicopter over casino Aug '14 Holmes 1
"Old Birch Bay"... (Oct '08) Aug '14 Shane 31

Ferndale News Video

Ferndale Jobs

Ferndale People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Ferndale News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Ferndale

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]