. .   .

 :          .

:                                           .

:                                               I preserve his future,
he preserves

my past. (R. Bach). We all are from the childhood.

:                                  10  

 . .:                               . .

 :               ..

                                17  2001 

I preserve his future, he preserves my past (R. Bach).
                We all are from the childhood.
1. Introduction (part 1)3
2. Part 25
3. Conclusion (part 3)14
4. The list of literature..17

Introduction (Part 1)
      Everybody wants to know what is happening around him or her? We  hear
about criminals, childrens creams and strange behaviour?  If  analyse  the
last ten news-programmes, well understand than the kids problems stays on
the same level with news about gas or oil. The childrens problems are  the
most interesting and important one for the majority of psychologists.  They
tries to understand everything what  is connected  with  children,  because
everybody believes that we can change a kid, but we can  not  do  the  same
with a man. Frankly speaking I disagree with this statement.  Is  it  means
that a person can not understand and solve all his problems? I think,  that
everybody does not believe in this.
      Really, nowadays everyone is surround by a great number of  problems.
Some of them are really easy, and we dont need any help in their  solving.
However, life is not so primitive, the majority of  situations  are  really
strange. If we want to cope with such difficulties, we must understand  the
roots of them.  We will never  be  good  at  chemistry,  physics  and  math
without knowing the basic rules and laws. The same is  with  the  roots  of
human behaviour.  We  can  not  learn  about  mens  conduct  in  different
situations, else well be able to claimant peoples  stresses  and  predict
human reaction (it can be very useful from the criminal side). Or, may  be,
we can ..!
      There are a lot of points of view on a problem, where the  origin  of
this or that conduct is. Freud came  to  believe  that  all  the  roots  of
possible complicates are laying in the sexual life of a person, Bacon found
them in the inward life, in mens ghosts and idols. A great group of people
believes  in mystic power, which controls peoples existents. It means that
everything has its own beginning. If we know the origins, we will  be  able
to give a right estimation to the situation and, of course, to react  in  a
proper way. But, if we can learn about math rules from the  special  books,
we cant do the same, if we want to find a local answer to  the  question:
where are the roots of human behaviour and reaction? Of course, there are a
lot of theories and  conclusions,  which  are  connected  with  our  topic.
Nevertheless, the  majority  of  them  touch  upon  a  question  about  the
childhood in any case. They are confident that all  information  about  our
future life (precondition) we get in an early age, that  our  problems  are
connected with childhood and the roots of good and  evil  are  not  in  the
genes as commonly believe, but in the earliest days of life. This  idea  is
rather new and conflicting, but very popular and under discussion. In  this
case it will not be only interesting but greatly important  to  learn  such
material inside out, and define at last, is it a solid theory, because,  if
it is, well be able to  understand  and  claimant  the  impediments  after
memorising our past. This problem is really dillicate. For it solution,  we
should work with an enormous quantity theories of different thinkers  (like
Freud or Birn) and writers (like Bach and Coalio). The main  idea  is  that
the majority of conclusions belong  to  the  pen  of  European  scientists.
Considering the importance of this question, it is easy to understand  that
its necessary to work with English  writing  material,  because  different
reports can give us inexact information,  and  make  incorrect  opinion  of
situation. For this reason, my paper is in English.  I think,  it   is  not
very difficult to understand   the  aim  of   this  work,  of   course.  It
consists of consolidation the theories about the  questions that   all  our
problems are from childhood, analysis of this material and  response to the
  issue  of  correctness of these ideas.

Part 2

       Human infants seem so weak and helpless at birth that it is  hard  to
believe they are capable of much  interaction  with  their  environment.  In
fact, not too long ago many people still  wondered  whether  new-born  could
even see or hear at all. In the last several decades, however,  research  on
the new-born has expanded greatly, and a very different  view  has  emerged.
We now know that human infants  are  born  with  sensory  systems  that  are
impressively  able.  They  process  information  and   learn   about   their
surroundings from the very moment of birth. They learn the world and try  to
understand how to survive in it. Children  acquire  an  enormous  amount  of
information in the twelve years of live. For Piagets  mind   to  this  age
the personality is shaped. [1]
     Everything what children have learned during this years  stays  in  the
subconscious. Of course, people  cannot  remember  the  experience  of  such
early age, but they use it, calling - intuition (instinct) or  presentiment.
So, our reactions and deeds depend on what we had put in our mind  [2]Lots
of psychologists, the  main of them is Freud, came to believe that  current
problems can often be traced back to childhood experiences. [3]
Unfortunately,  these  early  experiences  are  not  usually  available  to
consciousness. Only through great effort can  they  be  coaxed  into  active
memory, [4] said Freud to this problem.
        The ability to memorise depends on the development of  brains.  And,
in each term,  the  abilities   a  persons  brain  can  develop  depend  on
experiences in the first three years of  life,  the  childhood.  Studies  on
abandoned and   severely  maltreated  Romanian  children,  as  an   example,
revealed striking lesions in  certain  areas  of  the  brain.  The  repeated
traumatization has led to an increased  release  of  stress  hormones  which
have  attacked the sensitive tissue of the  brain  and  destroyed  the  new,
already build-up neurones. The areas of their  brains  responsible  for  the
management of their emotions are 20-30% smaller than in other children  of
the same age. Obviously, all children (not only Romanian)  who  suffer  such
abandonment and maltreatment will be damaged in this way.
         The attitude to the children always has its  results.  An  American
writer Alice Millir tried to understand, why some  people  (Hitler,  Stalin,
Mao and common ones) are  so aggressive. She wrote:  I  found  it  logical
that  a child beaten often and  deprived of  loving physical  contact  would
quickly pick up the language of violence. For him this language  became  the
only effective means of communication available. However, when  I  began  to
illustrate my thesis by drawing on the  examples  of  Hitler,  Stalin,  Mao,
Ceacescu,  when  I  tried  to  expose  the  social  consequences  of   child
maltreatment, I  first  encountered  strong  resistance.  Repeatedly  I  was
told, I, too, was a battered child, but that did not make  me  a  criminal.
When I asked these people for details about their childhood,  I  was  always
told of  a  person  who  made  the  difference,  a  sibling,  a  teacher,  a
neighbour, just somebody who liked or even loved them but, at least in  most
cases, was unable to protect them. Yet  through  his  presence  this  person
gave the child a notion of trust and love. I  call  these  persons  helping
witnesses.[5]  So, we see that these  people  became  aggressive   because
they lack love and  protection in the  childhood. It means  that  we  depend
not  only   from our common surrounding, but from  the  people   from   the
past [6]If a person lacked protection  in  the  childhood,  he   will  feel
himself uncomfortable and even in a great horror [7]in the company
of people, hell want to protect himself and thats why his reaction too
ordinary  things  will be rude. Many have also been lucky enough to find
enlightened  and  courageous  witnesses,  people  who  helped  them   to
recognise  the  injustices  they  suffered,  the  significance  the  hurtful
treatment had for them, and its influences on their  whole  life.  They  may
even suffer  much  in  their  life,  may  become  drug  addicted,  and  have
relationship problems, but thanks  to  the  few  good  experience  in  their
childhood usually do not become criminals. The criminal  outcome  seems  to
be connected with a childhood  that  didnt  provide  any  helping  witness,
that was a place of constant threat and fear,- [8]Miller thought.
        The parents attitude to the kid finds its mirroring  in  his  future
personality  and behaviour. It  has  been  observed  again  and  again  that
parents who tend to maltreat and neglect their children do it in ways  which
resemble the treatment they endured in  their  own  childhood,  without  any
conscious memory of their early  experiences.  Fathers  who  sexually  abuse
their children are usually unaware of the  fact  that  they  had  themselves
suffered the same abuse. It is rather in therapy, even  if  ordered  by  the
courts, that they can discover, sometimes stupefied, their own history.  And
realise thereby that for years they have attempted  to  act  out  their  own
scenario, just to get rid of it. The majority of psychologists believe  that
the explanation  of  this  fact  is  that  information  about  the  cruelty
suffered during childhood remains  stored  in  the  brain  in  the  form  of
unconscious memories. For a child, conscious experience  of  such  treatment
is impossible. If children are not to break down completely under  the  pain
and the fear, they must repress that  knowledge.[9]   But  the  unconscious
memories of the child who has been neglected and maltreated, even before  he
has learned to speak, drive the adult to reproduce  those  repressed  scenes
over and over again in the attempt to liberate himself from the  fears  that
cruelty has left with him. For example, The German  reformer  Martin  Luther
was an  intelligent  and  educated  man,  but  he  hated  all  Jews  and  he
encouraged parents to beat their children. He was no perverted  sadist  like
Hitler's executioners. But 400 years  before  Hitler  he  was  disseminating
this kind of destructive counsel. According  to  Eric  Ericson's  biography,
Luther's mother beat him severely even before he was  treated  this  way  by
his father and his teacher. He believed this punishment had "done him  good"
and was therefore justified. The conviction  stored  in  his  body  that  if
parents do it then it must be right.  This  example shows,  nothing  that  a
child learns later about morality at home, in school or in church will  ever
have the same strong and long lasting effect as the treatment  inflicted  on
his or her body in the  first  few  days,  weeks  and  months.  The  lesson
learned in the first three years cannot  be  expunged,  [10]  said  Freud.
So we can see that if   a  child  learns  from  birth  that  tormenting  and
punishing an innocent creature is the  right  thing  to  do,  and  that  the
child's suffering must not be acknowledged,  that  message  will  always  be
stronger than intellectual knowledge  acquired  at  a  later  stage.   Alice
Miller  made really great research work and her   conclusions  give  us,  at
last, the hole picture of  this situation: Usually away  from  home  either
praying in church or running the priest's household.  Stalin  idealized  his
parents right up to the end of his life and was constantly  haunted  by  the
fear of dangers, dangers that had long since ceased to exist  In  the  lives
of all the tyrants I analyzed,  I  also  found  without  exception  paranoid
trains of thought bound up with their biographies  in  early  childhood  and
the repression of the experiences  they  had  been  through.  Mao  had  been
regularly whipped by his father and later sent 30 million  people  to  their
deaths but he hardly ever admitted the full extent of the rage he must  have
felt for his own father,  a  very  severe  teacher  who  had  tried  through
beatings to "make a man" out of his son. Stalin caused  millions  to  suffer
and die because even at the height of his power his actions were  determined
by unconscious, infantile fear of powerlessness. Apparently  his  father,  a
poor cobbler from Georgia, attempted to drown his  frustration  with  liquor
and whipped his  son  almost  every  day.  His  mother  displayed  psychotic
traits, was completely incapable of defending  her  son  and  was  but  were
still present in his deranged mind. His fear didn't even stop after  he  had
been loved and admired by millions.    [11]
        But, what happen with people who  were  loved  in  their  childhood?
They have a better live without violent and  horror. There  are  people  who
grow up with loving  and protecting parents who  can  later  find  a  kind,
sympathetic partner, can organize their  life  and  become   good  parents,
even if they have to go through the horror of a concentration  camp  during
their adolescence [12]  after learning about Pablo Picasso  we can  mention
the severe trauma that the child Pablo  Picasso  underwent  at  the  age  of
three: the earthquake in Malaga  in  1884,  the  flight  from  the  family's
apartment  into  a  cave  that  seemed  to  be  more  safe,  and  eventually
witnessing the birth of his sister in the same cave under these  very  scary
circumstances.  However,  Picasso  survived  these  traumas  without   later
becoming psychotic or criminal because he was protected by his  very  loving
parents. They were able to give him what he  most  needed  in  this  chaotic
situation: empathy, compassion, protection and the feeling of being safe  in
their arms.
       Thanks to the presence of his parents, the two enlightened  witnesses
of his fear and pain, not only during the  earthquake  but  also  throughout
his whole childhood, he was later able to  express  his  early,  frightening
experiences in a creative way. In Picasso's famous  painting  "Guernica"  we
can see what might have happened in the mind  of  the  three-year-old  child
while he was watching the dying people  and  horses  and  listening  to  the
children screaming for help on the long walk to the shelter. Small  children
can go unscared even through bomb-raids if they feel safe  in  the  arms  of
their parents.
        It  is  much  more  difficult  for  a  child   to   overcome   early
traumatizations if they are caused by their own parents.  Here  we  have  an
another example. I analysed the childhood of the writer  Franz  Kafka.  Ill
try to show that the nightmares he describes in his stories recount  exactly
what might have happened to the small, severely neglected infant  Kafka.  He
was born into a family in which he must have  felt  like  the  hero  of  The
Castle (ordered about but not needed and constantly misled) or  like  K.  in
The Trial (charged with incomprehensible guilt) or like  The  Hunger  Artist
who never found the food he was so strongly longing for. Thanks to the  love
and the deep comprehension of his sister  Otla  in  his  puberty,  his  late
"helping witness," Kafka could eventually give expression to  his  suffering
in  writing.  Does  it  mean  that  he  therefore  overcame  his   traumatic
childhood? He could indeed write his work, full  of  knowledge  and  wisdom,
but why did he die so earlyin his thirtiesof tuberculosis? It happened  in
a time when he knew many people who loved and admired  him.  However,  these
good experiences could not  erase  the  unconscious  emotions  and  memories
stored in his body.
        Kafka was hardly aware of the fact that  the  main  sources  of  his
imagination were deeply hidden in his early childhood. Most writers  aren't.
But the amnesia of an artist or writer, though sometimes a burden for  their
body, doesn't have  any  negative  consequences  for  society.  The  readers
simply admire the work and are rarely interested in the writers'  infancy  .
However, the amnesia  of  politicians  or  leaders  of  sects  does  afflict
countless people, and will continue to do so, as  long  as  society  remains
blind  to  the  important  connections  between  the  denial  of   traumatic
experiences in early childhood and  the  destructive,  criminal  actions  of
       An American writer, Richard Bach, is well knowing by his Fantasy  and
Philosophy.  He solves difficult problems, which are connected  with  Human
psychology. He does not have special education, Richard  is  only  a  pilot
(in any case, he wasbefore he began to write). His  first  book  was  Sea-
gull, than breach through the  eternity,  One,  Plane  etc.  In  this
stories and novels Bach taught upon lots of different  topics,  and  one  of
them is about childhood. This man deadly believe that a person  cannot  live
without his past. And what do  we  have  there,  in  the  past?  Of  course,
childhood! This topic glassed in one of the latest work: Running  from  the
safety. The main idea of the plot is that Richard-men  [13](  he  prefers
to write about himself rather  then to  work  with  heroes)  meat  Richard-
kid. It means that he, the old one, meat in his own world a little  boy  of
eight years old. This boy is HE, but from the past. In this novel  Richard
Bach tried to answer the the  question:  What  will  you  do  if  you  meat
yourself-from-the-past? The own correct response he has  able  to  find  is
to learn everything what you can from this kid. What can  you  learn  from
the little child from your past? What he can give us?   This  questions  can
appeared  in the mind of everybody in Running  Bach  neatly  respond  to
them: he remembers all what I have forgot Really,  we  have  spoken  about
this already, all  information which people get in an early  age  cannot  be
remembered further. But  kids retain all  this,  cause  it  still  in  their
active memory. Some people had critical moments in  their  childhood,  which
influence  their lifes, but they cannot remember this  episode    the  most
impotent one  and thats why cannot change the situation.  For  example,  a
man is a looser all his live. He cannot do anything with  this.  Why?  After
memorising his childhood, he remembered that he was  whipped  by  schoolboys
and after this all the school was laughing at himHe  understood  everything
and tried to change the attitude to this situation at last we won for  first
time. Richard Bach had such critical moments too. At  first,  the  death  of
his brother and his climbing to the water-tower. After  this  he  understood
that he was not a little boy, and   left  the  family   and  common  world
after this moment he decided to become a pilot and made the biggest  fault
in the live: went to the army. Why  he did it? For what he left the  family?
Why his behaviour was such as it was? Richard cannot  understand. But  after
the talk with Dickey (Little Bach) he  was  able  to  explain  all  this  to
himself and  the desert  Dickeys world  converted in a field of  green
grass. At first Richard was not able to survive in the dark of the  mind.
But Dickey was able to return to Bach the part of   himself,  and  he  did
it. Now he could be  out of space and time. Telling things about the  live
and answering to Dickeys questions, Bach found lots of  responses  for  his
own issues. Dickey knows  everything  about  the  childhood,  and  I  knows
everything about one of his Futures, - told Richard  to his wife.  So,  the
boy  could find all the answers in several months, and  spare  50  years  of
had learning the  live.  The  man  remembered  the  half  of  his  life  and
understood the roots of all the problems. And both   took  that  they  could
not live without each other. I preserve his future, he preserves my  past,
- said Richard Bach and he was absolutely right.

Conclusion (Part 3).
So, we can see that the question about the Childhood  is  really  important.
It found the glass in many spheres of human life and mens deeds. It is  not
a science theory, but a reality.  We  know  that  every  cow  is  an  animal
doesn't include the statement that every  animal  is  a  cow.  It  has  been
proved that many adults have had the good fortune  to  break  the  cycle  of
abuse. Yet I can certainly aver that I have never  come  across  persecutors
who weren't themselves victims in  their  childhood,  though  most  of  them
don't  know  it  because  their  feelings  are  repressed.  The  less  these
criminals know about themselves, the more dangerous they are to society.  So
I think it is crucial to grasp the difference between the statement,  "every
victim becomes a persecutor," which is  wrong,  and  the  statement,  "every
persecutor was a victim in  his  childhood,"  which  I  consider  true.  The
problem is that, feeling nothing, he remembers  nothing,  realises  nothing,
and this is why surveys don't always reveal the truth. Yet the  presence  of
a warm, enlightened witness ... therapist, social worker, lawyer, judge  ...
can help  the  criminal  unlock  his  repressed  feelings  and  restore  the
unrestricted flow of consciousness. This can initiate the process of  escape
from the vicious circle of amnesia and violence.  Working  toward  a  better
future cannot be done without  legislation  that  clearly  forbids  corporal
punishment toward  children  and  makes  society  aware  of  the  fact  that
children are people too. The whole society and its  legal  system  can  then
play the  role  of  a  reliable,  enlightened  and  protecting  witness  for
children at risk, children of adolescent, drug addicted  criminals  who  may
themselves become predators without such assistance. The only reason  why  a
parent might smack his children is the parent's own history. All  other  so-
called reasons, such as poverty and unemployment,  are  pure  mystification.
There are unemployed parents who don't spank their children  and  there  are
many wealthy parents who maltreat their children in the most cruel  way  and
teach them to minimise the terror by calling it the right education. With  a
law prohibiting corporal punishment towards children,  people  of  the  next
generation will not have  recorded  the  highly  misleading  information  in
their brain, an almost irreversible  damage.  They  will  be  able  to  have
empathy with a child and understand what has  been  done  to  children  over
millennia. It is a realistic hope to think that then  (and  only  then)  the
human mind and behaviour will change.  With  a  law  that  forbids  spanking
every citizen becomes an enlightened witness.
So, we see that everything lays in ourselves. It is easy to understand  that
people can change everything around themselves. The  theory  about  personal
children problems is really correct. Now  everybody  can  just  analyse  his
past and remember the main idea of his last deeds. They  will  help  him  to
solve the difficulties. It is the easiest way to survive in your own  inside
world, which can be  a  bright  one.  But  the  main  problem  is  that  not
everybody knows about this theory, and especially such  people  can  not  be
happy and live an easy life else the whole  world  can  be  changed.  People
will understand all their problems and (it is important) now how  to  behave
and solve all the difficulties. It means  no depress, mad people and  their
deaths, good social situation, at last. To my mind  we  should  try  to  use
this material, because it can help us and it will be so easy  to  understand
each other and, at the first term, ourselves, is not it?

The list of literature
1. People, who play in games        A. Birn
2. Psychology                                Camille B. Wortman
                                                             Elizabeth    F.
3.  The Childhood Trauma           Alise Miller
4. Running from Safty                   R. Bach
5. Interpretation of dreams             S. Freud

[1] The list of literature. The 2nd  book.
[2] The list of literature.  The 1st  book.
[3] The list of literature.   The 2nd book
[4] The list of literature. The 5th  book.
[5] The list of literature. The 3rd book.
[6] The list of literature. The 1st book.
[7] The list of literature. The 3rd book.
[8] The list of literature. The 3rd book.
[9] The list of literature. The 2nd book.
[10] The list of literature. The 5th book.
[11] The list of literature. The 3rd book.
[12] The list of literature. The 3rd book.
[13] The list of literature. The 4th book. Other   quotes are from this

" "