“So Little” and “So Big”

The Path of Rightsizing

Paul Dunion

Native peoples took the transition from boyhood to adulthood quite seriously. Apparently, there was some intuitive understanding that it would serve no one if boys were expected to be responsible for the welfare of the people. Adulthood, to some extent meant being clear about the nature of life and how to relate to it effectively. Life was viewed as mysterious, unpredictable, and insecure.

Boys were taken from their mothers when they reached puberty. The mothers knew their role in the drama of the boys leaving to join the male elders. They would issue a staged protest while honoring what was happening. The boys would live with other teenage boys in a lodge at the edge of the village. Boys would live there for three to five years, being regularly exposed to the ritual of the Mysterium Tremendum, or Great Mystery. The ritual was designed to indoctrinate the boys into the mystery of life.

The elders supported the death of the idyllic visions of life fitting to childhood. The hope was that an adult might be born, honoring the immensity of the journey and liberating him from a need to posture with too much bravado, which can echo an eagerness to triumph over life. These attempts to be victorious would be considered a serious impediment to offering genuine service.

Modern Initiation

Occasionally, there are voices reminding us about the nature of our life’s journey. “Do not grow old, no matter how long you live. Never cease to stand like curious children before the great mystery into which we were born.”

(Albert Einstein). However, for the most part, such a voice will go unheard. What will be heard from our institutions, families, and social media is the following: “Get the right education, right job, marry the right person, live in the right neighborhood, invest your money wisely, and know the right people and life will be understandable, predictable and secure”.

This is a massive distortion into which most of us have been initiated. It’s a mandate that can generate some comfort but will not allow for penetrating the mystery of life and will confuse us about who we are and how to live. We will be ill-prepared to deal with the ordeals and trials life will inevitably issue. I recall the birth of my daughter Sarah, who was diagnosed with a rare neurological disorder, calling for twenty-four-hour care seven days per week. My bravado posturing began to crumble rapidly. I plummeted into a crisis of meaning and faith. I could only feel deeply betrayed by life and the gods. After all, hadn’t I done all the right stuff?

So Big

We tend to be more familiar with the “I’m so big” strategy. It’s just hard to miss. Popular reaction to it includes deciding it's arrogant, inflated, narcissistic, and self-aggrandized. Typically, it turns us off for a couple of reasons. Someone’s claim of being so big implies we’re not, that is, not quite as worthy. We might also see our attachment to inflate, which we have yet to accept about ourselves.

“So big” commonly reflects an exaggerated attachment to the Archetype of the Senex, the wise old man. When we simply allow ourselves to be guided by this archetype, we can be responsible, devoted, generous, stable, and long-sighted. Once we are compensating, declaring our alleged bigness is inevitable. The compensation almost guarantees rigidity, self-righteousness, excessive cautiousness, narrow-mindedness, and lacking generosity.

There is a loss of spontaneity, play, wonder, curiosity, and inspiration. The spirit of youth is lost to a hardening heart while being visited by an immature narcissism.

It took some time before I could admit that I was invested in displays of “I’m so big.” Even then, it took considerable help from my mentor, Ray, before I could summon a level of compassion for my inflated version of myself. To make peace with my oversizing, I needed to explore its purpose and where it came from.

On the outside, it looked like being self-assured, confident, self-reliant, and without needs. On the inside, there was a tenacious denial of limits and a fictitious amount of inner authority. I held the belief that I was all that I needed and that others would not be able to support me adequately. I went from being conscious to unconscious regarding my dependency upon being impressive, eliciting deference, respect, and admiration. I was unaware of how dependent I was upon others to appear inferior to me. The dependency deepened as the need to be admired grew stronger. I also became more externally referenced as the need to be recognized by others determined whether I would feel valued.

Just a bit out-of-sight was a nagging feeling of not being enough. Eventually, this feeling of being less than me became the herald, revealing my inflation as compensation. It was tough to believe that my bigger-than-life self was a false self or a provisional sense of self.

I wondered when and how I learned to compensate. Before I reached adolescence, I was parenting myself and my mother, who experienced arrested development. She would never reach her chronological age, settling in psychologically somewhere as a preteen.

A smart move for a parentified child is to pretend he or she has things well under control. The option is to feel the vulnerability caused by the neglect, leaving a child scrambling for survival. Of course, I did what any parentified child would do: I pretended to myself and the world.

It became quite helpful to understand I did not need to reproduce this early dynamic by neglecting myself. It became a serious undertaking to address the question, “If I’m not neglecting myself, then what actually am I doing?” Gradually, a response came, “Maybe I can learn to choose myself and nurture myself.”

The idea of choosing myself became increasingly attractive, as it might be a possible interruption of my compensation for striving to be so big. I was reminded that when I choose a friend, I don’t ask the person to prove they are worthy of my choice. I simply treat them as if they are worthy. Well, what about me? Might I see myself as simply worthy of being chosen by me rather than having to prove it?

I began understanding the “I’m not enough” voice as my way of understanding why I didn’t feel chosen by my parents. It was the classical loyalty of a child to turn against myself and not threaten what little connection I had to my parents by deciding there was something wrong with them. They were simply wounded, offering me what little was offered to them by their parents.

I increasingly felt committed to my personal growth, not wanting to be governed by needing to be so big. I wanted to choose myself, and it translated into remaining loyal to my desire. I also wanted to grow without deciding there was something inherently wrong with me now. I adopted a line from Sheldon Kopp’s book The Hanged Man as my mantra. Kopp states, “I’m no longer interested in character development, as long as that implies in any way that my Buddhahood is not already at hand.” Finally, I had a compass I could trust. Rightsizing myself meant, “I’m absolutely fine the way I am, and I’m interested in deepening my development.” And I can allow others to comfort and nurture me.

It certainly does not mean I have achieved an absolute exemption from portraying myself as larger than I actually am. An unconscious desire to impress or to be included, feeling scared, or stepping away from my essential worth can summon my inflation. However, I have more ease moving back to my rightful size. I can also hold more compassion for slipping into an oversized representation of myself.

So Little

Folks typically respond to witnessing a display of “So Big” by either being impressed by the alleged extra-large person or turned off by the aggrandizement. When it’s the former response, it can be accompanied by admiration and/or feelings of inadequacy compared to the show being presented.

Anyone presenting as “So Little” will most likely escape uncomplimentary reactions from others unless they are obviously obsequious. People generally enjoy interacting with anyone deflating. It automatically has people feeling respected and praiseworthy. After all, the person they are interacting with presents no challenge, and there’s no competition for attention or being noteworthy.

The person attached to the strategy of “So Little” will be compulsively adaptive, compliant, and eager to please. It won’t likely engender much respect and admiration, but it will open doors. The message to others is, “I’m here to do whatever it takes to support your needs and to disrupt little or nothing.” It may be we are so accustomed to managing to have diverse needs from others and engaging in conflict to procure what we need that it becomes extremely seductive to hear the voice of one suggesting they need nothing.

The person attached to “So Little” is likely overly connected to the archetype of Puer Aternus or eternal boy. These Peter Pan characters are challenged to create a life reflective of personal values and beliefs. There is an inordinate amount of confusion about the nature of personal power. The priority is play, lightness, and fitting in, which trumps living in integrity. Holding a large vision of possibility is sacrificed, yielding to the immediacy of spontaneity and being carefree.

What commonly goes missed is the “So Little” person isn’t truly present, as he lives a provisional life. His or her desire and values play an insignificant role as they interact with others. However, a non-verbal deal is happening. Compliance is supposed to guarantee acceptance and inclusion, as well as some other needs occasionally getting met. That part of the deal often remains masked behind the obsessive need to please. The “So Little” person can feel deep resentment when some need of theirs goes unmet, driven by “You don’t know how much you owe me!”

The Dances

Several dances occur when these oversizing and undersizing strategies come together. Let’s look at the options.

· So Little & So Little — Collusion is a natural consequence when two undersized people come together. They typically offer each other much permission to avoid living life on life’s terms. They reap the benefit of not hassling one another for clinging to undersizing. They do lose the possibility that the other will be a resource supporting rightsizing.

· So Big & So Big — Competition naturally occurs when these two oversizers unite. They can obsessively vie for alpha status. The consequence is often the loss of mutual support and collaboration, as well as the possibility of a meaningful relationship. There is also the tendency to avoid one another which can hurt the systems where they live and work.

· So Little & So Big — This is a perfect setup for cutting a rug gracefully together. They a more than ready to drop into mutual collusion. The oversized person is fine with the undersized one confirming that his friend is the only big guy in town. They each enjoy demonstrating exactly what they don’t want to be, which helps them maintain their chosen strategy. I continue to feel guilty for colluding with a Little person to confirm my elevated status.

There is not much opportunity for help from someone to step out of the strategies. One possibility is that a person committed to rightsizing comes along, sees either the inflated or deflated tendency and holds the person accountable for steeping away from themselves.

Heading Toward Rightsizing

We don’t arrive at being right-sized. The best we can do is to remain corrective, noticing we stayed away from our rightful size. It is critical to be compassionate about wandering away from ourselves. It got started simply as a way to cope with the immensity of life. And there were some benefits. Your being “So Little” likely made you seem sweet, engaging, and cooperative. “So Big” likely yielded some admiration, respect, and praise. Let’s look more closely at how we can interrupt being over or undersized.

· Get honest. To come home to ourselves, we must be willing to get honest about a fascination with being smaller or larger than we are, foregoing the Illusion that we really are that small or that big.

· Pay attention. Commit to tracking the move into either deflation or inflation. Locate the energy in your body that accompanies getting little or big. As your awareness increases, so must your compassion. We all risk stopping to look if we are not gentle with what we’re seeing.

· Let yourself feel your emotions. When you see yourself moving into “So Little” or “So Big.” this observing posture suggests you are not stepping into one of those strategies. This can be accompanied by feeling lost, scared, or overwhelmed. Accept that each of these strategies did work to some extent. They shared the same purpose. A door might very well open as you announced that your presence was only about offering support or you were so impressive, causing a door to swing open.

· To act or not to act. If you’re letting go of deflating, pause and decide if there is something for you to say or do. If you’re interrupting inflating, pause and ask if you’re willing to be quiet, listening, or offering some measure of support to someone.

· Be willing to learn more about dependency. Typically, a deflated strategy calls for learning how to depend more on yourself. We can say that “So Little” is acquainted with the benefits of maternal comfort and nurturance which gets projected to the world. It is then easy to live in the story that I can be little, and the world will take care of me like my mother did. The inflated strategy often reflects not enough mother. “So Big” needs to learn to be discerning, allowing yourself to depend upon others you perceive as trustworthy and reliable.

The Face of Rightsizing

The willingness to be rightsized calls for courage. The deference accompanying “So Little” and the impressiveness of “So Big” have appeared to facilitate your inclusion along the way, your need to belong. Belonging is not simply an incidental psychological need. Belonging reflects your early childhood need for attachment and the DNA message carried through the millennium that belonging is essential for survival.

The problem is whether it’s your acquiescence or your stunning appearance that has issued some desired affiliation; the offering of acceptance only addresses your strategy and not who you really are. We might say a deal has been made sounding something like, “Let’s stay together as long as you can either continue to be compliant or impress me with your imposing persona. Wielding the “So Little” strategy easily leads to resentment, while “So Big” morphs into emptiness and fraudulence. Authentic offerings of belonging cannot be made into a strategy. They can only be given and received by a whole person.

Let’s look at some of the distinguishing features of being rightsized:

· Internally referenced. Being rightsized is reflected by a shift toward your inner world for information clarifying who you are. Such a shift is maintained by a commitment to be compassionately self-examining. Social expectations and the needs and beliefs of others continue to deserve consideration while this dynamic shift in viewing takes place. Our eyes and hearts turn inward.

· Inner authority. As we remain internally referenced, the seeds of inner authority can germinate. The word authority comes from the word author, whose old meaning is “the one who causes growth or increase.” You are the one causing your growth when you are rightsized. An example of stepping into inner authority happened when I was nineteen. I returned home for a weekend visit from college. I decided it was time to get honest with my staunch Irish-Catholic family about my emerging religious beliefs. I proceeded to announce that I had decided to be an atheist. My father responded, “I don’t give a shit what you are. When you’re home, you’ll go to church”. This response did not really surprise me, although it would have been great to receive a bit more understanding. Behind my bold declaration was a deep appreciation for the work of Ludwig Feuerbach, a prominent German philosopher. I was beginning “to cause my own growth” in not so subtle a way. I was more interested in beliefs that were truly aligned with my core. My father’s intolerance of my shifting religious beliefs came from the man who had also been speaking out against the Vietnam war while drinking beer at the local VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars). It may be that his modeling exceeded his prohibition leveraged against my atheism. This example reflects the shift from growth caused by external sources to something within myself, risking the possibility of unfavorable feedback. Even now, at 76, life for me continues to offer opportunities to claim inner authority and almost always, involves some accompanying risk.

· Self-belonging. The experience of belonging typically denotes a connection or association with someone or a group. We seldom hear talk of self-belonging, as if belonging can only happen with others. However, when we experience genuine self-belonging, the obsessive need to please or the compulsive need to impress begins to wane. Similar to belonging with others, self-belonging deepens as trust builds. We can understand trust for ourselves as built upon the quality of two beliefs. The first is the belief that I will allow myself to know my own truth, and the second is believing I will treat myself kindly. When my truth is about how I see myself, it can be challenging to notice my broken heart or where I felt seriously mistreated. It may also be difficult to view my own shortcomings, such as failures and times when I was out of integrity. Sometimes, it can be difficult to see our own gifts and strengths. When we believe we will treat ourselves kindly, we eat when hungry, rest when tired, honor our limits, and forgive ourselves to restore a sense of personal worth. Working on trusting ourselves is a life-long endeavor, as is engendering self-belonging. Unlike pleasing and impressing, self-belonging offers the opportunity for genuine belonging with others. I’m no longer working now, strategizing to solicit your acceptance and welcome. The person behind the strategies is now present with his triumphs and defeats, fears and longings, strengths and weaknesses. I am simply here, being myself, open to being received or rejected, which can now genuinely take place!

· Life on life’s terms. What are life’s terms? What does it mean to live life on life’s terms? Before responding to these questions, let’s recall that “So Little” and “So Big” reflect the decision not to live on life’s terms. Rather, they aim at gaining the upper hand in life by controlling their lived experience with excessive compliance or demonstrations of grander. All of this is allegedly circumventing the inevitable risks of being fully alive. Life’s terms include mystery, unpredictability, and insecurity. Living life on life’s terms means making peace with these three conditions. Such peacemaking is a wonderful definition of maturity. Acceptance of these conditions is the first step. This essentially means you will accept that you will not get life right. However, with the help of the Serenity Prayer, life may get you right. “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference”. The third resource is self-forgiveness, which is critical as we fumble with knowing what is and is not in our control. We might think of courage as holding the faith that we will hold ourselves kindly when a risk yields unfavorable results, and then we take the risk.

Choosing to be rightsized is both devotional and an act of self-honoring. It declares a willingness to let go of a provisional self, striving to manage a need to belong. We won’t arrive at being rightsized. We need to accept rightsizing as a corrective process. Sometimes, it makes sense to inflate to protect ourselves or others or to deflate to allow others to be heard and seen. At best, we remain curious about how much inflation or deflation might be taking place or needs to take place. I appreciate the soulful task of allowing any lived experience to inform. Is my current situation asking for more or less of me? My apprenticeship with rightsizing continues as I, only too often, mistakenly decide it must be asking for more of me.