Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2010, Page 79
Cult Pseudo-Creativity vs. Creativity in Recovery
Gillie Jenkinson, M.A., UKCP
Hope Valley Counseling
Abstract
This article gives a brief history of The Love of God Community, England (―the
Community‖). It looks at how the Community used creative arts negatively to
reinforce control and thought reform, considers whether this use of creative
arts is true creativity, and illustrates with case examples how therapists and
ex-cult members can use creativity positively for recovery. All individuals‘
names and identifying details have been changed.
What Is Creativity?
The creative impulse is deeply human and intrinsic to being free and alive. These ideas are
elaborated in several schools of psychology.
Winnicott (2005i) notes that this impulse within us is a source of art, poetry, and other
artistic forms, but that creativity and play are even more fundamental than the creation of
things (p. 91) they are necessary in the individual‘s search for self (p. 73). In healthy
living, creativity characterizes the individual‘s approach to external reality. This creative
approach may be fostered or hampered by ongoing environmental factors that can enhance
or stifle creative processes throughout an individual‘s life.
Carl Rogers (1967), the founder of person-centered psychotherapy, defines the creative
process as ―the emergence in action of a novel relational product, growing out of the
uniqueness of the individual on the one hand and the materials, events, people, or
circumstances of his life on the other‖ (p. 350). Rogers notes that three conditions are
necessary for creativity to occur: openness to experience (lack of defensiveness) internal
locus of evaluation and evaluative judgment (rather than compliance) and the ability to toy
or play with elements and concepts. Fundamental to creativity is the ―I‖—―I have discovered
this‖ ―this is what I wanted to express‖ (p. 353-5). He also notes that, for creativity to
occur, psychological safety and freedom are necessary (p. 355).
Perls, Hefferline, and Goodman, the founders of Gestalt psychotherapy, viewed creativity as
the means to contact self, and playfulness as integrating and health-promoting. They
utilised a range of creative expressions in their psychotherapy work, including drama,
movement, dance, and sound (Perls et al., 1951 Mackewn, 1997). Gestalt psychotherapy
conceptualises the self as creatively adjusting moment by moment in contact with self,
others, and the environment. The aim of Gestalt psychotherapy is to raise awareness and
heighten this contact so the individual is more in touch with self (Perls et al., 1951).
It is particularly the ―freedom to play creatively‖ per Winnicott (2005), ―to be non-
defensively open to experience‖ per Rogers (1967), and to ―creatively adjust moment to
moment‖ per Perls (1951) that characterize creativity. The individual develops defenses or
interrupts contact (to use Gestalt terminology) when these features are absent or lacking.
Winnicott, for instance, uses the term ―false self‖ to characterize a defensively created
sense of self in response to continuous and/or harsh boundary crossing by the environment.
He suggests that this false self has a negative impact on the individual‘s ability to
differentiate between ―me‖ and ―not me,‖ a state that I suggest becomes increasingly true
in the deeply entrenched cult member (Winnicott, 2005, p. 176). Winnicott continues that
development of trust in an unimpinging early environment as well as in later life is a key
Cult Pseudo-Creativity vs. Creativity in Recovery
Gillie Jenkinson, M.A., UKCP
Hope Valley Counseling
Abstract
This article gives a brief history of The Love of God Community, England (―the
Community‖). It looks at how the Community used creative arts negatively to
reinforce control and thought reform, considers whether this use of creative
arts is true creativity, and illustrates with case examples how therapists and
ex-cult members can use creativity positively for recovery. All individuals‘
names and identifying details have been changed.
What Is Creativity?
The creative impulse is deeply human and intrinsic to being free and alive. These ideas are
elaborated in several schools of psychology.
Winnicott (2005i) notes that this impulse within us is a source of art, poetry, and other
artistic forms, but that creativity and play are even more fundamental than the creation of
things (p. 91) they are necessary in the individual‘s search for self (p. 73). In healthy
living, creativity characterizes the individual‘s approach to external reality. This creative
approach may be fostered or hampered by ongoing environmental factors that can enhance
or stifle creative processes throughout an individual‘s life.
Carl Rogers (1967), the founder of person-centered psychotherapy, defines the creative
process as ―the emergence in action of a novel relational product, growing out of the
uniqueness of the individual on the one hand and the materials, events, people, or
circumstances of his life on the other‖ (p. 350). Rogers notes that three conditions are
necessary for creativity to occur: openness to experience (lack of defensiveness) internal
locus of evaluation and evaluative judgment (rather than compliance) and the ability to toy
or play with elements and concepts. Fundamental to creativity is the ―I‖—―I have discovered
this‖ ―this is what I wanted to express‖ (p. 353-5). He also notes that, for creativity to
occur, psychological safety and freedom are necessary (p. 355).
Perls, Hefferline, and Goodman, the founders of Gestalt psychotherapy, viewed creativity as
the means to contact self, and playfulness as integrating and health-promoting. They
utilised a range of creative expressions in their psychotherapy work, including drama,
movement, dance, and sound (Perls et al., 1951 Mackewn, 1997). Gestalt psychotherapy
conceptualises the self as creatively adjusting moment by moment in contact with self,
others, and the environment. The aim of Gestalt psychotherapy is to raise awareness and
heighten this contact so the individual is more in touch with self (Perls et al., 1951).
It is particularly the ―freedom to play creatively‖ per Winnicott (2005), ―to be non-
defensively open to experience‖ per Rogers (1967), and to ―creatively adjust moment to
moment‖ per Perls (1951) that characterize creativity. The individual develops defenses or
interrupts contact (to use Gestalt terminology) when these features are absent or lacking.
Winnicott, for instance, uses the term ―false self‖ to characterize a defensively created
sense of self in response to continuous and/or harsh boundary crossing by the environment.
He suggests that this false self has a negative impact on the individual‘s ability to
differentiate between ―me‖ and ―not me,‖ a state that I suggest becomes increasingly true
in the deeply entrenched cult member (Winnicott, 2005, p. 176). Winnicott continues that
development of trust in an unimpinging early environment as well as in later life is a key
