Three situations. An outing with friends in which one of them asks you to pay for him something quite expensive promising to refund the money left in his car when they say goodbye, but finally he leaves without returning it. A trivial conversation with your partner raises its tone until, without expecting it or believing you deserve it, an accurate insult and very ugly gestures come straight from his mouth from his fingers. A long-distance bus trip where you finally managed to fall asleep is interrupted when the lady hurrying down the hall to the bathroom slams you squarely on the head with her arm, and she doesn't apologize.
Depending on the interpretation made of each of the cases, there will be very different ways of proceeding. From what you tell yourself has happened, the answer you will give will become, and from this your contribution to the evolution of the bond.
Normally we know that our actions have a direct relationship on what will happen to us later. Perhaps we also know that these actions will be the consequence of a particular selection of the barrage of thoughts that preceded it, and that this selection will come with a delimited emotional charge according to what we have interpreted from the original event (the friend who does not pay, the partner who insults, the lady who hits).
But it also happens that in certain situations where interpretation involves a heavier emotional burden, our ability to perceive will be irretrievably altered, and from there on, the rest of the journey.
If in front of the friend who did not return the money I remain silent but furious for having understood it as a fault on his part, surely the next time we meet (and in several previous moments in which he remembers the episode) I will feel tense and disappointed by their behavior, which in my own way I will try to make them notice (the repertoire of the "passing of bills" is as varied as the capacity of expression of each one) Something similar will happen with the other two examples.
Each one will find a way of acting that makes him feel better about himself and the other according to the inner development that he has been able (and wanted) to achieve. Now, what if you feel that your response was not enough for the bond to continue on the path you expect from that relationship? Or yes, beyond the bond, it doesn't feel the way you'd like?
I find three ways to share that allow us to broaden our way of looking.
The first is to make your concern explicit with the other party to make it a participant in the solution and see if together they can achieve a satisfactory result for both. If they do not identify or find available the necessary resources to effectively overcome the conflict, and they agree to continue looking for a solution, the second way is to ask for the help of competent third parties (that is, with the necessary resources) who are willing to assist them.
The third way, which can be the first or second, is the narrative question.
It is about asking yourself “ How do you want to tell it? " What thing? Well, that particular situation that you are going through, regardless of whether you live it calmly and marching or very tense and stumbling. By asking myself “How do I want to count…? As such, I create a space for reflection, visualization and action that can help me to stay aligned with the way of life that I chose for myself.
How does it work
Consciously or unconsciously, I believe that we all choose a predominant tone or style to tell ourselves and then tell the stories of our lives. It can vary from period to period, or even during the course of a story, but there will always be at least one present or predominant.
For example. If, after the insult of my partner, I think that she wanted to harm me and I create a climate of confrontation to defend myself or attack, it will be unlikely in that context to maintain a peaceful dialogue. On the other hand, if despite not understanding or approving your reaction, I consider that in order not to aggravate the situation, it would be best to avoid responding in the same frequency; surely there it does seek to promote a climate that contributes to giving us some tranquility.
I will then be able to think about how I am living that episode and identify, as if it were a movie, the main style I am looking for to tell the story (Suspense, Action, Comedy or Documentary, if I like to show data to support an approach) and avoid especially the ones I don't want (Drama, Police, Terror).
If the tone that I feel preponderant leads me to tell myself a story with suffering protagonists, a knot full of tension and an ending as forceful as it is painful, and I don't like that; I can change it. Following the example, I will evaluate how else I can tell myself what is happening in order to feel more likely to enjoy the story and the actions derived from it. Thus, I will focus on the participation and relationship between the characters (among which I will be the protagonist) and I will conclude something that gives me certain possibilities of action more in line with what I would like for my life (always within what is expected for the style predominant on duty).
Hopefully, everyone will know what they want to generate in their people. The narrative question "How do you want to tell?" It invites us to become aware that in each story we are promoting a certain kind of context and that this, in turn, will give us scope for certain actions and exclude many others. Taking a minute, two or fifteen to choose how to live what will be told later can be a simple and very powerful way to feel more responsible for your present and designer of your future. And if not, you can always try another story.
