We have as a major interest the regaining of attention units and the general rehabilitation of a case by the Auditor Imagination Saver. This is nothing terrifically new, but I am going to show you a codification of this material and a method of using it.

The first thing in terms of this is of course our triangle: reality, affinity, communication. The auditor uses this in straight memory by starting with anything which would break down, for instance, reality. You have to pick up the types of incidents which would go to make up a break of reality.

So the auditor hammers around for a while picking up things about reality, and just to vary the monotony, he starts picking up some things that have to do with affinity, and then he comes around and he picks up some things that have to do with communication. Then he picks up some things that have to do with reality, picks up some affinity breaks, and picks up communication.

It doesn’t matter which corner is uppermost, of course. We call it ARC — we keep swinging in an arc: affinity, reality, communication; affinity, reality, communication. That would be a way to remember this. The auditor of course is not drawing any pictures for his preclear, but he knows what composes breaks in communication, or over-communication, breaks in affinity, or enforced affinity — in other words, a break-off of or an enforcement on, an inhibition of or a compulsion on, communication, affinity or reality. It works for each one of these. The auditor goes around the triangle. In this fashion he doesn’t run out of ideas and he keeps the memory of the preclear playing on new subjects and new people.

He asks for something on communication — for instance, “Who used to tell you you had to talk?” That would be too much communication.

The preclear will think for a moment and say, “Tell me I had to talk? My father. He used to tell me to speak up. Yeah, ‘Speak up.”’

So the auditor says, “That’s fine,” and explores this a little bit more. There’s probably a “speak up” chain of some sort if this was Papa’s dramatization straight down the boards. And the auditor has gained a little point there on communication.

So he swings over to affinity: “Who used to tell you that they hated you?” “Oh, nobody — oh! my sister.”

Believe me, if his sister ever went around with this computation “I hate you,” you can be sure that it is strung down the bank, particularly if his sister is older. Look at a family pattern and you End that the first child does not have quite the same aberration pattern as the next child. By the time they get down to about the third or fourth child these things are compounding because there are more and more personnel around Mama, therefore there are more and more commands. In addition to that, Mama by this time has probably had a lot more keyed in. God help the third child! I knew a seventh child once who was a Junior.

It is fairly certain that if the second child has a dramatization and our preclear is the third child, he is going to have everything the second child had, plus. We can follow this material down, and if we are keeping accurate notes on our preclear we are putting this stuff down as potential circuits — for example, a circuit that said “Speak up. I tell you, you’ve got to speak up” — thatsort of thing — ”I can’t hear you, you know. You’ve got to speak up.” It is this insistence, and if Papa said this continually it was a communication break. We just go around the thing. We have won a little bit now on communication, so we try to win something on affinity, and then we try to win something on reality. In other words, round and round on this case — affinity, reality, communication.

We can divide our session up, to get really mechanical about it, into two areas. First we get all those things which enforced — compulsive, you might say — and we go around many times on compulsive. Then we start swinging it on inhibitive — actually, that is denied inhibitive.

So we start going around the triangle, first on enforced: “You’ve got to love me. You must love me,” and so forth. Somebody trying to force affinity through will have a tendency to charge up the bank. Now we swing to the next corner. Somebody has continually said to this person, “You must understand. You’ve got to understand. It is true, you must know that it’s true,” and that is an enforced reality. Then we come on around and pick up “You’ve got to see it,” “You know that this is very plain,” “You’ve got to see this,” “You’ve got to look at it,” “You’ve got to listen to it,” “You’ve got to feel it,” “You’ve got to smell it.” Any of these things enforced communication, as did “You’ve got to talk” or “You’ve got to write.” And we just keep swinging it around.

Now we select members of the family, if we want to break this thing down further. We may know that besides the preclear there are basically four members of the family — Papa, Mama and two brothers — but also there are probably some grandparents or other relatives and some nurses on this case. We get a list of the dramatic personnel on the case. You could even inventory the dramatic personnel via your preclear You would then work each person with this circular system. For instance, let’s just get this elder brother very thoroughly into view.

“When did your elder brother used to say that you had to like him?” “Well, he never said anything like that. He wouldn’t say that.”

If you actually force this a bit on your preclear, he will turn around and object: “Why, he didn’t say things like that. He used to say things like, well, ‘Nobody likes me, absolutely nobody likes me.’ As a matter of fact, you know, he committed suicide when he was eighteen.”

All of a sudden you realize this man has not thought about or compared this; this is new data which was just sort of lurking back in his mind. His elder brother committed suicide; somebody in that family had a suicide engram. You mark that down and go on to find out what its ramifications are.

Here is the trick in all straight memory: Don’t concentrate on any one subject very long. Memory can be darted at a subject, but a continual pressure toward the subject will have a tendency to blunt it a little bit and it will disperse. In other words, the thing that you are targeting seems to become alert and start bouncing memory off, and you won’t get anything out of it. Make him remember something quickly. You don’t ever insist that he remember this quickly, but you say “Lets remember this,” and so on. To keep him on the same subject restimulates it a little bit and it will begin to turn against the “I” slightly. So you change the subject on the person, and you make him remember something else and you direct the memory stream at something else, and then you direct it at something else. After you’ve done this, you finally come back around to the same subject again and you will find out that a little more of it is in view and ready for a sudden dart at it again.

“Now about your brother’s suicide, how did he do it?” “Why, it was with a razor blade.”

“Aha.” You enter it in your record. “Now, what else did your brother used to say about liking people?”

“Well, nobody liked him; nobody liked him. He used to say that all the time. He used to say, ‘Everybody is against me’ and so forth.”

“Good.” And you think, “Aha! ‘Everybody is against me’ — that’s hot!” And you write it down.

Now you go on around the triangle and you get some reality and a little communication and so on, and you just keep going around.

Then you come back and find out “Well, did your brother say this just before he committed suicide?”

“Oh, I don’t remember that. No, I don’t remember that.”

“Well, let’s take your younger brother now; did he used to try to make you understand things? Did he have any trouble trying to get people to understand things, and so forth?”

“Oh, yes. As a matter of fact, he used to go into tantrums. He’d lie on the floor and he’d say, ‘Nobody understands me. I just can’t do it to anybody. I can’t tell anybody about it. Just nobody does,’ and so on.”

Later you come back to the first one again: “Now, what did your brother say just before he committed suicide?”

“He was pretty blue. This girl had just left him,” and so on.

Here we have a dramatization in the bank about Papa leaving Mama and somebody threatening suicide because of the separation. So we know that Papa and Mama used to fight and they used to come hammer and tongs at each other on this subject, but this whole thing may be completely occluded from the preclear

He may be telling you all this time, “Well, you know, my father and my mother never fought. They were absolutely model parents in front of children and they never fought or said anything about it and they were always nice to each other, and they got along so well.”

Here is this fellow with no reality and hardly any more communication, and he is telling you that his family life was all a gay song. Not likely! This means that there is a tremendous amount of occlusion on this case. But you do not tell him he is occluded; you just come around again and keep working and chewing away at it, and the first thing you know, Papa and Mama come into view with this very same dramatization. They probably dramatized that sort of a computation later if they dramatized it earlier.

It so happens that if the parents died very early, you get a break in the dramatization pattern, so the dramatizations in late life don’t compare to the prenatal This means the prenatal bank may be relatively undisturbed because it has never been repeated. But it also means that there is a tremendous affinity break on this, with grief or apathy, and so forth, because of the death or loss of Papa and Mama. It does not mean this case is in any better shape just because he lost his parents. It does mean that you are not going to pick up the clues on the prenatal bank that you would pick up ordinarily. But there is broken affinity.

The parents may not have died; they might have just left the child. Or Mama, for instance, might have left the child in a foster home and then gone off. This will definitely alter a pattern, definitely alter the background. If this happened immediately after birth, the chances of the preclear’s knowing anything about it, or of its having any enormous effect on the child are very slight. But the aberrative pattern which would be ahead of a child being abandoned immediately after birth is probably awful. Anybody who gets an adopted child gets a terrific pig in a poke, you might say, because the child was unwanted all during the prenatal period, unless the parents died by illness or violence. So you know what sort of a thing to scout for; if this child was just pushed out and given away shortly after birth, you can expect AAs and everything else on this case.

It will be a little tough to locate until you start to find out during what points and periods in the preclear’s life he was very unhappy. What sort of thing made him unhappy? Work at it still on this triangle. Get the people who have broken affinity with him, people who have invalidated his reality or enforced realities upon him, people who have communicated with him too hard, people who have not communicated enough. Go after both enforced and inhibited on these three points. Have him go on remembering all the family members and other persons in his vicinity, and try to touch on each one of them with these various things.

Deal with Mama, or the foster mother, and discover the enforced basis. “When did she insist on being loved?” or “When was she very sad?” Remember that affinity doesn’t mean just love. Ask “When did she used to be afraid? What did she used to say about these things?” and look for things like “You’ve got to watch out” and “You’ve just got to be afraid, because if you aren’t afraid then you won’t learn to stay away from these things.” I ran that one out of a person once; it made an anxiety case.

Up on the reality line you find “This is true,” “You’ve got to believe it,” “This is the way the world is,” “You’ve got to mind your grown-ups, they know best. Elders know best,” and so on. That last is really the toughest of tough social aberrations, because it enforces upon an individual the idea that his elders know best. By golly, I have given a great deal of thought and inspection to this subject and I have not found it to be true!

Now, going around the triangle with Mama, you want to vary this enough so that the preclear does not see a mechanical pattern in it, and you inventory Mama and what she used to do. Then take up the foster father or the grandparents or another person in the child’s life. Then take up his teachers, his playmates and all this vast horde of humanity that surrounds every human being during his childhood, one by one — even the chauffeur.

One time by assuming the possibility that a case’s family might have been in better circumstances, I suddenly found out that the family had gone broke when the child was two years of age. The preclear had no recollection of it whatsoever. They had lived in an enormous, beautiful house with servants and everything else. And the ally on the case that was burying everything was the chauffeur.

Now take denied on the same personnel. Follow it out with some degree of pattern so you get full coverage: denied tears, denied apathy, denied shame, denied fear, denied love, denied unity with the rest of the human race, and so forth — affinity. On the reality line you look for “It isn’t true,” “It isn’t real,” “You don’t know what’s true,” “You don’t understand,” “You don’t know the facts,” all of that sort of thing, including the disagreement aspect. Who used to disagree in this family and say that the other person didn’t know? In the communication field, things like “You can’t hear anything,” “You don’t know,” and so on, are what you are looking for. “You can’t feel anything like that; it’s all in your imagination” is a cross-up between communication and reality. So that is denied, all the way around.

With this mechanical method for straight memory you can regain lots of attention units without straining your own imagination.

If you have a case that is so bad off you have to do an awful lot of Straightwire in order to get attention units, don’t dive into the case. Let me give you that as a caution. When the preclear’s sense of reality isn’t too good and so forth, and you get something that looks hot, just make a note of it. Be orderly about this; don’t be eager, just be orderly. When you have just discovered one of his parents’ dramatizations, put it down over to the side as something you are going to scout later. This is the sort of thing you would then go after in reverie.

You don’t dive on this case. You are getting data here, but the main thing you are trying to do is pull attention units up to “I” and restore “I” and get the charge off the valences.

Now, you will find somebody in the family who had trouble with personal identity. So start covering the people in the family in terms of whose valences they were in. If any of these people did a lot of dramatizing or anything according to that, they were out of valence themselves, therefore there existed valence shifters. Find out what these valence shifters are.

You might ask, “Did anybody try to make you a better boy?” “Oh, yes.”

“Well, who did they set up as a model for you?”

“Oh, that was Herman, down the block. I hated him!” “Okay. Well, what did they used to tell you about Herman?”

“Oh, he was a little gentleman and had nice manners; my mother used to tell me this all the time.”

You follow this track right on down to find that Mama had identity trouble herself, and she had a dramatization there that made her try to change the identity of other people around her. You have spotted then a shifted valence personality in the vicinity of your preclear — his mother.

So you look at Mama and find out what she said to Papa, who she wanted Papa to be like, who she wanted Grandpa to be like and who she wanted the other children to be like. Finally, you will pick up enough data on this and stimulate the memory of the preclear to a point where valence shifter dramatizations will be coming into view with whole word content. The dramatization could say, “You’ve got to be like other people. You can’t go on thinking you really amount to something in the world. You’ve got to buckle down to your job and you’ve got to be like other people. You’ve got to live like other people,” and so on. That would be a valence shifter into all sorts of valences.

Remember that each one of these locks is a lock because it is buried into the overall charge which has come up from the engrams and secondary engrams. But just springing a lock off the top of this chain deintensifies to some degree the charge on it. So you can go round and round.

The second part of the mechanical operation has to do with the first, second, third and fourth dynamics. You just cover these subjects. “Who used to talk about not liking yourself?” “Who used to say that you were nobody?” That would be a valence shifter and a nullification. “Who used to tell you you shouldn’t listen to your own advice?” or “you should listen to your own advice?” and so forth. These cockeyed little split-offs are all inhibitive on the first dynamic.

Start being interested now in the second dynamic. Remember there are two divisions here. One is sex as an act and the other is children. We can handle sex. The reason sex gets so mixed up is it gets mixed up with the family, which is actually in the third dynamic but is partly in the second. So the second dynamic has two divisions which have to do with the sex act and children, and it’s the family and it’s this whole dynamic of the future. People sometimes go hog-wild and think sex is the superaberrative thing in the society, just because it is apparently a little bit stronger than some of the other combinations. But I have seen whole societies that never worried about sex.

It is interesting that the recovery of data on the second dynamic is no more significant than the others, if you are treating just sex. You will find all sorts of locks and secondary engrams on the subject of sex on a case if you start asking about it. You are not so fascinated with this person’s own sexual behavior aberrations as you are interested in the sexual aberrations and behavior of the people around him. The only time you get interested in a person’s own dramatization is when all else fails. In that case you find out what he says and what he does, because if it is an aberrated conduct or an aberrated statement, he got it from somebody else, and it will clue you in to somebody else’s actions in the bank.

An interesting clue is getting the dictated affinity, communication and reality on children. Find out how they feel about children, and how you should treat a child, and so on. Just follow it around the triangle. Ask “Should children be seen and not heard?” and that sort of thing.

In an English or an American private school system you will find a lot of sex louse-ups on the case.

Just play one against the other — enforced and inhibited — back and forth, rolling around on affinity, reality, communication, until you have finally gotten a lot into view on the subject.

You are unburdening the case. You are taking charge off the case. You are looking for secondary engrams, dramatizations, circuits, and data on the case. You are trying to get everybody in this case into view and to knock out all the occlusions. If you keep it up in this fashion, I would safely say that without ever putting anybody into reverie you would finally knock most of the occlusion off a case just by going through this routine.

Now go on to the third dynamic. “How do you feel about people?” “How do you feel about the Elks Club?” “How do you feel about the government?” and so on with respect to affinity, communication and reality on these things. “Do you think government is good for people?” “Who in your family used to think that government was awfully bad for people?” You can use even a highly generalized question like “Do you think a government really exists to help the people?” and then ask “Who used to be very hot on this subject, around you?” and so on.

This is an odd tack which might sound, offhand, as though it couldn’t possibly contain very much in the way of charge. But you would be amazed. The group is terrifically important, and these so-called governments that are in the world today very often have a broken affinity with their own people and with individuals, which exists on cases in the form of charge.

You almost never get one single point that is terribly important, but this point resolved a young veteran’s case. He was in an apathy and could not get up the scale at all. I got him up to grief. I pulled him up by his bootstraps to a point where he could get rid of the apathy he had been hammered into.

He had been an officer and had lost both legs in the war, and the government had said that he should go over to the Veteran’s Administration to collect his compensation. His family was quite alarmed at having to take care of a cripple, but they didn’t have an awful effect upon him because they had always been ornery to him and he had never been close to any of these people; he was quite a stranger to them all his life. But he had always believed thoroughly and patriotically in the government, and here he had given his very best and the government had told him, “We’re not going to retire you as an officer so that you can get three-quarters of your base pay and live like a gentleman the rest of your life. No, we’re not going to retire you as an officer. We’re not going to fix you up. We’re going to push you over here and just let you starve. We’re going to give you 30 percent disability, maybe, in a couple of years if you pass all of the examinations and everything else.” And this case had just crashed right at that moment:

I tried to unburden it from the standpoint of family, but that didn’t have an awfully big bearing on it. He had been raised in another environment than his own family. But when it came to the government and the Veteran’s Administration, a secondary engram had been laid on the case, and that had been complicated by such things as the government’s refusal to answer his letters. They would force him to go through channels someplace else. That is a compulsion of communication. He had to communicate with somebody else and he had to do this over here with somebody else, and he had to see this person and he had to see that person. They had kept him going around in circles for weeks. Then, all of a sudden, he just had collected enough material so that the final blunt statement “No, we’re not going to retire you” was enough to send him completely into an apathy. Boom! It laid in a secondary engram.

I got some of the attention units out of the earlier part of this fight, then I suddenly ran into his receipt of a letter on the thing and ran that out. That was a secondary engram. I got the apathy off, discharged some grief, and we came up to a point where he could pick up his fear of facing his environment. I picked up a lot of these points out of people who had surrounded him all of his life: fear of the society, fear of self, fear of sex, fear of children, fear of this, fear of that. But particularly on the third dynamic — and we were practically, in this case, selectively rehabilitating one dynamic — I picked up fear of not being able to measure up in the society anymore and that sort of thing. And his case came up to a point where it very nearly ran pianola. It became very easy. If you can lift up one of these dynamics, you have picked up to some degree the possibilities on the others.

You can rehabilitate the fourth dynamic, for example. Enormous amounts of things lie across this line. Certain religions lie squarely across the fourth dynamic. “Man is evil, therefore we have to make him good” is the computation. And I have seen some women who did this: “If human beings only acted so nice as cats, if they only acted like these dear little animals . . .” (Evidently, they had never seen kitty out there knocking off a bluebird! )

Now, the odd part of it is, statements like “Men are no good,” “Women are no good,” “Women are all alike,” “Men are all alike” create a block on the fourth dynamic. So we have to start picking up affinity, communication and reality enforcements: “You’ve got to like people, you’ve got to agree with people,” that sort of thing, or “You shouldn’t pay any attention to people, you should never listen to them.” This sort of material will form locks on this dynamic.

You have a number of tools now that you can use. These include affinity, reality and communication for any one of the dynamics, for any of the family members and for any of the dramatic personnel in a person’s life. Don’t overlook the marital partner, for instance, as a source of aberration °F restimulation. So you have affinity, reality and communication on any of the personnel in a person’s life for any one of the dynamics. And you follow it out.

Take them selectively, person by person, and by keeping notes on these various people really get to know their aberrative pattern. You are inventorying the people in the person’s life and working out what these people consisted of. There are two motives to this: one is to get back attention units and locate secondary engrams — discharge, in other words, some of the charge on this case — and the other is to get data to use in locating some of the engrams which must be run in order to resolve the case. By removing the charge and some of the circuits and some of the valence shifters, we will finally get the case in a deintensified state so that it can run engrams with conviction. And we can then resolve the case along a pianola line.

You can run affinity, communication and reality locks out of the person by Straightwire. And when you put him in reverie, you can run secondary engrams and locks out just as though they were engrams. You can run the secondary engrams out in reverie or you can knock them out by Straightwire. That does not mean that you are going to discharge all the grief off a grief engram or a bad secondary engram by Straightwire. You are never going to be able to discharge one of those things by Straightwire. It has got to be in reverie, you understand. But just by springing these things into view, a little other material springs into sight. Some attention units start coming back to “I,” the case starts to discharge and reality will pick up. That is how you get a tough case into shape.

There is a spectrum of charge on locks:

Loss of an ally or close friend would be at the bottom of the scale; a broken appointment would be at the top.

A secondary engram is a highly charged lock which must be reduced as an engram. The degree of the intensity of charge and the amount of pain in the physical pain engram on which this engram is sitting determine the intensity of the lock.

If you could knock out all these secondary engrams, you would have a release automatically.

You use the factors on the Straight Memory Chart (plus any others that apply to the case) to give you all the questions you have to ask the preclear. You use these questions to break through locks to build his “I” up to the point where he can run secondary engrams and reduce them, or to the point where you can go after circuitry if the secondaries won’t reduce. You are trying to return all these attention units that have been lost to “I.”

To get a person up to a point where nothing can happen, it is necessary to run physical pain engrams. They are the cause of what is wrong with your preclear but there may be two thousand locks attached to a physical pain engram. However, these locks will start to disappear; when you finally take the physical pain out from underneath, they have nothing on which to live.

Sometimes the deepest charges will wait until last, such as Mama’s death. You can expect such occluded material as deaths to hang on. One day the file clerk will hand out something, and the next thing you know you will be into this engram that produced it. You cause this to happen by unburdening the case. The file clerk is the safety valve. He knows how much this case can take. He is not likely to hand up what it can’t take.

Auditing skill is required. The case is hardest to work at the beginning and immediately after the beginning. It softens up as it goes along.

So, you can use the Accessibility Charts and this technique of handling affinity, reality and communication breaks and secondary engrams. You can use these two things as a guide which locks in with Standard Procedure. These are better tools than you had before.