Mr. Lankton,

I have noticed that so many of the different individuals who met Erickson seem to have taken away with them a multitude of dimensions of Erickson's personality. For instance, some say he was direct while others such as yourself seemed to have focused on his indirect work and how his framework fits into the larger theoretical structure of therapy. Did this happen because Erickson was simply utilizing each person's beliefs, emotions etc, which would ultimately make each individual have a different co-created experience with Erickson?

Maybe this is all too theoretical...I was intrigued with your story at Evolution about Haley and his suggestion for a family to not discipline a child, which ended in the child being given a dose of castor oil. How did you and Haley have such a different view of how Erickson would have intervened with this family when you both had spent a considerable amount of time with Erickson? To me, I find it curious that the strategic founders seemed to have missed Erickson's focus on building resources and it got dummied down into simply changing patterns while many of the individuals who trained with Erickson took a more sophisticated stance that added humor, resource building, and enchantment. Was this by accident or an indication of who you are/were vs. who Haley is/was? Although it is off subject, I would be really curious about the type of stories you would have used to shape the family's behavior related to the paradox. Is this in print somewhere?

John