1. The ’Wanting Less’ Quadrant
Even though we might desire relationships that are close and mutually dependent, often we will find ways to subvert the intimacy we desire. To get close to people, we need to let our protective barriers down. But this comes with significant risks. If we allow others to get too close, the risks are they might:
- do or say something that is threatening to us and trigger some of our deeper uncomfortable feelings, or,
- see through the protection we have in place and witness our fears, our inadequacies and the parts of ourselves we don’t want them to see.
The prospect of both possibilities is threatening so we seek the safety of keeping others at a distance. We have a built-in sensor which tells us when the relationship is becoming too close. We then automatically begin to pull back. This feels good for a moment because we feel safer. But this pulling back is an escape; it takes us away from the opportunity for intimacy.
If you are in this quadrant there is a practice that will help us move out of the ‘Wanting Less” quadrant towards greater levels of intimacy. It is a simple enquiry that you can do by yourself or with another person. Sit quietly and ask the question:
What do I do to create distance in my relationships?
You may find there are many patterns of behaviour that you use to keep distance from others. They are often quite subtle like steering the conversation away from topics that might be uncomfortable. There will also be the more obvious things like working too hard or slipping into social media when you are with others. It is useful to have an inventory of your habits so you can get to know them. After a while you begin to see what you are doing and catch yourself in the act.
2. The ‘Wanting More’ Quadrant
As small children we found objects that we incorporated into our identity. At the age of three, a young boy or girl might have strong identification with a truck or a doll. It is very clear in their minds that the truck or doll belongs to them. If another child tries to take it away, there is strong pushback: “This is my truck!” or “This is my doll!” The truck or the doll has become part of their world and part of their identity. The word “my” expresses an extension of identity beyond the limits of the immediate self. As we progress through childhood, we continue to find objects and people to incorporate into our identity. Usually, they are things that will enhance or strengthen our identity. This is all part of healthy childhood development and the beginning of connections with outside objects and people.
As we grow older, our identification extends to things like cars, jobs, houses, family members, our children, and our partners. When our identification extends to, and incorporates, other people, it can become challenging. There is a subtle line we cross when we move past friendship and incorporate others into our identity. We can become possessive. We create rules and expectations about how they should behave. We become quite indignant when my best friend, my child or my partner doesn\'t behave in a way that aligns with our expectations.
If you are in this quadrant a simple enquiry will help you move out of it. Sit quietly and ask the question:
What are the ways I try to possess, control, or manipulate my partner?
Focus on the times when you feel anxious about the relationship. What do you do when questions about the other’s commitment arise? Are there attempts to control the other’s behaviour or to start asking them questions to get the reassurance you want. Do you go hunting for clues in their behaviour, seeking re-assurance that everything is okay? And when the re-assurance can’t be found, do you jump to the worst possible conclusions? When you are anxious about the relationship, do you try to win their affection and commitment by doing things for them, being overly attentive or buying them gifts?
3. The ‘Wanting Less-Wanting More’ Quadrant
It might seem contradictory to be in the ‘Wanting Less-Wanting More’ quadrant. On one hand, we are wanting to create distance in our relationship, and at the same time, wanting more from the relationship. This is a confusing place to be, but it is probably more common than might be expected. In this quadrant, we feel we need more space in the relationship, because intimacy is challenging our safety. But as we move away from the relationship, we become anxious about losing a reassuring part of our identity. So, we are tempted to move back to intimacy. It is a movement, backwards and forwards, between the threat of intimacy and the threat of solitude. When we have intimacy, we feel threatened and want solitude. When we have solitude, we feel threatened and want intimacy. And so, the dance of intimacy and solitude continues. And this is a dance that is familiar to many of us at some time in our lives.
4. The ‘Acceptance and Appreciation’ Quadrant
As discomfort and frustration arises in a relationship, we are tempted to do one of two things to get relief:
- we can move away from the relationship to get away from what we think is causing the discomfort. In doing this, we move further into the ‘Wanting Less’ quadrant, or
- we can decide that the relationship is not providing the comfort that we want or deserve; our partner should be doing more to support us. Again, we think that our discomfort is caused by our partner; they should be doing something that they’re not doing, or they should stop doing something they are doing. We are shifting the blame for our discomfort and frustration on to them. In doing this, we move further into the ‘Wanting More’ quadrant.
Neither of these responses is helpful. They might provide some momentary relief, but they quickly take us into the downward spiral of reactivity. The only alternative is to own our own discomfort. And to do this we need to:
- own each fear, disappointment and grief as they arise,
- feel the discomfort in the body,
- avoid trying to escape, diminish, ignore or reframe the discomfort, and,
- be curious about the discomfort and know it offers the potential for growth.
With this, we move into the ‘Acceptance and Appreciation’ quadrant. This is where we can experience undefended love where neither person is making the other responsible for their frustration and discomfort. There is no agenda for the relationship or how it should look. There is a gentle appreciation and enjoyment of each other.
Joseph Campbell described this simple kind of human relating as “stirring-the-oatmeal love”:
Stirring oatmeal is a humble act - not exciting or thrilling. But it symbolises a relatedness that brings love down to earth. It represents a willingness to share ordinary human life, to find meaning in the simple, unromantic tasks: earning a living, living within our budget, putting out the garbage, feeding the baby in the middle of the night. To “stir the oatmeal” means to find the relatedness, the value, even the beauty, in simple and ordinary things, not to eternally demand a cosmic drama, and entertainment, or an extraordinary intensity in everything. It is the discovery of the sacred in the midst of the humble and the ordinary.
There is beauty in these quiet moments of human relatedness. We are reminded of the beauty we experience in the other and that reminds us of the beauty within ourselves. There is a simplicity and innocence in these moments.
This possibility is described by Jett Psaris and Marlena S. Lyons in their book Undefended Love:
Slowly the hardened layers of our defence systems are peeled away and dissolved, and the walls between us become even thinner. As we become more exposed, we become more illuminated in the glow of our essential self and revel in the glow of our partner’s beauty.
Finding Our Partners in One of the Quadrants
If your partner is agreeable, it is very helpful if they complete the How We Relate questionnaire. Just seeing where both people are located on the chart will be revealing; the underlying issues in the relationship will often become obvious. All the quadrant combinations are possible and there is no research to show which are the most prevalent combinations.
One of the more challenging combinations is when one person is in the ‘Wanting Less’ quadrant and the other person is in the ‘Wanting More’ quadrant. This is a difficult combination and seems to be fairly common. As one person tries to ‘avoid closeness’, the other person responds by ‘wanting more’. It has a self-perpetuating character to it. The more one person ‘wants more’, the more the other person will want less. And vice-versa.
It helps to understand this dynamic by locating both people on the chart, because it makes it less personal. It also helps to remember that both people are attempting to get away from some discomfort. The person ‘wanting less’ is trying to get space in the relationship so they won’t be triggered, and their inadequacies won’t be exposed. The person ‘wanting more’ is trying get comfort in the relationship and bolstering their identity with a more “fulfilling” relationship. If both people can see the dynamic that is operating, they may choose to stay with their own discomfort and not blame it on their partners.
Wanting More and Romantic Love
A very interesting dynamic occurs when close partners are in the ‘Wanting More’ quadrant. On the surface, it would seem like the basis for a perfect partnership, and for a while it might feel like it is. Each partner is investing energy in the other “as if they were part of themselves.” The identity of each partner is being enhanced and strengthened by their connection with the other. And because both partners are ‘wanting more’, the relationship moves to merging. The partners can lose themselves in the relationship; it gets to the point where they don’t know where one partner ends and the other begins. There is an urge to get closer and closer and each movement closer feels exquisitely satisfying. This psychological merging of identities can be amplified by sexual attraction and sexual connection, but this is not always part of it. The combination of merging with an idealised identity and the pleasure of sexual connection is a potent cocktail. It is sometimes called the “love potion”.
This psychological merging is more commonly known as romantic love or ‘falling in love’. Inevitably, as most of us know, the fantasy cannot last. For a while, the idealised image of the other person drives the urge for “wanting more”. Then something happens: one of the partners sees through the idealisation. They see the imperfections of their partner and realise they are in a relationship with an ordinary human being. The relationship is no longer covering over their frustrations and pain and they now blame this on the partner. When this happens, they will normally move quickly to the ‘Wanting Less’ quadrant.
The relationship will often end dramatically, with enduring bitterness. It is not the loss of the partner that drives the bitterness; it is more the loss of an important part of their identity. Their anger at this loss is expressed in blame towards each other. This intense psychological merging rarely ends gracefully.
The relationship might continue but without the romance and excitement. The partners stay together, but with regret and disappointment, mourning the passing of romantic love. Or they can accept the realities of the relationship, and each other, and move towards compassionate, grounded human relating. Joseph Campbell describes this possibility:
Two people meet and fall in love. Then they marry, and the real Sam or Suzy begins to show through the fantasy, and, boy is it a shock. So a lot of little boys and girls just get a divorce and wait for another receptive person, pitch the woo again, and, uh-oh, another shock. And so on and so forth … So what are you going to do when that happens? There’s only one attitude that will solve the situation: compassion. This poor, poor fact that I married does not correspond to my ideal; it’s only a human being. Well, I’m a human being too. So, I’ll meet a human being for a change; I’ll live with it and be nice to it….
These insights from Campbell describe the movement away from fantasy and thinking we will find comfort and relief in the relationship. The agenda falls away; we don’t avoid closeness and we don’t ‘want more’. It is simple, innocent relating with another human being.
Click here if you would like a free 20 minute consultation with our accredited Ennegram coach to discuss your scores.
A 60 minute consultation is also available for USD $90 which will give you guidance about how to work with your score towards a more fulfilling relationship.
Coaching consultations are also available to couples and other close relationships if both people have completed the questionnaire. The cost is USD $120 for sixty minutes.