Reclaiming Obsession--Focus, Essay 1

The Oxford English Dictionary informs us that obsession is derived from the Latin word obsessio, which originally meant the siege of a city. The Latin verb behind it is obsidere which means to "surround in a hostile way, beset, assail, press, besiege, occupy, possess." The preposition "ob" means "against, towards," while "sedeo" means "to sit." Thus, we have what etymology often gives us--a verbal picture.

When the word obsession first came into English it also meant a siege (16th century). But, before long, it had taken on the idea of the feeling resulting from such a siege. It first became the "control, actuation, or tormenting of a person from without by an evil spirit." As Ben Jonsson could write in 1607: "Grave Fathers, he is possest..nay, if there be possession, And obsession, he has both." Then, if evolved into the "idea, image or influence which continually fills or troubles the mind." As such, it found a rich harvest, as you well can imagine, in theological literature, where Satan is often portrayed as the one who not only possesses, but also obsesses someone [both besiege and torment].

It was only a short jump from these usages to the realm of modern psychology, where the word obsession, beginning at the end of the 19th century, meant "a recurrent, intrusive, inappropriate thought, impulse or image causing significant distress or disturbance to social or occupational functioning." And, as we all know, once the shrinks get hold of a concept, they not only never want to let go of it, but they want to charge you for their use of the word. Indeed, hardly any word has been more helpful to the psychological profession in making a name and reputation for itself in the 20th and 21st centuries than the word "obsession." OCD ("obsessive-compulsive disorder") has now risen to such a prominence as a diagnostic category that if we took the word away from the shrinks, we would see the collapse of a profession. Not only would taking away the word be cruel, but I really don't relish seeing a coven of barbate middle-aged men selling apples on the street corners.

Reclaiming Obsession

Yet, as I have been thinking about my life and about the ways I have lived, I think we ought to pry the word obsession out of the greedy fingers of psychology and restore it to where it belongs--in the deep experience of passionate people. Indeed, as poet Robert Bly has said (in a Eugene, OR lecture on Oct. 17, 2006), he has never really trusted someone without at least one obsession. I know that I have long hesitated to use the term to describe myself or my activities because of its shadowy past. Instead, I recall using the word "focus." 'Of course I am not an obsessed person; I am just focused,' I would say. But, as I think about it longer and longer, I want to bring obsession into the vocabulary of normalcy in our speech. I would like to see the word be used to describe a riveting preoccupation, a focus, a passionate attention toward something--all of which are normally the prelude to creative expression and new ways of conceptualizing a field or the world. Just as the original word meant a sort of siege of a city, an "obsessed" person, in a positive sense, is rather besieged by an idea. It simply will not let him/her go, and s/he only ignores its insistent demands to his/her peril. Thus, in this "new" and "positive" way of using the word "obsession," we may see it as the key to the genius that moves the ideas behind much of our culture. Obsession, in short, is a good thing, from which we all benefit. You may not want it demonstrated around the Thanksgiving Day table today, but it is, in general a good thing.

Indeed, I cannot understand my life without trying to explain the role of obsession in making me what I am today. The next two essays explain this.

3068