BASIC CONCEPTS

— When novelists claim they do not invent it, but hear voices and find stories in their head, they are neither joking nor crazy.

— When characters, narrators, or muses have minds of their own and occasionally take over, they are alternate personalities.

— Alternate personalities and memory gaps, but no significant distress or dysfunction, is a normal version of multiple personality.

— normal Multiple Personality Trait (MPT) (core of Multiple Identity Literary Theory), not clinical Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD)

— The normal version of multiple personality is an asset in fiction writing when some alternate personalities are storytellers.

— Multiple personality originates when imaginative children with normal brains have unassuaged trauma as victim or witness.

— Psychiatrists, whose standard mental status exam fails to ask about memory gaps, think they never see multiple personality.

— They need the clue of memory gaps, because alternate personalities don’t acknowledge their presence until their cover is blown.

— In novels, most multiple personality, per se, is unnoticed, unintentional, and reflects the author’s view of ordinary psychology.

— Multiple personality means one person who has more than one identity and memory bank, not psychosis or possession.

— Euphemisms for alternate personalities include parts, pseudonyms, alter egos, doubles, double consciousness, voice or voices.

— Multiple personality trait: 90% of fiction writers; possibly 30% of public.

— Each time you visit, search "name index" or "subject index," choose another name or subject, and search it.

— If you read only recent posts, you miss most of what this site has to offer.

— Share site with friends.

Sunday, July 15, 2018


“Hillary’s Choice” by Gail Sheehy: Mental health professional working close to White House said Bill Clinton (post 6) had multiple personality

Hillary’s Choice is a biography of Hillary Clinton and her marriage. I have not read all of it, since I was interested only in Bill Clinton and multiple personality. The index, under “Clinton, Bill,” lists “dissociative identities of, 301,” to which I turned, and from which I quote:

“The most convincing analysis of Clinton’s sickness was offered to me by a highly qualified mental health professional who works too close to the White House to be identified. This source sees evidence that the President may suffer from dissociative identities

“The new official definition of this dissociative disorder (which used to be called ‘multiple personalities’) describes a personality that is a sum of various identities that have been split off at some time in the past. The split is usually due to traumatic events.

“ ‘He was so young, barely four,’ Hillary explained in an interview, ‘when he was scarred by abuse that he can’t even take it out and look at it. There was terrible conflict between his mother and grandmother’ ” (1, p. 301).

This speculation by Sheehy and her unnamed mental health professional goes on for most of the page. I do not know if the latter had any expertise with multiple personality (most mental health professionals do not). There is no claim that Bill Clinton was personally evaluated. My purpose here is simply to show that Clinton’s possible multiple personality was a matter of published speculation during his presidency.

Since no politician would have considered it a favor to be labelled as mentally ill—at that time, there was no concept of multiple personality trait, a normal version—the above speculation would not have been welcome.

Moreover, if he did commit any abusive and unlawful acts (I don’t know whether he did or not) as a result of multiple personality, then it couldn’t, at that time, have been considered a normal version.

Nevertheless, whether he had multiple personality trait or multiple personality disorder (assuming he had either), it was compatible with functioning as President.

1. Gail Sheehy. Hillary’s Choice. New York, Random House, 1999.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment (whether you agree or disagree) and ask questions (simple or expert). I appreciate your contribution.