Games People Play

CHAPTER ELEVEN 
Consulting Room Games 
GAMES that are tenaciously played in the therapeutic situation are the most important ones for the 
professional game analyst to be aware of. They can be most readily studied first-hand in the 
consulting room. There are three types, according to the role of the agent: 
1. Games played by therapists and case workers: "I'm Only Trying to Help You" and "Psychiatry." 
2. Games played by professionally trained people who ate patients in therapy groups, such as 
"Greenhouse." 
3. Games played by lay patients and clients: "Indigence," "Peasant," "Stupid" and "Wooden Leg." 
1 GREENHOUSE 
Thesis
. This is a variation of "Psychiatry," which is played hardest by young social scientists, such 
as clinical psychologists. In the company of their colleagues these young people tend to play 
"Psychoanalysis," often in a jocular way, using such expressions as "Your hostility is showing" or 
"How mechanical can a defense mechanism get?" This is usually a harmless and enjoyable pastime; 
it is a normal phase of their learning experience, and with a few originals in the group it can 
become quite amusing. (This writer's preference is, "I see National Parapraxis Week is here again.") 
As patients in psychotherapy groups some of these people are apt to indulge in this mutual critique 
more seriously; but since it is not highly productive in that situation, it may have to be headed off 
by the therapist. The proceedings may then turn into a game of "Greenhouse." 
I here is a strong tendency for recent graduates to have an exaggerated respect for what they call 
"Genuine Feelings." The expression of such a feeling may be preceded by an announcement that it 
is on its way. After the announcement, the feeling is described, or rather presented before die group, 
as though it were a rare flower which should be regarded with awe. The reactions of die other 
members are received very solemnly, and they take on the air of connoisseurs at a botanical garden. 
The problem seems to be, in the jargon of game analysis, whether this one is good enough to be 
exhibited in the National Feeling Show. A questioning intervention by the therapist may be 
strongly resented, as though be were some clumsy-fingered clod mauling the fragile petals of an 
exotic century plant. The therapist, naturally, feels that in order to understand the anatomy and 
physiology of a flower, it may be necessary to dissect it. 
Antithesis. The antithesis, which is crucial for therapeutic progress, is the irony of the above 
description. If this game is allowed to proceed, it may go on unchanged for years, after which the 
patient may feel that he has had a "therapeutic experience" during which he has "expressed 
hostility" and learned to "face feelings" in a way which gives him an advantage over less fortunate 
colleagues. Meanwhile very little of dynamic significance may have happened, and certainly the 
investment of time has not been used to maximum therapeutic advantage. 
The irony in the initial description is directed not against the patients but against their teachers and 
the cultural milieu which encourages such over-fastidiousness. If properly timed, a skeptical remark 
may successfully divorce them from foppish Parental influences and lead to a less self-conscious 
robustness in their transactions with each other. Instead of cultivating feelings in a kind of hothouse 
atmosphere, they may just let them grow naturally, to be plucked when they are ripe. 
The most obvious advantage of this game is the external psychological, since it avoids intimacy by 
setting up special conditions under which feelings may be expressed, and special restrictions on the 
responses of those present.