Two years of AA Book Club Blog!!

Throwback Thursday AA History/Literature post - From William Schaberg's Writing The Big Book, how the Big Book became more suggestive and less dogmatic:

 

Chapter 29  Promoting and Editing the Multilith Copy

Significant Contributions from Dr. Howard

   By far the most comprehensive changes to the book were suggested by a man who is identified only as "Dr. Howard," a New Jersey psychiatrist who was given a Multilith Copy to review. After reading it, the doctor was "greatly interested and enthusiastic," but he had a number of significant criticisms to offer. Most especially, he insisted that the tone of the book was far too dogmatic and directive. "His idea," Bill says, "was to remove all forms of coercion, to put our fellowship on a 'we ought' basis instead of a 'you must' basis."
   Doing so would mean the entire front half of the book would have to be reedited, page-by-page, taking out all of the directions, all of the "yous," all of the "musts" and replacing them with much more suggestive language...

   Bill's dramatic capitulation on this issue was actually the result of an extraordinary power play made by Hank Parkhurst. On Friday March 24, 1939, - just seventeen days before the book was actually published - Hank wrote a page-and-a-half memo recapping Dr. Howard's suggestions and effectively arguing for their inclusion in the book. He then told Bill that if he refused to make these changes himself, he would be forced to organize a committee to make those edits for him.
   Typical of Hank, this is not the most well organized document, but its meaning and intent are perfectly clear nonetheless. He began with a one-line statement of Dr. Howard's objections:

   "Dogmatic; Marked by positive and authoratative assertion. As 'shown by God.'"

   And then goes on to elaborate each of these points, insisting they be incorporated into the book.
   According to Hank's summary (he had obviously spoken directly with Dr. Howard), the psychiatrist "claims that we stand on impregnable grounds when we constantly talk about what some of us did and let the man draw his own conclusions as to whether by doing the same thing he will or not receive the same thing." But, Dr. Howard notes that, instead of this open suggestive approach, the book repeatedly takes a directive tone, telling the reader "You do this or you do that." In his opinion, this means tha the message instantly loses "a great deal of power." The psychiatrist said that, if the book is to have any hope of success with alcoholics, all of those authoritarian pronouncements must be deleted and replaced with statements such as "We did this or we did that and certain results followed."
   In addition, the doctor felt the presentation of God was far too dogmatic and the constant mention of being "shown by God" was entirely too much Oxfordism." All of this had to be significantly toned down and made much more broadly spiritual...

   ...John B., a former A.A. Archivist for the state of New Jersey, recently did come excellent research, which unearthed the fact that in 1939, the thirty-eight-year-old Dr. James Wainwright Howard was working at Montclair's Mountainside Hospital) a substantial facility with 330 beds at the time) as an Assistant Attending Psychiatrist, a position he held from 1934 to 1941. More than any other candidate, this Dr, James Wainwright Howard meets almost all the known criteria and appears to be the most likely candidate for the Dr. Howard who so carefully read the manuscript and then made his insightful suggestions for change.
   But whoever this "Dr. Howard" was, he did Alcoholics Anonymous an immeasurable service when he recommended removing all of the authoritarian language from the book and toning down the too obvious influence of the Oxford Group.

Page 563-567