Rescue Me
What a powerful phrase. Rescue me. Really hits internal, emotional chords, doesn’t it? In reading the headline “Rescue Me,” was there part of you that thought, “does he need help?” When writing it, is this something I wish to proclaim, or is it something I’m hauntingly hearing from others?
Even as a standalone word, “rescue” holds a strong resonance. Whether it be as a lingering voice in one’s head, or as a resounding utterance of someone in need, rescue is inextricably provocative and enchanting. I’m continually feeling called to unpack the larger complexity of what’s called rescue.
The concept of rescue can seem simple, but it runs deeper than what appears on the surface. What is it? What’s its purpose? Are we meant to rescue? Are we meant to be rescued? I can surely tell you a number of stories of rescue that are melancholically beautiful, littered with poignant messages. It has its place in life and living.
For some, it’s elusive. For others, it can be a blanket principle: One must rescue, when/if one can.
Full Moon on Monday
I enjoy acknowledging the moon cycle, exploring layered meaning to what’s happening. Some months I have curiosity around what familiar astrologers have to say about the upcoming full moon. Although sometimes I like to go into a full moon without hearing any thoughts about what it might symbolize. This month I took the latter approach. I wanted to see what naturally came up for me.
In the afternoon I was taking a shower, which happened to be when the moon was fullest. A memory showed up for me of a time when I saved a little boy from drowning in a lake. He was just a toddler, tumbling unexpectedly from the elevated grass. Within a matter of seconds, he was floating face down, appearing lifeless on the water. I jumped from my boat, thrusting through the water and scooped him up safely to shore. I’ll never forget it.
This was an incredible instance. One that stands above all other measures of time and experience.
When talking about rescuers or rescuing, I think there’s an important distinction to make around what’s considered an acute instance versus a chronic pattern. Any of us can have a recollection of an acute instance of rescuing or being rescued, like the story I shared here. Such occurrences can be an entry point into further understanding what it’s like to continually harness the energy of the rescuer.
Relativity, and the Perception of Doing Good
To rescue is a good thing, right? Well, it certainly does feel good in many situations. But let’s try to move beyond whether it’s good or bad. How can we view this with another framing? When you look at how rescue plays out in a scenario, from the vantage point of the rescuer, the perception is skewed. What does it look like when we zoom out beyond the perceived experience of the individual?
Not sure if “rescue” can be inherently neutral, as it appears to always be relative to something else. What would truly determine the “goodness” of a rescue? Is it based on immediate outcome? What about measuring the outcome at a later point? What if the “rescue” ends up altering the individual’s path negatively later down the line?
Thing is, most rescuers are going to deem their intentions and actions as good. But from what measure, and from what vantage point. This is really just me exploring some free association questions here. Historically, I’ve been in favor of rescue, yet feel it’s helpful to ponder. As I contemplate this topic, I believe there’s value for the rescuer to explore broader framing and multiple perspectives.
Givers, Takers, and Boundary Makers
I was talking with a friend today, and she shared a story about a loved one and a precarious situation they’re having with a family member. Upon hearing the details of the story, I could easily see some clear contextual overlay. It was as if the characters were doing a dance, consciously or unconsciously, in step with a given model. For me, the experience of the two individuals registered as trauma bonding.
A common attachment dynamic is when there appears to be a “giver” and a “taker.” When a scenario arises with this dynamic, the on-lookers (who are often unwitting witnesses) subsequently form a triad from that dyad. As the dyad is witnessed, the observer tends to assign names and meaning to roles being played out. When tensions mount, it’s common to view the “taker” as villainous, whereas the “giver” is seen as being victimized.
How accurate is this framing? While there may even be ample evidence to support this assertion, it can be debated whether or not it’s capital-T True. When are labels and identifiers helpful and when do they become self-fulfilling prophecies? When does such assertion encroach upon one’s own justification of one’s actions? Where does a discernment over-step to judgement?
This could signal as to where one is to set a boundary. Where does the observer stay in secure attachment, without activating the “rescuer” energy that may be stirred up from this scenario.
Karpman’s Drama Triangle
Alluding to the triangulation that can occur when witnessing trauma bonding, I refer to Karpman’s Drama Triangle. In 1968, psychiatrist Stephen Karpman proposed this social model of human interaction. I find it illuminating for understanding one’s role when determining one’s role in moments of strife or ongoing conflict.
As described by Karpman, the triangulation consists of the designation of three main roles. Consisting of: the victim (who feels oppressed and helpless), the persecutor/villain (who blames and criticizes), and the rescuer (who tries to save the day). Most individuals can think of instances when they’ve played each of those roles (or accused of playing one of those roles).
You can develop some pattern recognition about the Drama triangle. Most often, a drama triangle arises when a person takes on the role of a villain or victim. That initial person then usually designates who their counterpart is: the victim names a villain, or the persecutor/villain points to someone whose playing victim. A rescuer then completes the triangle, either by being encouraged or enlisted into the conflict or by choosing to save the day without being asked.
I find the Drama Triangle to be an extremely relatable model to use when looking at interpersonal dynamics. It really gives insight to what role each individual might be playing when tensions or conflicts arise. Therefore, making it a useful tool in understanding conflict dynamics and potentially assisting resolution.
Plight of the Rescuer
I’ve been on the verge of tears all day. Today I’m feeling the rescuer energy so strongly that I feel like I can burst. It’s like I might implode if I don’t use it. It seems odd to say, and I’m not looking for soothing or consolation. It can be easy for another to say that it’s a sweet or just way of being, or kind for me to feel such a way.
But I’m not looking for consolation, I simply want to say it. To give some voice to it, and let it sit there for a while. I know I’m fortunate to even have the bandwidth to wonder about such a thing as rescuer energy. I know it can serve a purpose in those acute instances, as I’ve witnessed those miracles. It’s more about what to do with it during those countless minutes in between. When it’s not meant to be cultivated, nor ignored out of fear of implosion.
Maybe it’s some type of caressing tempering. Some transmutation of the impulse to save, saving others and saving for the greater good. A bridling of a flame. A muted light. Maybe that’s it, some type of mutable light. Not in need to shine, just there whether seen or unseen, used or unused. Neither inert nor explosive. Just there.