6108C24 SHSpec-45 Rudiments A valence does not respond well to rudiments processing, since the rudiments are addressed to changing the conditions of the valence. That's a limitation of ruds. That's one reason it's tough to keep the rudiments in. It's next to impossible, since the characteristics of the valence are not owned by the PC. None of the valence's postulates are his postulates. How do you get around this? The functional ruds processes are those which can shift or lighten valences. The PC long ago lost faith in himself as himself and adopted other beingnesses. He reposed his hopes for survival in these other beingnesses, and cannot change the conditions of these other beingnesses. He's unpredictable to himself because of the valence. A problem process or Routine 1A would have a prayer of handling this situation, because all valences are accepted by the PC as solutions to some overwhelming problems. That's why Routine 1A works. Every rudiments process that separates valences will tend to work. You can also use TR-1C just to get him in comm with the environment. Otherwise, what will you do? You'd have to clear him to get ruds in; you have to get ruds in to clear him. TR 10 would help, but very slowly. So a good valence process for getting in ruds would be, "Who can/can't be audited in this room?" or "What could/couldn't be done in this room?" Also, "Who should you be to be audited?" or "Who should I be to audit you?" These processes key the valences out temporarily. It's an uphill action, but it does shake up or remedy havingness on valences. Withholds caused him to pick up valences, so withholds work on valences pretty directly. But you should whipsaw the withhold question around in ruds in the effort to make the PC able to talk to the auditor, not just willing to talk. So see if the PC feels able to talk to you or unable to and why. If it is sticky, find W-W would be able to communicate with an auditor. Finding the PC's havingness process can help somewhat. A common denominator of valences is matter, energy, space, and time, so any approach to MEST (e.g. havingness) has some slight power of shifting a valence. The only way a PC can get upset with you on a Sec Check is to leave something incomplete by bypassing a question with something still on it. You'll lose the PC's respect, lose your altitude. You should always tell the PC the question is hot, so that even if you do leave it unflat, the PC knows you know so there's no missed withhold. If you can't strip down a question by the end of a session, let the PC know that you know it's not clean. If you let him go with the impression that you have let him get away with something, he'll be ARC broken and hard to control. Interestingly, despite the games condition, the PC knows that when you lose, he loses. So use prompter-type questions to get the PC really able to talk to the auditor. On "Who would I have to be to audit you?" and "What are you doing?", you may find the PC doing something else than following the command. What you want to find out is whether the PC is willing to be a PC and follow the commands, or is he going to add something else to it? During session, you may observe the PC doing something a bit odd, so you should use some little rudiment like, "What are you doing?" or "Are you willing to be audited?" A PC doesn't mind being nagged. It's all interest, all havingness. When it gets grindy in auditing, find out what the PC is doing and what is happening. You have to avoid upsetting a PC who is interiorized but if he's all snarled up in something about the session, you'd better handle it. Also, pcs sometimes do self-audit, so, especially with an old time auditor, ask, "Which process you were auditing yourself on is unflat?" If it's very difficult to keep the ruds in, ask yourself if you are real to the PC or if he feels there's something else in the session he knows nothing about. For instance, let the PC know if you missed lunch and that it's OK, etc. It's up to the auditor to make himself real to the PC. When the R-factor starts to break, the PC will start to ask the auditor a question about the auditor. This shows he's out of session. The fastest way to handle the R-factor is to put in the R. It's almost always all right with the PC. When the R disappears, it's because the auditor is out of session. The PC frequently notices it and may well comment. Then the auditor had better put it right at once. It comes as a surprise to the auditor to learn that he should be real with the PC. All the rules seem to indicate that he should be unreal. But there has to be a person auditing the PC.