Two-way communication is the first step in getting a pc into session. DIANETICS 55, p.56, points this out: "The maintenance of two-way communication is actually a process in itself, and is the first and most basic process of Dianetics, and continues on through all the remaining processes."

   It is comparable to the first requirement given by Carl Rogers for therapeutic change; establishing a relationship. Without such a relationship, with its lively exchanges, no result can be expected.

   In my experience as a pc, I feel that two-way comm has been slighted. In 1955, in Chicago, I was run through the 6 steps of DIANETICS 55. I had to sit down and answer such questions as: "What wouldn't you mind remembering?" and "What wouldn't you mind forgetting?"

   I do not recall being acknowledged, and at the time my main concern was somehow to answer the question in such a way that the auditor would stop asking it. I did not tell the auditor this, and did not feel free to do so.

   Looking back, it was a dramatization of what I did in school: please the teacher with a "right" answer that would get the teacher to stop asking the question.

   I had no cognitions and it was a grind. If I had been able to discuss what we were going to do and get the area to bite, things could have been very different.

   When doing SOP-8C, the wall I was looking at suddenly started to shake. I felt a wooden apathy, but did not have the energy to mention this to the auditor. Such a reaction, pause, gasp, etc. should have been taken as an origination and handled.

   I have had similar events happen enough times so that I feel something is missing. Even with a St. Hill graduate doing the white form, when I was asked to name my brothers and sisters (all 9 of them!), I felt reluctant to do this, but did not feel free to tell the auditor how I felt.

   And since this form was to be gone through just for reads (method 5), I didn't feel I could take the time to blow the surface charge on these items. I would have preferred to handle  these as they came up (method 3).

   On an LX-1 list, I froze-up on "driven out," but again didn't feel like I could mention this. Although it was picked up later on an "anything been suppressed?" I felt strongly that I should have been alert and communicative  enough  to originate my freeze-up.
   I've been told that it was not important that I didn't share my difficulty, but feel that I should have been able to if I was in real comm with the auditor.

   There is another area that is difficult to talk about because of its vagueness. It consists of feeling "strugglely," with a dash of "cosmic exasperation," a pinch of "You can't be serious!" "This doesn't make sense!" a vague sense of puzzlement, a bit of "Go to hell." and an unknown unreality.

   Since this has been so hard to articulate, I'm inclined to consider it "unimportant" and just skip it. But it has the properties of engrammic material. I can flounder around with it on my e-meter (with action), but I doubt if an auditor could help me with it. He would probably slide into a rote grade level repetitive question so fast I'd lose it. I'm not being polite, but I think I'm being real.

   These have been my experiences as a passive pc who just followed orders. This does not promote gain, and I direct your attention to a missing gradient: an open relationship between the auditor and pc with the pc feeling that his commuication is welcomed, accepted, and carefully understood.

   In Operational Bulletin No.9 (19 Dec 55), under "New Auditing Style," p.314, Tech Vol II:

   "Every time the pc tended to go out of session even slightly, .. I assumed at once that something had gone wrong .. had been said he didn't understand .. had been overlooked .. had been done in error on the two-way comm formula, and immediately researched this fact to put the session straight again."

   "I .. have even gone so far as to run an auditing session which was nothing more than an auditing session to demonstrate that an auditing session with the two-way communication consequent to it would result in increased tone for the preclear. .. this also results in increased tone for the auditor."

   The above could have been entitled, "The Missing Gradient, or the establishing and maintaining of live communication."

   On SHSBC tape #232, "TR-0 Lecture," 6302C16, Ron says that the auditor should look alive. To this I would add that not only should the auditor look alive, but both he and the pc should be alive. An index of this is a lively and continuing two-way communication.