Let’s be honest, George Costanza was a pretty bad guy. Over the course of Seinfeld’s nine seasons, he lied, cheated, concocted a fake charity to scam co-workers out of holiday presents and cheaped out on wedding invitations, leading to his fiancée’s untimely death. Although, in fairness, the stationary store selling envelopes containing toxic glue should probably bear the brunt of the responsibility for that one.
But in recent years, some expert opinions have caused us to see George in a whole new light. For example, certain studies have supported his predilection for napping at work. And doctors have repeatedly backed up his claim that it’s 100 percent okay to pee in the shower.
But is it also possible that George could help us all better understand our own brains?
Writing in Psychology Today, clinical social worker and psychotherapist Phil Lane theorizes that “every one of us has some Costanza inside.” While George’s neuroses were obviously dialled up to 11 for Seinfeld, the core elements of his problems are very relatable to everyone.
To begin with, Lane says that George “possesses no shortage of self-doubt,” pointing to the episode in which he obsesses over the knowledge that Jerry’s masseuse girlfriend (played by Jennifer Coolidge) doesn’t like him. “Your ability to accept and cope with the idea that not every single person will like you is what makes you more adaptive and mature than George,” Lane explains.
George also clearly suffers from extremely low self-esteem. There are countless examples of this, but the article singles out the episode in which he refuses to accept his girlfriend’s “it’s not you, it’s me” excuse during a breakup, forcing her to admit that it is, in fact, him that’s the problem.
Lane outlines a number of different ways that we can learn from George, and avoid his mistakes, including remembering the value of self-compassion. “George is proof that when you tell yourself a negative narrative (‘I’m pathetic’) for long enough, it begins to feel factual and becomes more difficult to challenge or change,” Lane argues.
He also stresses that it’s not “healthy to rely on external validation” as George clearly does, and we should try not to see life in rigid terms. George routinely employs the “psychological defense mechanism” known as “splitting” which means that he sees the world in “rigid, all-or-nothing terms.” This is why George once reacted to a slight dissatisfaction with his own life by taking the wildly extreme step of opting to do the exact opposite of what his natural instincts tell him to.
“A more well-adjusted person may be able to identify some thoughts or behaviors that have not been in their best interest, without taking an all-or-nothing view,” Lane notes.
And we should all practice taking a more “mindful and reflective view” of our worries. George “tends not to really think through his responses to his worry and anxiety.” Otherwise, he probably would have been able to come to the conclusion that God wouldn’t punish him with a terminal illness for writing a successful sitcom.
And although the article doesn’t mention this specifically, anyone interested in therapy probably shouldn’t spend their sessions obsessing over a zipper.
Source link
-
-
-
-
