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.