Quote

As I come to the end of this letter, I'm scared that you won't like me when I take my column to the next level. I'm scared, too, that you will expect me to be amazing - more amazing than I can possibly be - because I have leveled with you and because I am a graduate of the Landmark Forum.

Why would readers expect someone to be "amazing" (more amazing than one can possibly be) because one is a graduate of the Landmark Forum? Most people I know have never heard of it. The ones who have think their friends sound a little wacky when trying to sell it -- not "amazing."

Glam

Re: "amazing" - just another example of that strange self-importance and ego cropping up.

Dear all:
As a regular reader of Ms. Marble's work, I can attest that the big deal you all are making about this column is unwarranted. If any of you read this writer on a regular baiss - and it is obvious from your posts that you do not - you would understand the point of her columns. She writes personal essays (i.e. the first-person "egocentric" tone - I don't find them egocentric, but I'm quoting from one of these posts). She writes about stepping out and doing weird things and then telling her readers about them. There's ain't much weirder than going to a Landmark Forum weekend. I'm rather appalled at the lack of courtesy in these posts, and it could be because you all aren't professional writers, so deem it necessary to take down someone who is. The woman knows what she's doing, otherwise, she wouldn't be getting published in a print newspaper. (Which, you must distinguish from postings on the web, in blogs and even in on line "magazines.") Print products have certain standards, and Ms. Marble meets them as a writer, or she wouldn't get a hearing from an editor. Primarily, however, reading through these pages about this column, all I can think is that you all need to read the rest of her work to get the "point" of her Landmark column. If you are familiar with the writer's work, you know where she's coming from and the column is not misread. In addition, the publication for which she writes assumes the readers are well-educated and intelligent, because of the demographics of that particular community - it is highly doubtful anyone reading Marble's column would rush out and sign up for Landmark. Take a breath, dear people, and relax a little.

Hello,

I have been following this thread since shortly after it began, but sinceI have had no direct experiences with the Landmark Forum, I have remained on the sidelines. However, over the past few days the focus of many of the posts has become something I know a great deal about -- the aforementioned columnist. I am her brother and a regular reader of her column. For what it is worth, I am also somewhat of a professional skeptic. Thanks in large part to Carl Sagan, I am an astronomer, and my well-worn copy of "The Demon-Haunted World" sits with all of his other books on my bookshelf.

I fully realize that it is generally unwise to get involved with a large group of like-minded people when they appear to already be convinced that they are right and are passionate about their cause. However, I suspect that this describes only the vocal minority of this forum, albeit the majority of posters on this thread. I do not question any of the experiences alluded to here, nor the authority of others on the topic of the Landmark Forum, nor their sincere desire to protect others from similar fates. However, on the altogether different topic of this thread, I am in a unique position to alleviate the concerns of those who truly want to be alleviated and debunk the aggregiously misinformed statements of others. I don't honestly expect to change the opinions of some of the posters, but I obviously cannot in good conscience stand by and watch a group of strangers personally attack my own sister.

An initial (and seemingly lingering) concern of this thread has been whether or not the columnist in question has been wittingly or unwittingly brainwashed by her attendance of the Landmark Forum weekend seminar. This is not the case (on either count). She didn't even mention her weekend experience until I asked about it later. To paraphrase (hopefully accurately), she said there were some interesting ideas in the mix, but frankly nothing all that profound. I would have thought that her lack of interest in continuing with the group would have convinced anyone of this fact, but regardless, you have now heard it from a real live person who actually knows her and sees her on a regular basis. This may seem a bit unfair to anyone who feels they were taken advantage of and harmed by this group, but the fact is that my sister has an enviously strong sense of self which is largely immune to the whims of any external group (be it the Landmark Forum or a forum opposed to the Landmark Forum).

A less informed but more offensive subject matter has been the discussion of her journaliism. This is extremely unfortunate because I have a difficult time imagining that there is anyone in her profession with more integrity. Those who know Laura, know a kind, compassionate, inteligent, and thoroughly honest person, which comes across in her writing. I invite anyone who doubts this to do a little research before saying otherwise again (you can start by reading the other columns in this series, but by all means continue on with the rest since it is all freely available on the web). Laura has already discussed this particular column in this thread. I'm afraid that anyone who doesn't think her words add up is doing more interpreting than listening. When you feel strongly about something, it is only reasonable that it will color what you see and hear, but please try not to transfer your own experiences onto those of others. This column series (regarding stepping outside of your normal boundaries or comfort zone and seeing what can be learned in the process) has proven quite popular, and deserves a less prejudiced treatment than it has received here.

I have said enough and have hopefully set the record straight. If for not, at least I have stood up for a good person. I admit, that as her brother, some of the posts have really angered me. That has made me appreciate all the more Laura's willingness to converse with you and yet not be baited into returning some of the uglines (by some, not all of course). In registering for this forum, I noticed that amonst the rules and disclaimers the following sentence is highlighted in bold: 'So-called "flames," vitriolic posts that personally attack people, will not be tolerated and are grounds for banning the author from this message board.' This is followed by: 'Any person that is here to cause trouble, start arguments and/or intimidate people, will be quickly banned.' The column in question was of legitimate interest to members of this forum; however, the thread has since become a vehicle for personally attacking the author despite her many overtures. In the interest of protecting the integrity of this forum, I ask that members simply move on to another topic. Hurtful words cannot be taken back, but they can be stopped. If the administrator happens to read my post, allow me to suggest that this thread has become suffiiciently mean-spirited to warrant being removed from the online forum.

Thank you for your consideration, and I wish you well

Quote

Dear all:
As a regular reader of Ms. Marble's work, I can attest that the big deal you all are making about this column is unwarranted. If any of you read this writer on a regular baiss - and it is obvious from your posts that you do not - you would understand the point of her columns. She writes personal essays (i.e. the first-person "egocentric" tone - I don't find them egocentric, but I'm quoting from one of these posts). She writes about stepping out and doing weird things and then telling her readers about them. There's ain't much weirder than going to a Landmark Forum weekend. I'm rather appalled at the lack of courtesy in these posts, and it could be because you all aren't professional writers, so deem it necessary to take down someone who is. The woman knows what she's doing, otherwise, she wouldn't be getting published in a print newspaper. (Which, you must distinguish from postings on the web, in blogs and even in on line "magazines.") Print products have certain standards, and Ms. Marble meets them as a writer, or she wouldn't get a hearing from an editor. Primarily, however, reading through these pages about this column, all I can think is that you all need to read the rest of her work to get the "point" of her Landmark column. If you are familiar with the writer's work, you know where she's coming from and the column is not misread. In addition, the publication for which she writes assumes the readers are well-educated and intelligent, because of the demographics of that particular community - it is highly doubtful anyone reading Marble's column would rush out and sign up for Landmark. Take a breath, dear people, and relax a little.

I thought that the article by Laura Marble read like a shill adverstisement for Landmark Education, through and through, and was not very professional. If she had wanted to present a better view, she could have discussed or touched on the lawsuits over the years, suppression of Freedom of Speech currently going on on the internet, the obvious ties to Werner Erhard and the EST Training, and the claims from some critics that Landmark is a "cult" or "cult-like", not to mention the two investigations by the United States Federal Department of Labor and one by the Federal Department of Labor in France for unpaid labor practices.

Why, even the Reuters article about the video Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus, mentions that:

[ca.today.reuters.com]

Quote

Landmark, which was founded in 1991, is a descendant of the 1970s motivational guru Werner Erhard's EST training seminars.

And I would imagine that Reuters is more highly publicized than Laura Marble's publication.

Quote
godscribe
Dear all:
As a regular reader of Ms. Marble's work, I can attest that the big deal you all are making about this column is unwarranted. If any of you read this writer on a regular baiss - and it is obvious from your posts that you do not - you would understand the point of her columns. She writes personal essays (i.e. the first-person "egocentric" tone - I don't find them egocentric, but I'm quoting from one of these posts). She writes about stepping out and doing weird things and then telling her readers about them. There's ain't much weirder than going to a Landmark Forum weekend. I'm rather appalled at the lack of courtesy in these posts, and it could be because you all aren't professional writers, so deem it necessary to take down someone who is.

Nahhh, godscribe. That ain't it. This is an animated place. We're not jealous of people who get paid to write. We're just wary of people who seem to be defending or promoting Landmark or encouraging others to go. Werner Erhard and his pals have made lots of money off the "curious" and the gullible and turned more than a couple of skeptical journalists into unpaid spokespeople. He's sitting in the Cayman Islands laughing his head off at all the fools who think his "programs" have something to offer. They're just as ~empty & meaningless~ as they claim life itself to be. Oh sure, they "decorate" the place with a few profound-sounding bits and pieces they've picked up over the years and some rather amateur basic psychology, but at its core, Landmark is just a hollow sham and a rip-off.

Quote

The woman knows what she's doing, otherwise, she wouldn't be getting published in a print newspaper. (Which, you must distinguish from postings on the web, in blogs and even in on line "magazines.") Print products have certain standards, and Ms. Marble meets them as a writer, or she wouldn't get a hearing from an editor. Primarily, however, reading through these pages about this column, all I can think is that you all need to read the rest of her work to get the "point" of her Landmark column. If you are familiar with the writer's work, you know where she's coming from and the column is not misread. In addition, the publication for which she writes assumes the readers are well-educated and intelligent, because of the demographics of that particular community - it is highly doubtful anyone reading Marble's column would rush out and sign up for Landmark. Take a breath, dear people, and relax a little.

Gee, I have two college degrees and I couldn't tell whether she was writing of her experience in glowing terms or tongue-in-cheek.

Which "god" is the one to whom or of whom you write, if you don't mind saying? And by that I don't mean the conventional one or some variant, but the brand-name of your particular religious persuasion. And how much have you investigated this group, if at all? Imagine if she had come back from a scientology week-end and written about it as "fun & interesting."


Thanks for your input,

Ellen

Quote
astrobro
I'm afraid that anyone who doesn't think her words add up is doing more interpreting than listening. When you feel strongly about something, it is only reasonable that it will color what you see and hear...

I suppose none of us is immune...and who, astrobro, is not listening? :roll:

Astrobro,

Thanks for your post. I appreciate some things you said, and agree. I also want to say that many people on this board, myself included, have had their lives torn apart thanks to LGATs, so it's an (understandable) sore spot for us. Additionally, people here are (very) knowledgeable about how LGATs operate (lie) and know that because such knowledge is not common LGATs have a pretty easy time conning people. It's hard to see it happen. This is not to excuse behavior that is rude, but to add another perspective. Also, it's true, not everyone gets sucked up, at least not to the degree that some of us and/or our family & friends did. Hopefully that's the case for your sister. LGATs are very seductive, and are quite masterful in the arts of persuasion and deception. Therefore, being informed and educated can be a good vaccine. This board has been very helpful for me in my attempts to learn and understand the true nature of LGATs.

All the best to you,

skeptic

Hmmmm.

I went back and re-read the article.

And it still sounds like a long ad/PR piece for Landmark.

"It's a three-day seminar that teaches you through direct, personal discovery how to create breakthroughs in your life."

Sounds like an endorsement.

"Part of the forum is to write a letter to someone with whom you have been inauthentic. The other part is to invent an inspiring future based on what is real."

Landmark gobbledy-gook.

"The possibility I have invented for myself and my life is the possibility of being genuine."

Landmarkese to the extreme. Now, if you were writing to an audience of people who pooh-pooh Landmark...us, for example...we might get a chuckle thinking you're poking fun at the insider language. But the article is written to a general audience, so this sounds sincere (if nonsensical).

And, of course,

"I'm scared, too, that you will expect me to be amazing - more amazing than I can possibly be - because I have leveled with you and because I am a graduate of the Landmark Forum."

The rest of the letter sounds like what a "graduate" would be assigned for "homework" (in fact, the author refers to this in the opening: "Part of the forum is to write a letter to someone with whom you have been inauthentic")...so this column is actually a typical Landmark homework assignment, only this author has the good luck to be paid for doing this homework, and her homework reaches a wider audience than the average "grad's." Of course, the real reason for a "graduate" to write a letter to someone with whom they've been "inauthentic" is to convince them to attend the Forum. And that comes across in this letter, though it isn't a hard sell.

I think what most of us here are upset with is that this sounds like an endorsement of the Forum. And since the author shared none of the "research" she conducted about the "controversy" before attending, it comes off sounding like a perfectly benign and pleasant way to spend a weekend.

For those of us who've had loved ones hurt by/sucked in by Landmark, this seems irresponsible.

Glam

I do wonder how this column sounds to the "uninitiated". Does it sound like an ad? Does it sound like non-sense? To the average reader who is not knowledgeable about LGATs and to those who know LGATs through [i:993d915579]direct [/i:993d915579]experience it seems as if it might read as two different columns.

Now that's something to consider, anthropologically-speaking.

skeptic