The house is typical of a normal child’s intelligence. The scalloped pattern on the house gives it an effeminate, child-like quality; the bushes lean back from the edge like a child’s fold-over drawing. The face-like appearance of the front of the house is typical of children’s drawings and the doorknob shows a child-like dependency.
It is interesting to note that the house and flower drawings appear flat, lacking depth, while the angular figures show a developed depth-perception. This particular house drawing is typical of a child of eight or nine years. The relatively high roof shows much fantasy thought, but extroversion is indicated. Considerable defensiveness is shown in the extremely high fence behind the house.
That feature as well as some elevation of ground in the background strongly suggests that the mother is perceived as an especially protective, dominant figure. The lines cutting across the sidewalk would normally indicate a defensiveness, but they are not especially important here because they are relativelylight. More emphasis is given to other features–the chimney and the bushes.
A curious feature appears in relation to the guarded characteristics of the house drawing. This is shown in the rows of shrubs, which were carefully placed along the sides of the walkway leading to the house. Frequently in such drawings, the number of bushes, trees, or windows indicates the number of persons in the family. In this drawing there are fourteen such shrubs lining the walk.
Could these shrubs represent Karen Kingston and her thirteen other personalities? That this characteristic appears in only one drawing dictates the utmost caution in suggesting such an interpretation. Therefore, I was nearly shocked to find the pattern repeated in the first drawing of the flower. Precisely fourteen leaves adorn the three stems. Too much for a coincidence, these features must certainly represent the expression of an inner awareness–something that perhaps even Karen Kingston herself could not know–that she may be a host to thirteen other personalities!
The vertical slant of Hugh’s writing, Chapter 10, gives it a very different appearance, but that is not adequate to say that it is a different handwriting. Only by evaluating the total personality can a conclusion be reached as to the overall differences, their number, and the degree of divergence. The overall effect of this personality is not unlike that of Elizabeth, Chapter 8, although the specific pattern of characteristics is quite different. Easily angered, sarcastic and deceptive, this writer is equally hostile and remote as Elizabeth, Chapter 8, but more aloof as shown by the vertical slant.
The writing appears to be moderately fast and there is a decided emphasis on simplicity and directness as shown by the abbreviated letter forms without beginning strokes (f, h, k, l, t). The well spaced lines and even margins, as well as the balanced upper and lower loops (see the letter f), shows a high degree of organization-a desire to create order out of disorder–which is likely to be frustrated by the overall destructive nature of the personality.
Unusual verbal fluency is indicated, which is a tool of a seemingly cool and carefree disposition. Given to rationalization and deception as a cloak of forthrightness, this personality would say anything to avoid criticism and disapproval. Some evidence from this handwriting suggests a rejection of someone close.
Although we cannot know exactly who has been rejected, an informed guess might be the mother. Such evidence as this may be one explanation for the splitting away of consciousness into segregated entities. The awareness of a rejection of one for whom there is such a pronounced need is certain to establish a powerful conflict in the mind of a child–a conflict that could easily overwhelm the impressionable seven-year old, virtually destroying the child’s mind. The loss of a parent at this stage of psychosexual development is especially disruptive to the child’s emotional well being.