I'm curious to learn what they mean by this odd statement in the promo material:

"With Bill as its driving force, A.A. grew from a handful of men to a worldwide fellowship of over 2 million men and women a success that made him an icon within A.A., but also an alcoholic unable to be a member of the very society he had created."

Huh?

Indeed, JH. By the mid-1940s the founder status of Bill W. was wearing on him. He sometimes longed to be just a regular ole member of AA. This October 1947 Grapevine article by Bill captures the dynamics of his blessing/curse. There is a LOT of structural AA in this article.

 

WHY CAN'T WE JOIN A.A. TOO !

DEAR AA's:

Dr. Bob and I have a problem. We'd like to share it frankly with you.

In actuality, A.A. has a score of "founders," men and women without whose

special contributions A.A. might never have been. But somehow the title,

"founder," seems to have attached itself almost solely to Dr. Bob and mea

phenomenon due perhaps to the general lack of information about our early

days. This sentiment, though it prompts AA's to set us somewhat apart from the

whole, is deeply affecting to us both. We surely have more reasons for

gratitude than anyone in the world. But we are beginning to ask ourselves if

this over-emphasis will be good for A.A. in the long run. Is so much sentiment

for "the founders" entirely wise?

Perhaps we AA's can become a new kind of human society. To a degree

hitherto unknown, A.A. may be able to function upon the power of its own

fundamental principles rather than upon the prestige or inspiration of a highly

personalized leadership. Thus the whole can become of transcending

importance over any part; continued unity and success can then mostly depend

upon God's working vitally in thousands of hearts rather than a few.

Deep down, I think we AA's have begun to sense this magnificent

possibility. The widening conviction that active leadership ought to be

transitory and rotating; that each A.A. Group with respect to its own affairs

needs be accountable only to its own conscience; that our committees and

boards are really servants, not officials; that we, as a movement, ought to

remain poor, so avoiding the risks of disrupting wealth; that as individual

members of A.A. we should remain anonymous before the general public

these are the signs and portents of a unique future. Such concepts certainly

leave little room for a prestige-clothed leadership.

"But," some will say, "how shall we make such a vision actually work when

most societies have to rely so greatly on management, money, and heavily-

publicized leadership exercising powerful personal suasion? Yet incredibly, we

are beginning to see our vision come alive. Even though we persist in looking

with misgiving on any large accumulation of money or personal prestige in the

name of Alcoholics Anonymous, we do continue to grow despite the absence

of these things, necessary though they often are, to other human endeavors.

 

Why is this possible? Is it because we are a superior people? Well, hardly!

Far from being better than average, we are surely much more fallible. Strangely

enough, our group strength seems to stem from our individual and ever

potential weakness. We are alcoholics. Even though now recovered, we are

never too far removed from the possibility of fresh personal disaster. Each

knows he must observe a high degree of honesty, humility, and tolerance, or

else drink again. For us of A.A. to drink is to die; to love God and fellow man

is to live.

Under such potent conditions the impossible has become possible. When

each AA's life literally depends upon his unselfish service to others, when

false pride, self pity, or unhealthy self-seeking is almost certain to be

unmercifully chastised by John Barleycorn, he needs but a minimum of man-

made rules or inspired leaders to hold him on the right course. Nor for long is

he apt to continue anything harmful to A.A. unity. He knows so well that we

AA's shall have to hang togetheror else hang separately! At

first living the spiritual life because he must, he presently lives so because he wants

to. Such is the truly Providential circumstance in which we all find ourselves;

that is why we are beginning to see new values in A.A. We perceive in our

midst a spiritual realm which can be little disturbed by the distractions of

wealth or self-serving egocentricity.

Against this background let's have another look at Dr. Bob and me.

Seemingly, the larger A.A. grows, the more our particular part in its creation

and continuance tends to be emphasized. Our status remains exceptional. Nearly

all other early AA's have long since slipped over to the "sidelines" where, if

they have retained the confidence of all, they are frequently consulted. By

common consent they have become unofficial coaches, reservoirs of longer

experience, to be sought out in the pinches. Their Alma Mater is now served by

new teams. Those too will have their day on the field, then finally retire. This is,

we think, as it ought to be.

Dr. Bob and I feel this sound doctrine should apply to us as well. There

seems no good reason to make an exception of "the founders." The more we

early members continuously occupy the center of the A.A. stage the more we

shall set risky precedents for a highly personalized and permanent leadership.

To well insure AA's future, is this not the very thing we should carefully avoid?

Of course Dr. Bob and I do not want to ignore any special responsibility

remaining still upon us. Quite the contrary; our principal mission today is

probably that of helping A.A. form a sound Tradition. But how, for example,

can we advocate the traditional principle of rotating leadership if we allow the

belief to grow that we ought to be permanent exceptions ourselves? Of course

we cannot.

Take for instance, my own situation. It is known that my health is recently

improved; that I'm going to a large regional conference. Instantly come warm

but most urgent invitations to speak at gatherings all over. North America

even via phone and loud-speaker from New York. Most AA's being good

salesmen, the pressure on me is truly enormous.

While it's a wondeful feeling to be so much wanted, these bids do leave me in

the middle of an acute dilemmaa real heartbreaker. How, in fairness, can I

speak at ten anniversary dinners and refuse ninety; how can I make special

recordings or telephone talks for all these occasions? Or, again, how can I

respond to all the mail I receive; how can I advise hundreds of individuals and

groups about their special problems? It is a physical impossibility. Even though

I could somehow accomplish all these things, and so remain in the center of

A.A. affairs indefinitely, would that be best for A.A. in the long run? Surely

you will agree; it would not.

So the problem of Dr. Bob and me comes down to this: We must take our

thousands of A.A. friends into our confidence and explain. Because we have to

decline their many invitations, we must ask their full understanding. We shall

somehow have to decide just what few things we are still specially fitted to do

for A.A. and, within the limits of our health, set about them.

For my part, I feel I ought to do much more writing: more A.A. Grapevine

pieces, more pamphlets and possibly a new book dealing with the vital matter of

A.A. unity. This material ought to be widely informative of our developing

Tradition and of the little undersood A.A. General Service Center. Occasionally

I would like to appear at the larger regional gatherings for the purpose of

discussing these matters with as many AA's as possible.

Over the next two or three years it will be desirable to broaden the base of

our General Service Center here at New York so that it can include a yearly

meeting of out-of-town AA's with the trustees of The Alcoholic Foundation, the

A.A. General Office staff, and The A.A. Grapevine editors, this is to be called

The General Service Conference of Alcoholics Anonymous. To help construct

such a Conference will be a real task which may eventually require us to visit a

number of our large A.A. centers the country over.

For the good of A.A. as a whole these seem the things most needful to be

done. If these projects are ever to be finished, I'm sure we can do little else. To

succeed we shall need real freedom of decision and few diversions. Hence we

beg your whole-hearted cooperation.

Though these assignments are still before us, Dr. Bob and I are now going to

confess a deep yearning. As private citizens of A.A., we shall often wish to

come and go among you like other people, without any special attention. And

while we would like always to keep the wonderful satisfaction of having been

among the originators, we hope you will begin to think of us as early AA's only,

and not as "founders."

So, why can't we join A.A., too!

As Ever,

BILL

Hi all.

Yes thanks Tanin. I checked in at just the right time. Principles before personalities. Yet though Bill and Bob have gone, we still have leaders that are looked up to in various parts of the world.

Bill talked about conventional enterprises needing leaders and followers, and he did not want AA to go down that path.Yet we often do, though perhaps in a more localised fahsion. We have much admired "super" sponsors who exercise a degree of influence and control in the fellowship out of all proportion to their spiritual standing.

Why do we allow this? Maybe it is a form of subtle co-dependence,maybe it is a form of "worship" (of other things?). Maybe we are still putting our dependence on people and not God.

There is a lot of wisdom in the old timers retiring to the sidelines to let the new folk have a go.