To celebrate the 20th anniversary of the iconic 90s television show Dawson’s Creek, Entertainment Weekly Magazine reunited the cast and did a beautiful photoshoot.
I wanted to do the same thing, but James Van der Beek wouldn’t return my calls. So instead I decided to mark the occasion by writing this blog article about a phenomenon I’ve noticed for many years, in my clients and beyond. I call it the “Dawson versus Pacey Fallacy”.
If you had a television in the 90’s , you probably know that Dawson’s Creek was a gripping and dramatic story about smart teenagers who used big words. You probably also know that the central story in Dawson’s Creek centers around Joey Potter’s dilemma: find happily-ever-after with rough-around-the-edges Pacey Witter or with sincere boy-next-door Dawson Leery? For 6 seasons, she agonized. Dawson or Pacey? Pacey or Dawson? Jack? No, it turns out he’s gay, so back to… Dawson or Pacey?
But there are more options than Dawson versus Pacey
This could just as easily have been called the Angel versus Spike Fallacy. Or the Ross versus Joey Fallacy. Or the Alex versus Larry Fallacy. (Orange is the New Black, anyone?) But something about the depth of Joey’s dilemma really makes the idea of Dawson versus Pacey hit home for me.
I see this in my clients pretty often. Should I date Bill or Henry? Or, similarly, should I keep the job I have now, or apply to work at this other company? Should I major in physics or in history? Should we break up tomorrow or get engaged?
The fallacy lies in the idea that there are only two options when, in truth, there are limitless possibilities. Joey didn’t have to choose Dawson or Pacey – she could have developed a relationship with anyone in Capeside. Or she could have focused on her art, choosing not to pursue a relationship at all. Or, if everyone was on board, the three of them could have had a polyamorous V-shaped relationship.
(On second thought, Dawson would never have been on board… remember that drunken scene at his birthday party in season 2?)
I call it a fallacy for a reason.
The first office I ever worked in, at a low-fee clinic in Van Nuys, had this picture on the shelf:
When I saw it, I felt tears spring into my eyes. “People feel so stuck,” I thought, “but there’s a world of possibility they’re not even able to see.” I think of that caged bird often when my clients feel stuck. Sometimes, I think the most important part of my job is to help my clients pull their beaks out and look around.
Because there are never just two options. Think of the scenarios I mentioned earlier:
- There are dozens of companies you could consider working at, or you could start your own business, or even change careers!
- You can major in anything, and a lot of schools even let you build your own major! (The history of physics?) Or you can change schools if the one you’re at doesn’t feel satisfying.
- You don’t have to break up tomorrow or get married. You can go to couples therapy and work on building a relationship that feels stronger and more supportive. (And for goodness sake, if you’re asking this question, it’s a bad idea to get married right now… but that’s a whole different blog article.)
Considering more than 2 options can make you feel stuck, or unstuck.
Sometimes if you feel like there are only two choices, it’s because you’re in the process of wrestling with the easy or obvious choices rather than taking a great leap into the unknown. And that’s actually very human. But it may also be keeping you stuck.
Or, you may be looking at only two choices because broadening the spectrum of options makes you feel paralyzed by overwhelm. If there are two options, it’s 50/50. (That’s why people love shopping at Trader Joe’s!) But if there are limitless options, then that may also make you feel stuck from the feelings of pressure to choose.
After all, Dawson and Pacey are right there!! You’ve known them your whole life, and it feels safe to consider them as your main options. So by all means, consider them first.
But remember that the idea that there is only Dawson or Pacey is a fallacy.