Criticizing Gurdjieff seems to produce shock in some people, often those with the least connection to any aspect of his so-called teaching. Part of the reason is the extreme authoritarian aura of the whole teacher/disciple mindset generated by the framework.
That authority is a rabbit pulled out of a hat and has no basis in objective reality, beyond the archaic traditions of general guruism which belong more in the age of monarchy than in modern culture. The whole thing is unnecessary. It would be easy to recast these ancient spiritualities in a form that could go three quarters of the way for people, so to speak, and leave their autonomy intact. But the establishments of ancient authority won’t support that.
So it is important to work outside such frameworks, alone. That is not the best situation, but it is the only one that the vast majority of people have. These ‘schools’ are mostly a fiction created to keep people searching and ignorant and hungry. The authoritarianism in Gurdjieff’s framework is extreme, unreasonably so, and belongs to a lost age. And noone can profit from it in the period we find ourselves in. Consider the facts, three bungled jobs with Ouspensky, Orage, Bennett, because of the unreasonable demands made on them. Such authority games are very destructive for students, and totally counterproductive. And they are unnecessary, worse, they destroy spiritual potential.