Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0148
Peter F. Mullen
ABSTRACT The article explores how constructive developmental theory may explain the origin of the current political crisis and provide a long-term solution. Two levels of adult development rely on fundamentally different sources to make meaning. Each views its own way of meaning-making as correct and others as inauthentic. The lack of a common ground for dialogue has caused “epistemic chaos” and a seemingly intractable political stalemate dangerous to democracy. The first step toward a solution is to understand the problem and the resistance to change. The second is to provide lifelong, experiential education to foster human development. In the work world, deliberately developmental education is already occurring more widely than commonly realized, with encouraging results.
{"title":"Change and Immunity to Change: Personal and Political","authors":"Peter F. Mullen","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0148","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0148","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The article explores how constructive developmental theory may explain the origin of the current political crisis and provide a long-term solution. Two levels of adult development rely on fundamentally different sources to make meaning. Each views its own way of meaning-making as correct and others as inauthentic. The lack of a common ground for dialogue has caused “epistemic chaos” and a seemingly intractable political stalemate dangerous to democracy. The first step toward a solution is to understand the problem and the resistance to change. The second is to provide lifelong, experiential education to foster human development. In the work world, deliberately developmental education is already occurring more widely than commonly realized, with encouraging results.","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135654947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0169
Chris O’Malley
ABSTRACT The expression of certainty within a Gestalt clinical praxis has been unhelpfully discouraged. Expressing certainty has been aligned with abuses of power, while maintaining uncertainty has become a shibboleth of Gestalt thinking. This is theoretically unsound and potentially therapist-privileging, contributing to an amoral practitioner neutrality rather than an implicated, ethical responsibility. From a specific clinical encounter in which certainty is expressed, a basis is built to support how a Gestalt access to certainty might be understood and achieved with regard to knowledge and truth, beyond irrelevant imperatives of being right, or of implying permanence. Certainty is conceptualized to befit Gestalt’s field-theoretical paradigm, and the key theory of creative indifference is employed to critique the unipolar prioritizing of uncertainty. With support from Wittgenstein, it is argued that inhabiting certainty can demonstrate commitment and be an authentic manifestation of responsibility in a field paradigm, contributing to an ethical practice and a successful clinical outcome.
{"title":"Emergent Certainty and the Limits of Uncertainty: Expressing Certainty in a Gestalt Paradigm","authors":"Chris O’Malley","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0169","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0169","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The expression of certainty within a Gestalt clinical praxis has been unhelpfully discouraged. Expressing certainty has been aligned with abuses of power, while maintaining uncertainty has become a shibboleth of Gestalt thinking. This is theoretically unsound and potentially therapist-privileging, contributing to an amoral practitioner neutrality rather than an implicated, ethical responsibility. From a specific clinical encounter in which certainty is expressed, a basis is built to support how a Gestalt access to certainty might be understood and achieved with regard to knowledge and truth, beyond irrelevant imperatives of being right, or of implying permanence. Certainty is conceptualized to befit Gestalt’s field-theoretical paradigm, and the key theory of creative indifference is employed to critique the unipolar prioritizing of uncertainty. With support from Wittgenstein, it is argued that inhabiting certainty can demonstrate commitment and be an authentic manifestation of responsibility in a field paradigm, contributing to an ethical practice and a successful clinical outcome.","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"98 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135655245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0190
Patricia Norris
Miriam Taylor’s latest book was published during a time of global pandemic, climate emergency, cultural conflict, and resource inequality, so it is both timely and apposite. It is best read as a follow-up to her previous volume (2014), although readers new to the concepts discussed are provided with succinct summaries of the ideas underpinning the Gestalt approach and the neurobiological perspective on trauma. As Taylor readily acknowledges, many of her arguments are ones that have already been well-rehearsed in both Gestalt and non-Gestalt literature. The list of writers advocating an embodied, relational approach and a move away from an anthropocentric approach to an ecocentric one is long and distinguished. Yet, Taylor argues that psychotherapy practice and the structure of its provision frequently remain rooted in a Western, capitalist, individualist model.Adding her voice to those challenging this paradigm, Taylor urges us to make an “ecological turn” (4) and widen our understanding of not just the concept of trauma, but the embodied experience of it in our own lives. Foreground for her in this volume, she says, is the cultivation of “an embodied, almost second-nature felt sense” (9), in which theory is important but not necessarily figure. Complex and wide-ranging theoretical arguments calling for cognitive processing sit side by side with a demand to stop thinking and turn one’s focus to exploring embodied process. Accepting her invitation to leave temporarily the intellectual argument and prioritize embodied feelings rather than thoughts can be uncomfortable. Taylor’s metaphor of the Trickster aptly encapsulates the disorientation that ensues when habitual ways of thinking/seeing are disrupted, when everything is turned upside down and boundaries move. Trickster stories (Hyde 1983), retold at the beginning of each of the book’s three parts, speak to the way the disruptive intelligence of the Trickster expands the field and illuminates new perspectives. The image of a Möbius strip is used to illustrate the flow and connection between the shifting perspectives and experiences that we will be introduced to. In all three parts (Situating Trauma, The Space Between, and Ecological Perspectives), clinical examples and spaces for reflection encourage the reader to move from certainty to uncertainty, from cognitive understanding to felt experience. To facilitate the shift, the author continually moves among theoretical arguments, clinical examples, and practical experiments in a sequence described by Laura Perls (Rosenfeld 1988) thus: “First comes the awareness and then the de-automatizing and bringing it more into the foreground. . . and out of that develops experimentation in different directions” (22).In Part One (Situating Trauma), the focus is on raising awareness by contextualizing and exploring ways in which our society is organized around trauma. The evidence is all around us: migrant boats full of refugees, polarized and often violent pol
{"title":"Deepening Trauma Practice: A Gestalt Approach to Ecology and Ethics","authors":"Patricia Norris","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0190","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0190","url":null,"abstract":"Miriam Taylor’s latest book was published during a time of global pandemic, climate emergency, cultural conflict, and resource inequality, so it is both timely and apposite. It is best read as a follow-up to her previous volume (2014), although readers new to the concepts discussed are provided with succinct summaries of the ideas underpinning the Gestalt approach and the neurobiological perspective on trauma. As Taylor readily acknowledges, many of her arguments are ones that have already been well-rehearsed in both Gestalt and non-Gestalt literature. The list of writers advocating an embodied, relational approach and a move away from an anthropocentric approach to an ecocentric one is long and distinguished. Yet, Taylor argues that psychotherapy practice and the structure of its provision frequently remain rooted in a Western, capitalist, individualist model.Adding her voice to those challenging this paradigm, Taylor urges us to make an “ecological turn” (4) and widen our understanding of not just the concept of trauma, but the embodied experience of it in our own lives. Foreground for her in this volume, she says, is the cultivation of “an embodied, almost second-nature felt sense” (9), in which theory is important but not necessarily figure. Complex and wide-ranging theoretical arguments calling for cognitive processing sit side by side with a demand to stop thinking and turn one’s focus to exploring embodied process. Accepting her invitation to leave temporarily the intellectual argument and prioritize embodied feelings rather than thoughts can be uncomfortable. Taylor’s metaphor of the Trickster aptly encapsulates the disorientation that ensues when habitual ways of thinking/seeing are disrupted, when everything is turned upside down and boundaries move. Trickster stories (Hyde 1983), retold at the beginning of each of the book’s three parts, speak to the way the disruptive intelligence of the Trickster expands the field and illuminates new perspectives. The image of a Möbius strip is used to illustrate the flow and connection between the shifting perspectives and experiences that we will be introduced to. In all three parts (Situating Trauma, The Space Between, and Ecological Perspectives), clinical examples and spaces for reflection encourage the reader to move from certainty to uncertainty, from cognitive understanding to felt experience. To facilitate the shift, the author continually moves among theoretical arguments, clinical examples, and practical experiments in a sequence described by Laura Perls (Rosenfeld 1988) thus: “First comes the awareness and then the de-automatizing and bringing it more into the foreground. . . and out of that develops experimentation in different directions” (22).In Part One (Situating Trauma), the focus is on raising awareness by contextualizing and exploring ways in which our society is organized around trauma. The evidence is all around us: migrant boats full of refugees, polarized and often violent pol","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135655246","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0115
Jean-Marie Robine
ABSTRACT I do not like using the concept of relationship. Too wide, too vague. Of course, I know that a relationship can be healing, and I also know that every psychopathology has been created by relationship. So, step by step, I try to explore some components of the therapeutic relationship, which could narrow our focus and contribute to unfolding and understanding what happens in this specific face to face encounter. Intimate is an interesting concept because it belongs to both the innermost and a special kind of close way of being together. Perhaps, encounter might be considered as an extension of our paradigm of contact, when contact rises and grows between two people. Love is often referred to, in our therapeutic context. Is it an appropriate reference? What about tenderness, which seems to designate better a therapeutic attitude that does not exclude confrontation or distance. A few tracks that need to be pursued.
{"title":"Intimacy, Encounter, Tenderness . . .","authors":"Jean-Marie Robine","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0115","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT I do not like using the concept of relationship. Too wide, too vague. Of course, I know that a relationship can be healing, and I also know that every psychopathology has been created by relationship. So, step by step, I try to explore some components of the therapeutic relationship, which could narrow our focus and contribute to unfolding and understanding what happens in this specific face to face encounter. Intimate is an interesting concept because it belongs to both the innermost and a special kind of close way of being together. Perhaps, encounter might be considered as an extension of our paradigm of contact, when contact rises and grows between two people. Love is often referred to, in our therapeutic context. Is it an appropriate reference? What about tenderness, which seems to designate better a therapeutic attitude that does not exclude confrontation or distance. A few tracks that need to be pursued.","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135606738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0188
Peter Cole
Adam Kincel is a UK-based clinician, teacher, and researcher. His book Exploring Masculinity, Sexuality, and Culture in Gestalt Therapy contributes a unique integration of new research methodology (autoethnography), new philosophical influences (especially the work of Barad 2007), new concepts (such as collective gestalts), and new growth methodologies (such as working with large group experience to create dialogue around prejudice and hatred). His book is substantial in its breadth and depth and contains multiple layers of meaning and content. Kincel approaches his research and practice from a field-oriented, phenomenological perspective. Among his philosophical influences are the onto-epistemology of Barad, the phenomenology of Husserl and Merleau Ponty, the existentialism of Buber, and the dialogical approach of Gadamer.Key to Kincel’s integration is quantum physicist Barad’s (2007) concept of “agential intra-action.” Barad views phenomena from the perspective of “practice and actions.” Through the lens of practice and actions, we are simultaneously embedded in, and separate from, the relational matrix within which we exist. We are both connected and separate. This is a profoundly dialogical stance in which relationships—those between humans, those between humans and the natural world, and those that exist outside of human experience in the natural world—are at the core of reality. Barad’s is a process orientation in which all matter is interconnected, and those interconnections are at the heart of existence.In Kincel’s method, when a researcher studies phenomena in which they are embedded, for example, sexuality or culture, such research cannot be approached from the outside. Instead, the researcher endeavors to apply the discipline of creating separability or exteriority from within phenomena. Throughout this book, Kincel approaches his subjects concurrently from within and with exteriority. He is the observer and the observed, the one who acts and the one who is acted upon. Thus, his Gestalt therapy research is both highly personal and aimed broadly. The methodology he employs is “auto-ethnography.”Kincel explains that “auto-ethnography is a research methodology that focuses on personal memory as a valid source of knowledge” (114). In his analysis of masculinity, sexuality, and culture, he utilizes the tools of auto-ethnography, bringing forth his own experiences and personal narratives. He then uses ethnographic methodologies, such as interviews with family members, to situate his personal narrative in a field context, so that his personal experience helps illuminate our understanding of the constellation of issues being investigated: the development of sexuality, masculinity, and heteronormativity in the author’s cultural context, together with an exploration of the ways in which these issues are currently worked in Gestalt therapy. Along the way, he engages in valuable discussions related to the practice of Gestalt therapy. Among the man
Adam Kincel是英国的一名临床医生、教师和研究员。他的书《在完形治疗中探索男性气质、性和文化》为新的研究方法(自我民族志)、新的哲学影响(特别是Barad 2007年的作品)、新的概念(如集体完形)和新的成长方法(如利用大群体经验创造关于偏见和仇恨的对话)做出了独特的贡献。他的书在广度和深度上都很丰富，包含了多层次的意义和内容。金塞尔从一个面向领域的现象学角度来看待他的研究和实践。他的哲学影响包括巴拉德的本体认识论，胡塞尔和梅洛·庞蒂的现象学，布伯的存在主义，以及伽达默尔的对话方法。金塞尔整合的关键是量子物理学家巴拉德(Barad, 2007)的“代理内行动”概念。巴拉德从“实践与行动”的角度来看待现象。通过实践和行动的镜头，我们同时嵌入在我们存在的关系矩阵中，并与之分离。我们既联系又分离。这是一种深刻的对话立场，在这种立场下，人与人之间的关系，人与自然世界之间的关系，以及存在于人类经验之外的自然世界中的关系，都是现实的核心。巴拉德的理论是一个过程取向，在这个过程中，所有的物质都是相互联系的，而这些相互联系是存在的核心。在Kincel的方法中，当研究人员研究与他们相关的现象时，例如性或文化，这些研究不能从外部进行。相反，研究人员努力应用从现象内部创造可分离性或外部性的学科。在这本书中，金塞尔从内部和外部同时接近他的主题。他既是观察者又是被观察者，是行动的人又是被行动的人。因此，他的完形治疗研究既高度个人化，又目标广泛。他采用的方法是“自动人种学”。Kincel解释道，“自动人种学是一种研究方法，将个人记忆作为知识的有效来源”(114)。在他对男性气质、性和文化的分析中，他运用了自动人种学的工具，带来了他自己的经历和个人叙述。然后，他使用人种学方法，如与家庭成员的访谈，将他的个人叙述置于一个领域背景中，这样他的个人经历有助于阐明我们对正在调查的一系列问题的理解:在作者的文化背景下，性、男性气质和异性恋规范的发展，以及对这些问题目前在格式塔治疗中工作的方式的探索。在此过程中，他参与了与格式塔治疗实践相关的有价值的讨论。他提到的许多问题包括:大型团队工作，在治疗中使用触摸，在工作中出现的同性恋恐惧症，更直接的方法与关系格式塔方法的临床影响，以及格式塔治疗实践中体现的文化体验。重要的是，金塞尔将他的格式塔方法定位于社会和政治。在书的开头，他引入了“集体格式塔”这个术语。据我所知，集体完形与我们与更大的群体(如国家或种族群体)的联系所体现的认同、内省和内化有关。以下是金塞尔的简明定义:“集体完形是通过个人经历体现社会、政治和文化经验。按照这种方式定义，它也可以包括代代相传的记忆”(19)。自从被引入集体完形的概念，我发现我的临床工作已经丰富了新的问题的探索，如文化，国家和种族认同，以及代际创伤。金塞尔的方法使读者读起来既迷人又激动人心:他与读者分享了亲密而引人入胜的个人故事。除了这些故事，金塞尔还深入而勇敢地分享了他的历史、他的原生家庭、他的性发展和身份、他在共产主义波兰的童年、他的个人心理治疗和他的格式塔训练。我们得到的是个人和社会的历史。他分享了代表他发展的不同领域的故事:他的性发展，他如何保持和表达他的男子气概的发展，他的文化认同的发展，以及他作为完形治疗师的发展。所有这些故事相互交织，相互影响，成为更大整体的一部分:一个关于出现、成长和成熟的故事。
{"title":"Exploring Masculinity, Sexuality, and Culture in Gestalt Therapy: An Autoethnography","authors":"Peter Cole","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0188","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0188","url":null,"abstract":"Adam Kincel is a UK-based clinician, teacher, and researcher. His book Exploring Masculinity, Sexuality, and Culture in Gestalt Therapy contributes a unique integration of new research methodology (autoethnography), new philosophical influences (especially the work of Barad 2007), new concepts (such as collective gestalts), and new growth methodologies (such as working with large group experience to create dialogue around prejudice and hatred). His book is substantial in its breadth and depth and contains multiple layers of meaning and content. Kincel approaches his research and practice from a field-oriented, phenomenological perspective. Among his philosophical influences are the onto-epistemology of Barad, the phenomenology of Husserl and Merleau Ponty, the existentialism of Buber, and the dialogical approach of Gadamer.Key to Kincel’s integration is quantum physicist Barad’s (2007) concept of “agential intra-action.” Barad views phenomena from the perspective of “practice and actions.” Through the lens of practice and actions, we are simultaneously embedded in, and separate from, the relational matrix within which we exist. We are both connected and separate. This is a profoundly dialogical stance in which relationships—those between humans, those between humans and the natural world, and those that exist outside of human experience in the natural world—are at the core of reality. Barad’s is a process orientation in which all matter is interconnected, and those interconnections are at the heart of existence.In Kincel’s method, when a researcher studies phenomena in which they are embedded, for example, sexuality or culture, such research cannot be approached from the outside. Instead, the researcher endeavors to apply the discipline of creating separability or exteriority from within phenomena. Throughout this book, Kincel approaches his subjects concurrently from within and with exteriority. He is the observer and the observed, the one who acts and the one who is acted upon. Thus, his Gestalt therapy research is both highly personal and aimed broadly. The methodology he employs is “auto-ethnography.”Kincel explains that “auto-ethnography is a research methodology that focuses on personal memory as a valid source of knowledge” (114). In his analysis of masculinity, sexuality, and culture, he utilizes the tools of auto-ethnography, bringing forth his own experiences and personal narratives. He then uses ethnographic methodologies, such as interviews with family members, to situate his personal narrative in a field context, so that his personal experience helps illuminate our understanding of the constellation of issues being investigated: the development of sexuality, masculinity, and heteronormativity in the author’s cultural context, together with an exploration of the ways in which these issues are currently worked in Gestalt therapy. Along the way, he engages in valuable discussions related to the practice of Gestalt therapy. Among the man","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135655243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0207
Catherine Hatinguais
Who are you,there,in the old forgotten land,still standing,still free,who everybody saidwould soon have to kneel?Yet there you are,holding,in blasted orchards,poisoned fields,and cities crushed to dust,holding.For behind the reawakened hordecomes a new harvest of sorrow,mangled neighbors,women, lately mute and flinching,children, vanished,come the butchering squads,and the blood-stained cellars,scratched walls, discarded tools,where someone tore the villagers apart,come torched libraries,and the long smothering.So once againtoilingin shattered woods,you meetthe heaving tides,and the flotsam thereafter,just beyond reach,crumpled brothersebbing fastin mud,in fire and rubble,captivessilencedby the taunting, savage blade,brothers in freedom,in daringand torment.Oh, what will you have becomeif you survivethis much witnessing?Who will you be when you walk home,once wrenched free,to the startling sweetness of apples,to tender hugsand public acclaim?And here we areon our comfortable couch,watching in disbeliefthe futureset ablaze,tumblinginto grief and fury.We remember now.We remember.Bewildered to draw strength,and sudden clarity,from your unfathomable bravery,and, yes,stoic grace,we recognize it now,the swaggering Empire,red claws and venom,under its golden cloak.We knowits history of lies,forgeries and slanders,its exultant cruelty,its cynical rebukes,yet we walk unsteadyin thiswasteland of malice.Here,we are fighting swarmsof giddy trolls, whores and hirelings,just to keep truth aliveagainst the hypnotic void,the encroaching tyranny.Just to keep faith with you,just to deserve your sacrifice.What will become of you if we fail?If we betray?What will become of usif you fall? May 2023I am deeply grateful to Cynthia Hogue for her keen reading of an earlier version of this poem, and for her generous feedback and encouragement which allowed me to get to this one.
{"title":"THERE AND HERE","authors":"Catherine Hatinguais","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0207","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0207","url":null,"abstract":"Who are you,there,in the old forgotten land,still standing,still free,who everybody saidwould soon have to kneel?Yet there you are,holding,in blasted orchards,poisoned fields,and cities crushed to dust,holding.For behind the reawakened hordecomes a new harvest of sorrow,mangled neighbors,women, lately mute and flinching,children, vanished,come the butchering squads,and the blood-stained cellars,scratched walls, discarded tools,where someone tore the villagers apart,come torched libraries,and the long smothering.So once againtoilingin shattered woods,you meetthe heaving tides,and the flotsam thereafter,just beyond reach,crumpled brothersebbing fastin mud,in fire and rubble,captivessilencedby the taunting, savage blade,brothers in freedom,in daringand torment.Oh, what will you have becomeif you survivethis much witnessing?Who will you be when you walk home,once wrenched free,to the startling sweetness of apples,to tender hugsand public acclaim?And here we areon our comfortable couch,watching in disbeliefthe futureset ablaze,tumblinginto grief and fury.We remember now.We remember.Bewildered to draw strength,and sudden clarity,from your unfathomable bravery,and, yes,stoic grace,we recognize it now,the swaggering Empire,red claws and venom,under its golden cloak.We knowits history of lies,forgeries and slanders,its exultant cruelty,its cynical rebukes,yet we walk unsteadyin thiswasteland of malice.Here,we are fighting swarmsof giddy trolls, whores and hirelings,just to keep truth aliveagainst the hypnotic void,the encroaching tyranny.Just to keep faith with you,just to deserve your sacrifice.What will become of you if we fail?If we betray?What will become of usif you fall? May 2023I am deeply grateful to Cynthia Hogue for her keen reading of an earlier version of this poem, and for her generous feedback and encouragement which allowed me to get to this one.","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135654946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0130
Michael C. Fisher
ABSTRACT Building on Fisher’s 2020 publication “Tearing Down the Self, or Transforming It? Est as Uncertain Gestalt,” this article tracks the emergence of a full-fledged critique of therapeutic culture, emanating from both American journalists and academic social critics in the mid-1970s. Since Erhard Seminars Training (est) and its founder, Werner Erhard, continued to attract media attention, it was often a focal point in this critique. While it drew on earlier criticisms of the human potential movement (HPM) that had centered on Frederick (Fritz) Perls, Esalen, and Gestalt therapy during the 1960s (detailed in Fisher’s 2017 “Gestalt Pathways of Dissemination, Part III: The Media Firestorm”), the 1970s critique of therapeutic culture branched into a wider mode of attack against both the founders and their legacies. Central to this critique was the concept of narcissism, which wedged itself in the pages of popular magazines and highbrow academic journals alike by 1976. In tracing this history, we see the roots of an ongoing cultural debate about the meaning and value of therapy, as well as the connections between individual pursuits of growth and the social conditions that frame them.
基于费舍尔2020年出版的《拆毁自我，还是改造自我?》“不确定的格式塔”，这篇文章追踪了20世纪70年代中期美国记者和学术社会评论家对治疗文化的全面批评的出现。由于Erhard Seminars Training (est)及其创始人Werner Erhard一直吸引着媒体的关注，因此它经常成为这种批评的焦点。虽然它借鉴了20世纪60年代对人类潜能运动(HPM)的早期批评，这些批评集中在弗雷德里克(弗里茨)珀尔斯、埃萨伦和格式塔疗法上(详见费舍尔2017年的《格式塔传播途径，第三部分:媒体风暴》)，但20世纪70年代对治疗文化的批评扩展到了对创始人及其遗产的更广泛的攻击模式。这种批评的核心是自恋的概念，到1976年，这个概念在流行杂志和学术期刊上都占据了一席之地。在追溯这段历史的过程中，我们看到了一场关于治疗的意义和价值的持续文化辩论的根源，以及个人对成长的追求与构成它们的社会条件之间的联系。
{"title":"The Decline of the Self: <i>Est</i> and the Critique of Therapeutic Culture","authors":"Michael C. Fisher","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0130","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0130","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Building on Fisher’s 2020 publication “Tearing Down the Self, or Transforming It? Est as Uncertain Gestalt,” this article tracks the emergence of a full-fledged critique of therapeutic culture, emanating from both American journalists and academic social critics in the mid-1970s. Since Erhard Seminars Training (est) and its founder, Werner Erhard, continued to attract media attention, it was often a focal point in this critique. While it drew on earlier criticisms of the human potential movement (HPM) that had centered on Frederick (Fritz) Perls, Esalen, and Gestalt therapy during the 1960s (detailed in Fisher’s 2017 “Gestalt Pathways of Dissemination, Part III: The Media Firestorm”), the 1970s critique of therapeutic culture branched into a wider mode of attack against both the founders and their legacies. Central to this critique was the concept of narcissism, which wedged itself in the pages of popular magazines and highbrow academic journals alike by 1976. In tracing this history, we see the roots of an ongoing cultural debate about the meaning and value of therapy, as well as the connections between individual pursuits of growth and the social conditions that frame them.","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"16 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135655242","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0203
Grace M. Burton
As he stands before the masterpiece, the poet, a “wandering Paddy, a butcher’s son,” feels the gaze of the painter, who peeks out from behind his canvas, if only momentarily, to contemplate the scene in front of him, a 17th-century Spanish artist catching the eye of 21st-century bard, who had dropped by the museum for a visit one mid-September day. The painter is Diego de Velázquez. The painting is Las Meninas. The poet is Seán Gaffney. The poem is “Figure/Ground.”1Seán has come to see, of course, for that is what one does at an art museum. And Seán, like so many others in the Prado that day, has come to see Las Meninas. But one cannot merely see Las Meninas. Velázquez’s magnum opus resists passive reception. “I can see him looking at me still,” notes Seán. The roles have been reversed. It is not Seán who stares at Velázquez; it is Velázquez who stares at Seán as the painter extends himself across space and time, “[g]rabbing me,” says Seán in his muscular verse, “balls, guts, heart and head.” But now the final turn, the final act of defiance that becomes its own profound moment of co-creation, for Seán refuses to be subsumed by the painter’s gaze; he will instead respond in kind, “[j]oining you here again, dear Don Diego,” but “[t]his time seeing you see me.”The story is not over, however. The process of seeing entails the possibility of invisibility, and invisibility abounds in Las Meninas. What is Velázquez limning on the large canvas that dominates the entire left side of his painting? And whom does the artist see as he looks out into the space that lies beyond the picture frame? For the cultural critic Michel Foucault (1973, 8), it is the mirror on the back wall in which we see the reflected image of King Philip IV and his wife Mariana de Austria that “allows us to see, in the centre of the canvas, what in the painting is doubly invisible.” Foucault argues that the mirror allows the viewer to see what is on the canvas and what lies outside the painting. The king and queen, who have come to the artist’s studio to sit for an official portrait, are at once present and not present within the pictorial space. Foucault may be right with respect to the royals, but is the same true of all viewers, viewers who, like Seán, now find themselves “standing where they [the royals] sat” looking at Velázquez’s painting of Velázquez at work painting? The world outside the picture frame is always changing. Museum patrons come and go, and some, like Seán, are gone too soon. Does the fleeting spectator have any permanence? Is the invisible real? Velázquez, alas, remains silent on the question. Seán, however, will have his say.Seán, you see, is comfortable in the presence of absence. In “Siblings,” for example, the silence that lingers in the house after his sisters’ visit grows “louder by the hour,” filling the void left behind in the wake of “hallway goodbye hugs” with a palpably disquieting quiet.2 The invisible has substance in a poem that demands that we unde
站在这幅杰作前，诗人，一个“流浪的帕迪，一个屠夫的儿子”，感受到了画家的凝视，他从画布后面探出头来，哪怕只是片刻，凝视着眼前的景色，一位17世纪的西班牙艺术家吸引了一位21世纪的吟游诗人的目光，后者在9月中旬的一天来到博物馆参观。画家是Diego de Velázquez。这幅画是《宫女》。诗人是Seán Gaffney。这首诗是“图/地”。1Seán当然是来看的，因为这就是人们在艺术博物馆所做的。Seán，和那天在普拉多的许多人一样，也来看《宫娥图》。但我们不能只看《宫女图》。Velázquez的巨著抵制消极的接受。“我还能看到他在看我，”Seán说。角色互换了。盯着Velázquez的不是Seán;是Velázquez盯着Seán，看着画家跨越时空，“抓住我，”Seán用他那铿锵有力的诗句说，“蛋蛋、内脏、心脏和脑袋。”但现在是最后的转折，最后的反抗行为变成了它自己的共同创造的深刻时刻，因为Seán拒绝被画家的目光所包含;相反，他会以同样的方式回答:“亲爱的唐·迭戈，你又来了”，而是“这次你来见我了。”然而，故事还没有结束。观看的过程包含了隐形的可能性，而隐形在《宫女图》中比比皆是。Velázquez在他画的整个左侧的大画布上是什么?当艺术家望向画框之外的空间时，他看到了谁?对于文化评论家米歇尔·福柯(Michel Foucault, 1973, 8)来说，正是后墙上的镜子让我们看到了菲利普四世国王和他的妻子玛丽安娜·德·奥地利的倒影，“让我们看到，在画布的中心，画中的东西是双重不可见的。”福柯认为，镜子能让观者看到画布上的东西和画外的东西。国王和王后来到艺术家的工作室坐下来拍摄一幅官方肖像，他们既在场又不在场。福柯对皇室成员的看法也许是对的，但对所有的观众来说，像Seán这样的观众，现在发现自己“站在他们(皇室成员)坐过的地方”看着Velázquez的画作Velázquez正在工作的画作吗?画框外的世界总是在变化。博物馆的赞助人来来去去，有些人，比如Seán，走得太快了。转瞬即逝的观众有永恒吗?看不见的是真的吗?唉，Velázquez对这个问题保持沉默。然而，Seán将有他的发言权。Seán，你看，在缺席的情况下是很舒服的。例如，在《兄弟姐妹》中，在他的姐妹们来访后，房子里的寂静“一小时比一小时更大”，用一种明显令人不安的安静填补了“走廊告别拥抱”之后留下的空白这首诗要求我们理解无形的东西，这首诗要求我们真正地“站在”并接受兄弟姐妹喋喋不休的记忆的重量，“现在消失在沉默的缺失中”，这首诗慢慢地占据了肖恩的家。姐妹们的来访，至少是对一个活生生的时刻的回忆，姐妹们在那里，然后又走了。然而，《神秘人物》中访问Seán的家庭来自一种不同的过去，一种既无法达到又无法逃避的过去Seán以一个他从未认识的叔叔的名字命名，生活在另一个Seán的阴影中，一个看不见的幽灵，“总是伴随着我一个我无法企及的理想。”这两个Seáns不是作为叔叔和侄子存在的，而是作为一个单一而复杂的存在:“现在，在我的想象中，我是一个生活在这里的你，我仍然在这里，而不是在这里/不是我，也不是你。”两个生命，同时交织又分离，每个生命都给予另一个生命，彼此交流，在一个Seán的沉默和另一个Sean的诗句的混合中产生了一种亲属关系。Seán背负着一段从来不属于他的过去，一段他从来不知道的生活，让那些“创造并成就我的人”变得清晰可见。这就是诗人的职责。
{"title":"Seán Gaffney: An Appreciation of the Poet","authors":"Grace M. Burton","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0203","url":null,"abstract":"As he stands before the masterpiece, the poet, a “wandering Paddy, a butcher’s son,” feels the gaze of the painter, who peeks out from behind his canvas, if only momentarily, to contemplate the scene in front of him, a 17th-century Spanish artist catching the eye of 21st-century bard, who had dropped by the museum for a visit one mid-September day. The painter is Diego de Velázquez. The painting is Las Meninas. The poet is Seán Gaffney. The poem is “Figure/Ground.”1Seán has come to see, of course, for that is what one does at an art museum. And Seán, like so many others in the Prado that day, has come to see Las Meninas. But one cannot merely see Las Meninas. Velázquez’s magnum opus resists passive reception. “I can see him looking at me still,” notes Seán. The roles have been reversed. It is not Seán who stares at Velázquez; it is Velázquez who stares at Seán as the painter extends himself across space and time, “[g]rabbing me,” says Seán in his muscular verse, “balls, guts, heart and head.” But now the final turn, the final act of defiance that becomes its own profound moment of co-creation, for Seán refuses to be subsumed by the painter’s gaze; he will instead respond in kind, “[j]oining you here again, dear Don Diego,” but “[t]his time seeing you see me.”The story is not over, however. The process of seeing entails the possibility of invisibility, and invisibility abounds in Las Meninas. What is Velázquez limning on the large canvas that dominates the entire left side of his painting? And whom does the artist see as he looks out into the space that lies beyond the picture frame? For the cultural critic Michel Foucault (1973, 8), it is the mirror on the back wall in which we see the reflected image of King Philip IV and his wife Mariana de Austria that “allows us to see, in the centre of the canvas, what in the painting is doubly invisible.” Foucault argues that the mirror allows the viewer to see what is on the canvas and what lies outside the painting. The king and queen, who have come to the artist’s studio to sit for an official portrait, are at once present and not present within the pictorial space. Foucault may be right with respect to the royals, but is the same true of all viewers, viewers who, like Seán, now find themselves “standing where they [the royals] sat” looking at Velázquez’s painting of Velázquez at work painting? The world outside the picture frame is always changing. Museum patrons come and go, and some, like Seán, are gone too soon. Does the fleeting spectator have any permanence? Is the invisible real? Velázquez, alas, remains silent on the question. Seán, however, will have his say.Seán, you see, is comfortable in the presence of absence. In “Siblings,” for example, the silence that lingers in the house after his sisters’ visit grows “louder by the hour,” filling the void left behind in the wake of “hallway goodbye hugs” with a palpably disquieting quiet.2 The invisible has substance in a poem that demands that we unde","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"156 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135655247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0198
E. Rachel Hochman
I often find collections by different authors difficult to review because, while the common overarching discipline (in this case, Embodied Relational Gestalt [ERG]) is the spool, the disparate chapters create tangled threads that leave readers with a knot to unsnarl if they are to use the concepts/ideas/constructs in their own work. So, I pull out my marlinspike and ask the question: “Which of these chapters creates the thread that binds the articles together into a valuable package for readers to take on their next intellectual journey, be it at the therapy room, writing desk, or research laboratory?” In this volume, I found that thread in Chapter 8, “Engaging Strategic Curiosity: Toward and Embodied Relational Approach to Research in Gestalt Therapy.” In this chapter, Rae Johnson makes a clear case for qualitative research into concepts that arise from Gestalt Therapy (GT) and specifically ERG. Why is this call for research the thread that binds? All of the chapters propose hypotheses and offer support with case studies. But Johnson shares how to take these hypotheses to the next level by using research approaches that are harmonious with Gestalt and somatic psychotherapy.Supportively, she begins by sharing two reasons for the philosophical disconnect between traditional quantitative research and GT: (1) “the founders of humanistic experiential therapies made intentional philosophical and structural breaks with the dominant paradigms in psychology that tended to objectify, quantify, and commodify human experience in order to study it”; and (2) the prevalence of “large-scale, randomized controlled trials” as a best practice for psychotherapy research (274). Then she poses the question: “How can embodied relational Gestalt psychotherapists contribute to the research literature while remaining in integrity with our relational, process-oriented, in-the-body stance?” (274). She provides a convincing comparison among the philosophy, skills, and abilities of Gestalt therapists and constructivist/qualitative research methods by reminding the reader that heuristic research, organic research, and grounded theory (GRT) all follow the data that emerge from the research subjects, allowing themes to surface organically. Her chapter culminates with a basic framework for Gestalt therapists to refer to as they embark on their own research endeavors to discover new understanding of embodied relational experience.I am only slightly familiar with one of the constructivist methods that Johnson recommends: GRT, but her chapter encouraged me to do a brief literature search to learn more. I found an article by Chun Tie, Birks, and Francis (2019), which might be a useful place to start for Gestaltists interested in bringing a research mindset to their practice. Like Johnson, Chun Tie, Birks, and Francis emphasize that the quality of research findings (in their article “Grounded Theories”) arise from congruency of the philosophical position of the researcher, the resear
他分享的三个案例研究来自诊断非常不同的客户。然而，有两个明显的共同点:(1)注意力缩小，激活固定格式塔，以及随之而来的不良行为的呈现;(2)在ERG疗法的支持下，注意力范围的扩大导致从固定格式塔的释放和新的更有益的行为的呈现。一项GRT研究如何使这项研究支持心理治疗师和患有精神疾病的客户?在第七章中，Renee J. Jennings向我们介绍了“具体化的叙事重新模式”，这是她和她的客户一起开创的一种方法，她将格式塔物理过程、眼动脱敏和再加工、能量和心理学结合起来，“用于内在物及其相关叙事的物理和神经上的解开和重新模式”(244)。定性研究是否能够使这种方法得到更多的认可和使用?在第五章“签名运动”中，鲁扎尼将五个实验作为“在治疗遭遇中研究自我、他人和领域时实现具体化实验的方法”(169)。“签名运动”是“治疗后身体的一种非语言表达”(169)，“阐明了自我监督的治疗过程，识别了边界干扰，并帮助制定了治疗计划”(192)。我想，在向一群实践者教授签名运动的过程后，当他们回到他们的实践中，使用签名运动，并报告他们的经验时，可能会出现GRT研究。作为一名牙科诊所的顾问，签名运动引起了我的兴趣，因为我相信牙医和牙科保健师可以从学习它作为一种重置患者之间关系的方法中受益。这让我想知道签名运动如何也能支持其他医疗从业者，特别是在经历了两年半的大流行之后。想象一下，用GRT的递归迭代过程精炼和扩展ERG中讨论的方法、范式和假设的价值。全球治疗师群体将如何受益?众多的患者将如何受益?还有谁会受益?Johnson要求GT和ERT从业者考虑变化的矛盾理论，通过做旧的事情来做新的事情，并专注于成为真正的自己:具有战略好奇心的从业者，他们注意到客户对他们的文化、世界和经历的反应模式;以及他们对GT和ERT的反应模式。然后，她要求他们采取下一步行动:参与正式的(但不是定量的，也不是传统的)研究，并报告他们的发现。克莱门斯的著作《体现的关系格式塔:理论与应用》为进一步研究提供了丰富的机会。因此，如果你正在寻找一个论文项目或一个机会将格式塔带到更广泛的社区，那么:(1)在你自己的客户社区中寻找模式;(2)与其中一位作者和/或其他同事联系，了解他们注意到的模式;(3)学习并使用Johnson推荐的一种定性方法，比如GRT;(4)发表你的定性研究!
{"title":"Embodied Relational Gestalt: Theories and Applications","authors":"E. Rachel Hochman","doi":"10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0198","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/gestaltreview.27.2.0198","url":null,"abstract":"I often find collections by different authors difficult to review because, while the common overarching discipline (in this case, Embodied Relational Gestalt [ERG]) is the spool, the disparate chapters create tangled threads that leave readers with a knot to unsnarl if they are to use the concepts/ideas/constructs in their own work. So, I pull out my marlinspike and ask the question: “Which of these chapters creates the thread that binds the articles together into a valuable package for readers to take on their next intellectual journey, be it at the therapy room, writing desk, or research laboratory?” In this volume, I found that thread in Chapter 8, “Engaging Strategic Curiosity: Toward and Embodied Relational Approach to Research in Gestalt Therapy.” In this chapter, Rae Johnson makes a clear case for qualitative research into concepts that arise from Gestalt Therapy (GT) and specifically ERG. Why is this call for research the thread that binds? All of the chapters propose hypotheses and offer support with case studies. But Johnson shares how to take these hypotheses to the next level by using research approaches that are harmonious with Gestalt and somatic psychotherapy.Supportively, she begins by sharing two reasons for the philosophical disconnect between traditional quantitative research and GT: (1) “the founders of humanistic experiential therapies made intentional philosophical and structural breaks with the dominant paradigms in psychology that tended to objectify, quantify, and commodify human experience in order to study it”; and (2) the prevalence of “large-scale, randomized controlled trials” as a best practice for psychotherapy research (274). Then she poses the question: “How can embodied relational Gestalt psychotherapists contribute to the research literature while remaining in integrity with our relational, process-oriented, in-the-body stance?” (274). She provides a convincing comparison among the philosophy, skills, and abilities of Gestalt therapists and constructivist/qualitative research methods by reminding the reader that heuristic research, organic research, and grounded theory (GRT) all follow the data that emerge from the research subjects, allowing themes to surface organically. Her chapter culminates with a basic framework for Gestalt therapists to refer to as they embark on their own research endeavors to discover new understanding of embodied relational experience.I am only slightly familiar with one of the constructivist methods that Johnson recommends: GRT, but her chapter encouraged me to do a brief literature search to learn more. I found an article by Chun Tie, Birks, and Francis (2019), which might be a useful place to start for Gestaltists interested in bringing a research mindset to their practice. Like Johnson, Chun Tie, Birks, and Francis emphasize that the quality of research findings (in their article “Grounded Theories”) arise from congruency of the philosophical position of the researcher, the resear","PeriodicalId":499147,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt review","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135655244","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：