Book Review: Sibling Relations and the Horizontal Axis in Theory and Practice: Contemporary Group Analysis, Psychoanalysis and Organizational Consultancy (New International Library of Group Analysis)

The weaving together and unravelling of meaning in a group, also stems from Foulkes, they say, and the alternate states of being of the tree and the rhizome should be available options for every group conductor in their work. Following this, Dudai takes us to the cinema to analyse the relations of two brothers to each other and to their father in the film ‘The Return’. The start refers back to the Bible and the respective relationships between brothers and fathers and sons. The intersection of the vertical and the horizontal axes are assessed and they explore how this has been represented in the film. Rapoport and Piper, in the final chapter in the book, offer an assessment of the power relations between patient and analyst in psy- choanalysis and point to the underlying conditioning through capitalism. This chapter also makes reference to Guattari and Deleuze, addressing the contradiction found in any therapeutic endeavour, that the process aims at liberating the patient, while keep-ing them blocked from reinvesting in the social field. This contribution is by two authors, who are not group analysts and may not necessarily be familiar with the importance of the social in group analysis. They highlight the contradictions that are part of the monetary exchange between patient and therapist, pointing to capitalist structures as a limit to the possibility of horizontal relating in analysis. On the whole, I found it interesting how frequently references to the Bible, like the story of Cain and Abel, Abraham and Isaac, Joseph and his brothers and so on, featured in the texts. These examples were often used to illustrate each of the author’s perspec-tive of the vertical or horizontal axis. The law of mother and the violation of it, as well as the law of the father, are used in a variety of contexts by the authors and are often interpreted differently by the different contributors to the book.