Resonancesby Mercè Martínez

June 2007Joan, Malcolm, Hanne, Pere & Mercè

Building bridgesJoan, “the network knitter”

See Joan Campos Professional Milestones

Building bridgesMalcolm “the propagator” (standard-bearer)

See Malcolm Pines Professional Milestones/ Interview with D. Flapan

Building bridgesA group prepares in group, a conference a duo from a group analytic perspective We talk about the format and the audience What distance is there between what Joan/Malcolm,

Malcolm/Joan would like to talk about and what people would like to or are able to listen to?

No doubt there will be expectations, their long experience in group and institutions is appreciated, but in the last instance the demand is for practical recipes useful in the here and now. What have I done (my curriculum), As the initial offer as to what should I do (as an initial

demand)

• Juan’s idea to make a presentation a duo makes that he addresses our group to approach this idea in group. This is to say that the first bridge is a group of dialogue. It is too late to change… everything while we are still four.

Hanne

• As antecedents, what we put into practice with Jesús de Miguel in Medical Sociology in the Academy of Medical Science, after I had left the Autonomous University of Barcelona, and still later when the multidisciplinary doctorate was started and the Course of Group Analysis as integrator… The same than with the Hausona in Copenhagen... Convergencia Analítica in Barcelona, Grupo Análisis Operativo (Pichon Rivière-Foulkes)¿We are a Group of Analysis?

Juan

• First of all I would say that we should not be too preoccupied with what we suppose the audience wants to hear, if this was the case we would always be moving in the field of hypothesis, and rightly or not we should put the emphasis on WHAT WE WANT TO SAY, in what Juan and Malcolm would like to comment and transmit. For me this is the most important. And following this reasoning, I would mention one of the basic, fundamental elements to be transmitted: beyond the fact that there be two main personalities presented, the presentation has been gestated, has been thought out in group and by a group (reference to the work of Foulkes and Lewis).

Pere

RESONATING...

Building bridgesComing back to the format Hanne will make the presentation, explaining briefly the

professional trajectory of Malcolm and Joan Mercè will moderate the debate, centered on a small

number of questions which Joan and Malcolm will answer Time preoccupies us, to leave space for debate We are also preoccupied about getting lost in the

discourse, not to bring out the essential. What is the essential?

We are preoccupied about not motivating the dialogue, even that the format may not favor dialogue between the audiences.

My own free association: I am thinking of the parable of the seed… I am thinking about other

experiences, how little wheat is harvested…

• Yes, Mercè, me too... Anyhow, it seems to me that your diagram can help us to do what we still can do without too much of an exaggerated effort.

Hanne

• It seems alright to me that you two begin and our role passes to be the one of the interviewed, which extends to the audience as interviewer…

Juan

• In reference to the format (Hanne presents and Mercè moderates) I have nothing to object. Another basic element is to open the debate to the public. I am optimistic in this respect that a favourable climate will be created for people to participate. Myself, in the sense that I am part of this initial group that reflects on the subject the two colleagues will develop, I have enough questions to make from the public so as to break the silence which precedes when the audience has the word.

Pere

RESONATING....

Building bridgesReturning to the subject (see preliminary questions for the dialogue J. Campos 4-4-07)The discussion leads us along many pathways:The training of Malcolm and Joan (similarities and differences).

The beginnings Participation in institutions and professional associations

(similarities and differences). Links between professional groups. Long life experience.

Training others, spreading group analysis or creating networks. From psychoanalysis to group analysis (similarities and differences).

Interest in historical analysis; differences in the insertion of group analysis in view of cultures, of different processes of institutionalization in different countries.

Personal free association: I look at Joan and Malcolm, listen to them, they surprise me, the connections (in spite of the differences), I enjoy the free floating discussion. I think in Foulkes’ article (“Communication of a group by a group”). I feel that this climate and this experience cannot be transmitted in the space of the Congress, its irrevocable

RESONATING...

Hanne

• Yes, Mercè, our big problem is that one cannot transmit the experience, one has to live it. But this is the problem of any psychoanalytic and groupanalytic process, or even analytic. Beyond the concepts and methods that emerge from experience, the experience itself is a prerequisite for everyone to decide what meaning does psychoanalysis and groupanalysis have in their lives... AND HERE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT I HAVE JUST CLEARLY SEEN SOMETHING: IN TRAINING SHOULD FIRST COME THE TRAINING IN GROUP IN ALL FIELDS, NOT BECAUSE IT IS MORE IMPORTANTO OR IT HAS PRIORITY IN RELATION TO THE INDIVIDUA, BUT BECAUSE IF THE STUDENTS DO NOT EXPERIENCE AND TAKE IN THE WIDER POINT OF VIEW IN THE FIRST INSTANCE THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SITUATE THE INDIVIDUAL, THE ELEMENT, THE SUB-SET WITHIN THE GENERAL FRAME OF REFERENCE OF THE GLOBAL WHOLE. “The whole" in the case of the human sciences is humanity, and the part is the individual, or the sub-set., This fact should go through experience. It cannot pass through theory because the first theory we transmit will automatically be a priority, and if it is a theory centred in the individual this will automatically be “the whole” and there will be no possibility of subordinating the group as a whole, remaining excluded. Here come all those questions of “Psychoanalysis an asset or an hindrance fro the future groupanalyst”…. And the questions of priority and of one theoretical frame of reference against the other...

Juan

• ¡Bien Hanne! this is what I also think. Well said! In fact the training I received in the Opus Dei was basically of group, although it was a group of TWO, the leader and the followers who identified themselves with him and between them… What more, in that group, apart from total dedication, to have a critical spirit was impossible, it was the worst of sins… On the contrary, in the Maudsley con Foulkes, is where I learnt psychotherapy as a psychiatrist in a hospital of the National Health Service (therapy, training and investigation) and at the Postgraduate Center for Mental Health, where the first teacher was the peer group of colleagues since I graduated simultaneously from the individual and group programs of psychotherapy and psychoanalysis. These were my models of training where my group education was founded and the one of the others.

1

RESONATING....

Hanne:

• I think that in the presentation in principle, Juan and Malcolm should not get lost in their early experiences and training…Except commentaries like: Juan’s training was principally in group analysis. Malcolm’s training was particularly in individual analysis and in group as a group conductor of therapy groups of patents.

Hanne:

• The subject which you mention, "spreading group analysis or Creating networks", seems to me a possible subject. This depends on Juan… and what we finally decide when we meet.

Juan:

• I like the idea of our influence in the SEPTG and the IAGP

Hanne:

• If we wanted to take up the subject of “from psychoanalysis to groupanalysis”, I think we should look up our workshop on this subject… contextualize it in our trajectory., etc.

Juan:

• This has been one of our hang-ups. Malcolm does not see the difference, I consider groupanalysis as the “container” of psychoanalysis, it is not the child of psychoanalysis. … (The Issue SHF) My historical approach always has been in “psychosocial development” and its institutionalization .

Hanne:

• The same. If Juan wants to say something about historical analysis… In the last instance, as things are, all depends on two or three subjects or points that Juan would like to touch. And starting from these we decide the articles, the projects, etc. which are included in the presentation and the publication.

2

3

4

5

RESONATING....

Pere

• Hanne mentions an aspect which I would not like to overlook when she makes reference to training in groupanalysis and in psychoanalysis, and it is so that training in groupanalysis should be first, not in hierarchical sequence but because it is the wider element without which one cannot understand the individual (the sub set. Is to say, we would be speaking of the “whole”, the group and the “parts, the individual. I subscribe your words completely., Hanne.

• Returning to the subject of Juan and Malcolm, I insist in that the two say what they consider fundamental in their personal and professional trajectories. This way the differences and similarities become manifest. For me, and this you say in your commentaries, Juan’s trajectory I tend to consider it more from a burrownian perspective, in the sense that for Juan life and profession have been and are one and the same thing. Juan personifies perfectly a model of groupanalyst as a way of being and of understanding life. In turn, Malcolm seems to me more in the line of an academic, of an intellectual, of somebody –with all respect for Malcolm- who does not live with such passion and vital compromise his profession and personal existence. And let it be said, these, to my understanding, important differences , do not imply a judgment of good or bad, of better or worse.

Building bridges

HanneThank you for the document “A bridge called group”, chart for a joint inaugural conference of J. Campos & M. Pines. I hope you will get the information of Malcolm to complete it.Thank you for footnotes, for getting us back onto the task, for the care, for the knowledge… for everything ;-)

RESONATING...

Hanne

• Thank you, my friend. At times I am surprised of how similar we are in some ways to the group of Burrow. Each moment we do what we can and in a specific way. Although the others “do not understand”; they want us to explain to them... And one cannot explain it can only be lived and it depends if one wants to find the energy and the time to live it … at the end there is little wheat...

Juan

• Añado archivos: la comunicación de la Hanne, para empezar "El estrés de la Vida: Una teoría de la salud" Symposium SEPTG en Sevilla 1999. El del 25 cumpleaños de la APAG en Bilbao y mis Vídeos.

El estrés de la vida. Una teoría sobre salud, Hanne Campos, 1999“Bilbao 1974-1999: la grupalidad humana a debate” Hanne Campos, 1999Juan y su proyecto de diálogo, 2007La nueva motivación de Juan, 2007

Building bridgesThis time Pere is our reporter

Hanne

• Thank you, Pere, for your efforts: the report, the Complete Works of SHF, for looking for means and people to help us, and a thousand more things. On top, as you make no noise, at times I forget to tell you things I think and at the end often I don’t get to comment to you…You are always present. Thank you.

Juan

• I spoke with Carmelo Pinto (he made the video of one of our workshops), he will not be here in August but we count with him for February 28. We talk about what we would like to publish! Perhaps the complete Works of “Campos”, or of GdAB?

Pere

• In the chapter of thanks I will simply say that it is thanks to all of you and to you Juan that I have had the privilege to share a group space which for me is a space of health and of life… and, it goes without saying, of continuous questioning. You, Joan, you always complained that you don’t leave a school, you don’t leave followers… Mercè, the last day we met, when we said goodbye , she mentioned the importance it had for her that we had known each other and I manifested my solidarity with her opinion. Now I would like to add that I have been your disciple and now, more mature, I still am and your teachings have marked me in the wider sense of this word, for what I am highly grateful. I have and will have my style of transmitting this form of feeling and living life from a groupanalytic perspective, but I shall not forget that I owe it to you and I owe it to the group.

RESONATING....

Building bridgesGroup analysis: motor of social change?

KNOWLEDGEEvolution contributions (others)

Personal contributions (Malcolm / Joan)Processes of integration (inter-theories)

COMPETENCES

ATTITUDES

HIS

TO

RY

CU

LTU

RE

THEORY

PRACTICE

Training and Accreditation

A way of thinking, being and acting

LIVE

RESONATING...

• The diagram is beautiful, it will yield a lot.Juan:

• Groupanalysis as motor of social change inscribes itself in the theoretical-practical context of history and culture? Hanne:

• Differences between the Institute of Psa de Berlín (21) and the one of Frankfurt (29-30) and the Children’s Seminar (rojos). While the first has as an aim to train psychoanalysts, the second is one of Mental Hygiene on the base of training Psychoanalytically “social agents of change”: physicians, sociologists, psychologists, anthropologists, etc.

Juan:

• Groupanalysis as a therapeutic method ¿inscribes itself in the theoretic-practical context of the psychotherapies? Hanne:

• In a wide sense in the second of the meanings Bion formulates…Juan:• As motor of social change: The ultimate aim would be ATTITUDES that lead

to a way of thinking, acting and being solidary- to a planned effort of to develop in a group the forces which lead to cooperative action, as motor of social change. The ultimate objective would be ATTITUDES that lead to a solidary way of thinking, acting and being; following Bion: to "a planned endeavour to develop in a group the forces that lead to smoothly running cooperative action."

Hanne:

• This is what I want to say.Juan:

RESONATING...

• The practical objective would be to develop the capacities of the individuals to function in group in view of cooperative activities.

Hanne:

• Or a way of living.Juan:

• The theoretical objective would be to articulate the knowledge within a cultural and historic context in view of solving specific problems, be they individual, social, psychological or physiological, of know-how, or method, etc. etc

Hanne:

• “From the Ego training in action to the group matrix, to (the plexus) the we-training in action within its group contextJuan:

• If groupanalysis is the “container” of psychoanalysis -a hypothesis which seduces me- then this implies a profound revolution in the theoretical, practical and training aspects in which we actually move. This is an enormous challenge.

Pere:

Building bridges Group analysis: motor of social change?

To the question of the preceding page (this would be my interest, what I would ask if I was the audience), a bit more restructured some days afterwards, emerge many answers.My impression: Knowledge (Malcolm): avid reader, interested in other currents

and disciplines, individual integration, more explicit in the discussion with peers and in practice than in new conceptualizations.

Knowledge (Joan): avid researcher, wide interests, revising history, multiple attempts at integrating collectives (example: Convergencia Analítica), made explicit in different writings, group discussions and correspondence.

Note: I am much more familiar with the trajectory and writings of J. Campos, so that by force I am more subjective with the trajectory of Malcolm (sorry).

Hanne:

• Group analysis: motor of social change. Social change is the only ultimate objective of group analysis

Juan:

• And facilitate in the groups in which we are destined to live, a “smoothly running cooperative action”.

Hanne:

• In the last instance the only objective we pursued in Grup d’Anàlisis Barcelona. This is the difference between Juan’s groupanalysis and the one of Malcolm . If social change is the objective, the possibility ad capacity of individual change is the prerequisite. The objective of social change in a group makes evident the difficulties of change in the individuals. The resistence to social change which we have come up against conceals the resistence to change of the individuals, for who it is convenient that nothing changes in the context so that they do not have to pose themselves the question of their individual change.

Juan:

• James Anthony thought that Foulkes was a radical optimist; probably we contaminated ourselves.

Pere:

• Another aspect which I would like to underline is ir groupanalysis can be a motor for social change. Without doubt, I would answer affirmatively. I think that there are very revolutionary aspects of groupanalytic theory and that, to follow them through, would imply or should imply a social change. Another question is that they can be developed until their last consequences in a world like the present one, so radically individualistic. I think we would feel satisfied if groupanalysis achieved to make –as Juan says paraphrasing Foulkes- “better citizens of a democratic community”. This implies a change of attitudes which would allow a predisposition to think and act in a more solidary manner.

RESONATING....

Building bridges Group analysis: motor of social change?

My impression: Training (Malcolm) from the Institute of Group Analysis (training

and accreditation together). His experience in the Nordic countries. His efforts of propagator and facilitator in attracting people towards the group analytic experience.

Training (Joan): has created groups wherever he passed (IESE, San Joan de Deu, University School of Psychology, Autonomous University Barcelona, etc.). Almost all interdisciplinary and pioneering projects in Spain, which he, in some way, left when the pressure towards institutionalization grew. I think he is more inclined towards continuous training in group, and feels a certain resistance towards traditional forms of accreditation.

Note: I am absolutely subjective with both; it’s a devolution of what made me resonate.

Hanne:

• Following my previous thoughts, perhaps I consider that Malcolm situates himself more in the context of investigation of the individual in a social situation, putting the emphasis on the capacity of change of the individual. Changes of attitudes, capacities, knowledge and also social changes as collateral effects of the process of individual investigation in group.

• I can also think that Juan situates himself more in the articulation of different contexts of knowledge processed in the group in the hope that through this experience the people become conscious that all we can think, feel, and imagine is human and that a group is the adequate place where to experience how we can arrive at a cooperative way of proceeding in view of arriving at certain objectives…

• I believe that neither Malcolm nor Juan questions himself about any possible ulterior objectives of the human being in his ecosystem; neither about any possible priorities between symbolic and psycho-fisio-biologic aspects of this system. Both, as good physicians and good groupanalysts of the Foulkesian tradition, they both are pragmatic in outlook. Well, only thoughts inspired by all your reflections, Mercè

RESONATING....

Building bridges Group analysis: motor of social change?

Some sentences picked out from the “report”We arrived at the conclusion that the degree of acceptance of group analysis in society at large depends basically on people who have political or academic influenced or a recognized authority to implement group analysis in universities, national health services or in institutions or organizations (all). Being group analysts we can influence society by writing, publishing and going to conferences. Then, we are able to create a network (Malcolm). There appeared several questions: How can group analysis influence the wider social system beyond

therapy? Analysis in the groups and analysis between

groups? How individualistic are we in group analysis?

RESONATING....

Hanne

• Very significant: As groupanalysts, we can influence society by writing, publishing and going to conferences, This way we create a network…Answers to the questions::1) We can if and when the social systems includes us. There are no spaces. There are no powers that sustain the value of groups, of cooperative, creative activity of the group prior to individual o majority decisions.2) Both, see 1.3)A lot. As all.Unfortunately.

Pere

• The disposition o lack of it to question and interrogate oneself unfortunately is not too habitual. Only in contemplating our professional circles we can perceive either an excessive rigidity towards certain “innovative” proposals , or if there is questioning, it does not go beyond a simple intellectual play without consequences in the realm of change of personal attitudes.

Building bridges Group analysis: motor of social change?

My impression Attitudes In general: A way of thinking and living. Group analysis

changes your way of perceiving reality. Group analysis is more than a therapeutic technique, perhaps only possible in peer groups.

Malcolm: a point of view more integrated with formal transmission in the clinical ambit, creating networks through contacts between institutions, congresses, etc. Possibility of network transmission (social synapses).

Joan: disillusioned with “formal” networks, he puts his stake on correspondence groups, now virtual, between interdisciplinary peers, breaking the hierarchical boundaries (influence of T. Burrow)

Note: I am absolutely subjective with both; it’s a devolution of what made me resonate.

RESONATING....

Hanne

• We keep to the title: ¿Group Analysis as motor of social change?I think that the "peer groups" don’t work either... We should think more concretely.If we can and it works, we can save or use the idea of social synapses… We will see…

Building bridges Group analysis: motor of social change?

A possible outline or script: Where do we come from? Training, experience, trajectory of Joan and Malcolm. Where are we now? Really it is where we have arrived at, our here and now. Where we are heading for? Future perspectives of group analysis.

A different title: Bridging the social synapses

RESONATING....

Hanne

• We come from a more and more individualistic world. The group methods and principles and the different partial theories are inscribed in this “whole” which is the individual. We are in an individualistic, egocentric, narcissistic world which does not want to know anything about proposals in terms of groups for the above mentioned reasons. We are heading for a world of "homo hominis lupus".

Juan:

• Freud thought that it has always been like that and there is little Civilization can do. In turn Burrow thought oft the human race as the kingdom of angels , prostituted by the serpent and the apple”. Foulkes never pronounced himself but believed that Groupanalysis at least made “better citizens for a democratic society”. And I ask myself: ¿where are then these blessed democracies?

Hanne:

• New title: If we could think about what the social synapses is, it could serve us for a new proposal.

Joan & MalcolmA synapses between groups? Between cultures?

RESONATING...

Hanne:

• Yes, in effect, if we spent sufficient time together, I believe that in the end we could understand each other. But, since nobody has time… for the group…

Juan:

• Not even a 75% incapacitated like me, on the point of making an “opposition” as a great dependent…

Hanne:

• Mercè, you made me work a lot and I am tired. Its noticeable. Now I only say tonterías. Sorry. Besos y abrazos a todos. I’ll continue tomorrow...

Juan:

• And you made me work, Hanne, or perhaps the three of you... Look that you are workers!! Malcolm with the excuse of the English, he does not say anything!

It is a way of communicating information from one nerve cell to another.

The nervous impulse arrives to the terminal pre-synaptic body of the nerve cell the synaptic vesicles open and release neurotransmitters into the synaptic cleft on the post-synaptic dendrite there are receptors where some of the released neurotransmitters fit in.

What is a synapses?

What is a synapses?

It is a SPECIFICALLY CLOSED system, something similar to a key and a lock, supposing that the neurotransmitter is the key and the receptor-surface is the lock. Only if they fit, the transmission of information between one cell and the following will be produced, and, in consequence, their activation in the inter-synaptic cleft. There also float enzymes, which are in charge of “breaking the transmission”. The neurotransmitters separate from the receptor-surface and return to the synaptic vesicles.

And if we apply this concept to the social context (synapses between groups)?

Bridges between groups (synaptic connections) should be established.To build bridges does not guarantee that there will be communication and, consequently, an activation of the social network. This only is possible if there is a real intention of communicating, of being permeable to new ideas that activate some shared change.Groups, very often, are closed (closed speciality). Causes: theoretical framework, socio-cultural influences, fights for power,…

RESONATING....

Hanne:

• I send you the article I wrote for the Sevilla Symposium, “The stress of life. A theory of health”. In this article I propose some ideas of how to pass from the physiological to the psychological and the social, in relation to the “Synapses between neurones” as elaborated by Freud, “contact barriers”, “stimulating responses” at the neuronal level, energetic transformation and the quantum of tension tolerable or not , etc. etc. Its an article I translated into English for a group of doctors who came to work in group with Juan, and in which I collaborated.

Juan:

• I will re-read it before discussing it.

Juan:

• I just finished reading it. It is one of the best things ever written by Hanne… and I had forgotten... Her thesis is nothing more than a group investigation! IF POSSIBLE WE COULD ELABORATE HER ARTICLE OR A WORKSHOP FOR THE MedConf2008, STARTING FROM IT!

The idea of the double helicesThe double helices really is a spiralAs a symbol, the spiral implies evolutionThe sequence of simple elements repeats itself, but makes up a unique “Gestalt”

Gestalt means form, configuration or structure and refers to a quality of perceptual form, a global quality that transcends the elements which constitute it. I always thought that this concept is very meaningful in relation to the concept of group. The influence of Gestalt is very clear in the work of Foulkes.

RESONATING...

Hanne

• If the helices is a spiral, we have to go to Pichon-Rivière to see what contributes his theorization-imagination…

• We can perceive more than one process of development? Possibly, we could see different images and compare the utility they have, and the relation that exists for the understanding of physical, psychical, social phenomena…

• The double helices, figure-ground, the Moebius band, systemic images, etc.

The idea of the double helices

An image most illustrative of cultural values, in this case of capitalismCan culture transform our DNA?We talked about Vigostky, Batjin & Luria. The socio-cultural school, emerged precisely under the influence of Marxism in soviet thought.

Note: the paradox seemed significant to me

RESONATING...

Hanne

• We could also think these questions in function of the “History” and the “Culture” which you have in your diagram, Mercè, and which you link through groupanalysis

Juan:

• This is the one which I like best. It takes us straight to GLOBALIZATION

Some personal contributions (Communication)Resonating to the dialogue

For Batjin “To understand the statement of another person means to orientate oneself in relation to him in the corresponding context. For each word of the statement that we are in the process of understanding, we propose, so to say, a larger set of words of ours answer... All real understanding is, by its very nature, dialogue".

It has to be underlined that the concept of address of Batjin is not limited to the speakers in an immediate situation, but that voices to wich we direct ourselves can be temporally, spatially and socially distant (for example, when writing a text we can have in mind one o more people to which it is directed).

I think that the idea of which we have often been talking of “internalised group” or present in absence, has much to do with the concept of addressee of Batjin.

RESONATING...

Hanne

• I will not comment on your contributions on communication because I would need some hours to situate myself. In this sense it would help me that we situate the question of communication in the diagram which we finally will be using in the presentation. I need to talk about this when we see each other. So, that I finish my notes now…

Pere:

• And, lastly, when Mercè talks about Vigotsky, Luria and Batjin , I have not read these authors so as to have an opinion, however, Mercè, you have woken up my curiosity to read them and this is something to be grateful for.

Some personal contributions (Communication)Resonating to the dialogue

We should underline two aspects which without doubt intervene in social behaviour: in one hand, language and communication as one of the most complex systems used by humans beings in regulating his cognitive functions (Vygotski, 1977 y 1979; Bruner y Haste, 1990; Werstch, 1991); on the other hand, the capacity of perceiving and representing that which others believe, think, wish for… a system with which to understand ourselves and understand others.

Both mechanisms equip the human being to achieve an intelligent contact, especially, with others (transmission and reception of ideas, knowledge, intentions) and with his environment (adaptation to social and cultural norms).

Perhaps one of the peculiarities of the human mind that can more surprise us, is not so much all its knowledge functions (think, remember, perceive, resolve, create…) but the capacity to be conscious of these functions in ourselves and in others

The ideas coming from soviet school, symbolic interactionism or theories of mind, are relevant for understanding “the conscience of oneself” and “the represented other” from a different perspective but which can be integrated with the psychoanalytic one.

Some personal contributions (Communication)Resonating to the dialogue

The social group contributes with different procedures in defining the personalities of is members, carrying out this process primarily through communicative interaction. Little by little, the individual learns to act in accordance with the norms, accumulated throughout various generations. This set of norms, explicit and implicit, we can call culture.

The approach, which from the point of view of psychology has tried understand how mental acts and processes locate themselves in the cultural, historic and institutional contexts, has its origin in the soviet school.

For Vigotsky, the development of the child depends on the use the latter makes, as we may say, of the toolbox of culture in expressing his mental faculties.

Perhaps these ideas can help us understand the different development of group analysis in view of the socio-cultural contexts.

Pere:

• Although later than I told you, I send you my reflections-resonances- on the group encounter of June 2007. In general I agree with the opinions you expressed in the different sections of the text. However, I would like to make some nuances in this respect. (included in every section)

Hanne:

• Thank you for your kind mail and Resonances to the work which we are constructing for the ConfMed2008. It motivates me a lot that this occasion of next February gives a new impetus to our existence lived from the group. Without a doubt, I am also a follower of this difficult teacher the three of us have found along the way. Nothing could I have thought if it was not for his incorruptible insistence of first to pass the word through the dialogue… without knowing beforehand where it will lead us to...

• I have more need of knowing where it leads us and thanks god Mercè has the capacity of putting “in solfa” some of the pre-conception. Anyhow, the dialogue always again loosens the structures and gives me the sensation that we are on our way and making headway. As you very well point out, important is what Juan and Malcolm want to comment and transmit. Everyone of us has things to say and needs his or her pubic, unique or no.

• What most enthuses me is the possibility that this work takes us to construct this “conceptual map”, as Mercè says, with which we can situate the projects we have been taking forward and we have in writing.

Mercè:

• Thank you Pere for your resonances which have already been incorporated in the frame of commentaries to the diagram. I also slowly see what will be left our of the first elaboration and what, on the whole, interests s most.

• I would ask you all one more effort ;-) to incorporate some aspects of the soviet school and the Gestalt, not in the conference but in our project. It is not necessary for all of us to read the sources, for there is the group and the knowledge can be shared; I have neither read and cannot read all that you know of psychoanalysis, but I have full confidence in that the concepts you choose are the adequate ones for the group and the task.

RESONATING...

Inviting you to resonate

Let us think of people who represent the different cultures, especially in the Mediterranean area, so that they may share their ideas of the development of group analysis in each country or in each socio-cultural context. There emerged the idea of reserving a space for a workshop, perhaps with a fishbowl technique, were to realize the aforementioned idea.

Relaxing between sun and shade, sharing memories

A panoramic Barcelona point of view from the terrace of Joan and Hanne