Discussion with LS (Part 4/6)
There seems to be a range of art therapy courses which are defined by different strands of psychoanalytical theory/ theorists. My course at the moment for instance is Jungian-based though I wondered if this was the same for your course.
No, it was Freudian-based. Following a line through Melanie Klein, Bowlby, Winnicott (to name a few) following the development largely of attachment theory and object relations to the present day. It covered a huge amount but really ignored Jung.
Did you read up on Jung anyway?
No, there was enough to be looking at on the training. I read what was suggested to read and followed some other things up that I was interested in. I obviously did read a lot of Freud, and was particularly interested in Klein.
Do you feel that people will actively seek out therapists whose training is underpinned by a particular school of thought whether it’s Jungian, Freudian or other? Is this a prerequisite to people working with you?
Well I’ve never been asked. It’s good to have learnt about that history, though the most important thing is whether you’re psychodynamic or not and how you’re thinking about your clients. People are definitely interested to know that I’m a psychodynamic art therapist and that I’ve got that traditional training from Goldsmiths – then they generally know what they’re getting. Other therapy courses often have more of a spiritual element or focus more on dreams and visualisation.
Does the breadth of different art therapy courses make it harder for you to describe what you do as an art therapist?
Some people have a really good understanding and that’s really exciting. Some people are open to knowing more about it and that’s cool. And some people, no matter how well you explain it, are not going to get it and maybe don’t want to get it either. There’s definitely a lot of misunderstanding around it, a lot of people think you’re doing art teaching or art activities which you’re obviously not.
So do you have to be strict in saying this is what I do and it’s just this or do get asked to asked to do other things which aren’t geared towards art therapy?
When I’m doing art therapy I’m clear in saying that this is an art psychotherapy session, there are different boundaries. If I’m doing individual work they know that the room’s a no-go area for that hour, the work’s also kept confidentially so I won’t be giving the staff feedback. And if I’m working in an art therapy group there are rigid timeframes; the group takes place here and this is the time boundary, and it’s the same very week. It doesn’t change. Whereas if I’m doing art activities these things are more flexible.
Is it easy for you to switch between these different ways of working?
I always have done. When I was training was I still doing social art projects to earn a living and I ran other stuff too. I’m used to juggling different projects; I think I prefer it to doing one thing all of the time.
Given that art therapy has its own rules and ethical code did you find this way of working rigid having worked on other projects that offered you more flexibility?
Yeah it took some getting used to. At first I found it incredibly dogmatic and I thought it was a bit ridiculous and unrealistic. But then over time I’ve really appreciated how important those boundaries are and how important it is to contain the client you’re working with. The stuff that’s coming up in therapy needs regularity and clear boundaries so that it can be therapeutic and useful, otherwise it could be destructive.