Foucault & Poststructuralist inquiry: Archived reflections

Mohammad: December 16, 2008

When I first heard about the “gaze” and the shift it has taken in time by Foucault, something in me shifted also. I lived most of my childhood and youth as the “lamb” that Lynn talked about, very shy, much in need of “affirmative action” to bring me out and none was in sight in the patriarchal culture of Iran. I will be 52 soon and I still blush easily, though I no longer behave exclusively like a “lamb.”

Collaborative learning- what I it seems is what is promoted through poststructural is, postmodern thought, which I am posting here to indicate that I would very much like to learn more about- to me is encapsulated in a quatrain by Omar Khayyam. If Africans always say something about the weather, Iranins can not finish a conversation without reciting a line or two or even an entire poem that they have in heart, with which they believe they can concisely describe what may take numerous pages to convey, if at all possible. Khayyam lived in the 11 hundreds and was very mathematical and cared much about simplicity of thought and saying more with less:
“This ocean that has come to being out of the hidden,
There is no one who can pierce the Jewel of its meaning.
Every one has talked out of personal anxt,
Of the way it is no one can tell!”

To me, if it is so that no one can tell of the mystery, it then gives more credence to what I can tell from my very unique vantage point, this now that is exclusive only to me from here in my skin. This points to a Jewel with as many cuts as there are people, every face represented. Each view point imbued with knowledges, each face sheding light on one aspect that only can be done by that one individual. Every point of view just as valid an known illuminating all that is there to come to fore from the hidden. Collectively, however, there is hope that we may shine such light that we may begin to see the path that we may want to take the next step onto. Silencing the lambs keeps us all in the dark. To reach the sun we must all roar, masquerading even if we have to, as lambs in lions’ skin!
I wish you all a wonderful season of light.
May the Holidays bring joy to your hearts!
Mohammad

Peggy: March 1, 2009

I love your passion, Bonnie! And Mohammad, your post reminds me of how happy I am that you have chosen to become more of a “lion” only with a poet’s “lambness.”

I am encouraged to know you are interested in further studying the French philosophers. I have a particular reason. By some incredible stroke of good fortune, I have been hired to co-teach (with Gaye Stockell from Sydney Australia) the first week of a year long training programme in narrative therapy in…Paris! You can read about it here (to the extent you can read French!) www.narrativepractices.com. As a result, Gaye & I are embarking on a fast furious studies of French thinkers – in particular: 1) Gilles Deleuze; 2) Jacques Derrida 3)Michel Foucault 4) Pierre Bourdieu (who apparently is one of those who thought early about narrative identity; 5) Jacques Revel (who applied a ladder/scale in history, to conceptualize micro history and macro history. There are others: Gaston Bachelard, Paul Ricoeur, Francisco Varela, Ignace Meyerson and Tzvetan Todorov who…I know are important but I feel rather ignorant about. Andre, any chance you would like to join us here? I think there is much we can learn from you. I am most intrigued by Gilles Deleuze. Everyone seems to be talking about him these days. I hear John Winslade has just written a Famiy Process article about Deleuze, but I haven’t seen it yet.

I am now thinking about schedules….I first want to devote time to Michael White – who would be interested in also studying Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault? Beginning in April? Nothing real fancy, just some basic understandings. I know when I first started out studying Foucault, I was greatly helped by an adult comic book – did anyone else read this as well?

Andre, do you have something to recommend that we might read (in English) about Deleuze? Anything you have written?

Peggy

March 6, 2009

I’m on a quest to better understand links intellectual ancestors for narrative practice – and in particular, the relevance of the French philosophers. When I discovered narrative therapy (what it was called before the “narrative practice days”) in the early 1990s, I was already a family therapist. Hence, I first understood narrative therapy as a development in thefield of family therapy – one of the collaborative therapies that emerged as an alternative to systemic, strategic or structural family therapy. I was already an enthusiastic student of dialogic/ collaborative language sytems (Tom Andersen, Lynn Hoffman, Harlene Anderson) so I experienced studying narrative as further steps on a path…

Now when I look back, some memories stick. I remember how cautious Michael W was in entering conversations about narrative therapy as a development in the field of family therapy. He was insistent (more gentle in his insistence in later years) of narrative therapy as not simply a development within the field family therapy, but linked with emergent ideas in poststructuralist philosophy, literary theory and anthropology. I think Michael was more enthusiastic about reading postructuralist philosophy than anything said by any therapy theorist/practitioner.

I just read a draft article by John Winslade called “Tracing lines of flight: Implications of the work of Gilles Deleuze for narrative practice.” It has just been accepted by Family Process. I took several readings for me to start getting it – and it’s been worth it. If there is interest, I can try to explain more of what I am learning. In the meantime, I want to add this favorite quote that John cites in this article. I heard Gene Combs read the same quote recently – and I am very happy to finally find it.

Those of you/us who had the privilege of knowing Michael, do yu remember how often he used the word “Joy?” One of the places he described feeling joy was when he first read Foucault. Here is what he wrote:

“Upon first reading Foucault on modern power, I experienced a special joy. This joy was in part due to his ability to unsettle what is taken-for-granted and routinely accepted, and to render the familiar strange and exotic. Apart from other things, I found that this opened up new avenues of inquiry into the context of many of the problems and predicaments for which people routinely seek therapy.”

White, M. (2002). Addressing personal failure. International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work, 2002(3), 33–76. p. 36.

I want to experience more and more joy in my work. Do you think it is a reasonable goal to experience more joy in studying Foucault, Deleuze, Derrida and…? I know I feel joy about this study group becoming a place where we can make more visible – and share with each other – our explorations into experiences that unsettle the
taken-for-granted and routinely accepted,” and in ways that “render the familiar strange and exotic.” Reading that quote from Michael, I want to yell out “YES!” I too want my exchanges with people (in and out of the consultation room) to open up new avenues of inquiry, so we can together transform problems and predicaments in all sorts of contexts. Michael (and Foucault’s) words really resonate with me and inspire me. What about you?

More to say, but must run…
peggy

Bonnie Miller: March 18, 2009

Hello Peggy, everyone

[waving]

Just finding this new trove of threads, so expect I will be busy typing for the morning…

Peggy, I echo your YES! re Foucault and MW’s appreciation and excitement.

unsettle the taken for granted- doesn’t this bring a new charge into life? and I find that this attitude has already born fruit- it doesn’t have to be LARGE- in fact, I think it may be most effective when it is done small- incremental…

I felt this recently in our peer practice group- 4 therapists in private practice, all women. We are focusing on defining our practice vision (because none of us have a large client group at the moment) We are using a workbook, called “12 Months to your Ideal Private Practice”- some of the group felt awkward about the exercises because they realized they did not want to GROW their practice in terms of more clients- and questioned whether the workbook/group was meaningful for them.

Our conversation was so interesting following this- we began to discuss ideas of success, our position as women with partners who have income, our definitions of self and accomplishment and where those come from- our relationship with money, with privilege, with standards and external measures- whew. It was GREAT! we got started on taking apart some significant assumptions, and I know that everyone felt invigorated, affirmed and more interested in their own understandings by the end of the hour and a half.

I am pretty sure we would not have gone there, without MW and Foucault…

For me, this is an area of Great excitement- the challenge is how to take the ideas and make them available to people who are not inclined or able to read about it- bringing the ideas into conversations, and asking those provocative, unusual questions- then watching and participating in the untying of knots- Joy is a great word for what happens when this is taking place. And the conversations linger- this is the gift back to my life- that I go away still engaged with the conversation and what it means for me- so unusual, so different from previous experience in my work life….

Bonnie

Kevin Nielsen: April 7, 2009

Hello everyone. I just posted a reply but unfortunately I lost it. Oh well. Just wanted to say how inspiring and stimulating I have found these readings to be. Peggy, I am curious to hear more of your studies and learning of the “clairovoyant philosophers” (I love that term from Lynn Hoffman). Yesterday I read David Epston’s tribute to Michael White. I was struck by how he said that Michael felt joy in reading Foucault. As David pointed out, he could so easily move back and forth between the realm of ideas and practice. He drew from so many different fields, literary theory, anthropology, etc. I think it is easy to be drawn in and confined to one’s particular discipline. I too find it joyful to engage in ideas that expand and broaden, that offer possibilities and become fertile ground for new growth.

Bonnie I really loved this quote of yours: “For me, this is an area of Great excitement- the challenge is how to take the ideas and make them available to people who are not inclined or able to read about it- bringing the ideas into conversations, and asking those provocative, unusual questions- then watching and participating in the untying of knots- Joy is a great word for what happens when this is taking place.”

Peggy, count me in as someone who is interested in reading the article in the Journal of Systemic Therapies on Teaching and Learning Postmodern Therapies (Vol 25 -Issue 4).

While we are thinking of ideas, I came across a website (www.eastsideinstitute.org) that others might be interested in. I have visited it a few times in the past. They have a library you can access with articles on postmodern psychologies, language, vygotsky etc. I am intrigued with their ideas on social therapeutics, performance and how they are inspired by Vygotsky and Marx. Interesting stuff.

Mohammed, I loved this line in the poem you posted, “This ocean that has come to being out of the hidden.” Makes me think of how all these ideas, these words and philosophies seem like an ocean and full of possibility, emerging from something hidden.

Kevin

 

Bonnie: April 9, 2009

Kevin!
Thank you for this link- I just dipped a toe into the water and found this East Side Institute reference list of postmodern psychologies:

I think it is a great conversation starter- Lois Holzman- talks about redefining ‘groups’ and how we perform socially- very interesting! I like that she says we don’t do groups that well- it makes me think that the idea of ‘group’ is pretty invisible- that we function so dominantly as individuals…

now- I am aware of my location as a white, English-speaking, North American- and I wonder if there are members here who would respond differently to this idea of ‘doing groups’- my culture emphasises the individual to such an extreme degree- are there alternative experiences here, in our forum?

Bonnie

Bonnie, I am really glad you posted this link. I hadn’t read this before, but have found myself thinking about it these past few days. I only have a few minutes but I have wanted to say something. This makes me think of an interesting book I read called Constructing the Self, Constructing America by Philip Cushman. He gives a cultural history of psychotherapy that makes for interesting reading. We do live in such an individualistic culture. We think of our “self” as this bounded, rational entitity. We don’t do groups well, yet we are in them. Thanks again. There is much to be said on this.

Jordi Freixas Dargallo: February 13, 2010

I have found a video where Foucault summarizes very clearly his views about the power of discourse/the discourse of power. His contribution is subtitled in English

 

Ítalo Latorre: May 24, 2010

Hello

In other part I post that in a course I hold a discussion with students about how to look a person that did a very “social punished” action like murder, or abuse. How to see this person without totalise him with: murderer, rapist, pedophile, etc… this not in the context with having to “report or seek justice”, but in the context we have to work with one person who before made this action, perhaps in yale…

To be able to dont´t totalise this person since perhaps one action (the murder, the rape), although this event is terrible and very social punishment. I question to the students whether is any person who cry for him, and whether that is a real posibility, why they think this person cry ing or suffering for this “terrible” person. This was very interesting, the students engage with a very diverse opinion discussion. We also speak about the ethics in our work, but trying to “separate” the responsability of the person for this action, of totalising his/her identity. I think this is a very difficult task for discussing.

I remembered the first part of David Denborough´s book (Collective Narrative Practice) and his work with the men who had previously sexually abused women. How this men in a Structural therapeutic context has no posibility for be seen like a person. He had been diagnosed as psychotic and had been prescribed that “has no empathy, so you can not work with him as it is impossible to generate therapeutic relationship”. However, as seen from non-structural view, you can richly engage with his experience and promote responsability (“real” or “ethic” responsability, the one that include the person, not only in punishment)

Well, I engage very powerfully with non-structuralist thought, I think because in my own life had have a very important impact. I feel more free and I feel I can change without thinking that I am wrong! I want to practice more this in my life, I think is a really way to respect myself.

Hoping to understand my English and ideas.

Ítalo Latorre

James McCracken: October 4, 2010

I, for one, would love to better understand the philosophical underpinnings to narrative practices… I have a few Foucault books, but, I tell you, they have been so incredibly difficult to digest. Something about the way he wrote is very hard for me to understand… if there are other writings of his that are easier to understand, I’d be happy to read them.

[abbr title=”I also wonder how much contributions from folks like Thomas Kuhn”]I also wonder [/abbr], Herbert Brun, Benjamin Lee Whorf, Claude Shannon, Humberto Maturana, and Francisco Varela have had on social constructionist ideas that may have bled into narrative practices. Would it be worth finding some select works to review in the future (i.e. Maturana and Varela’s “Tree of Knowledge”)?

Lately I’ve also been reading some papers written by the integrative school of psychotherapy, which propose that all therapies generally fulfill healing and change through catharsis and internalization practices, which, when you get to understand what they mean by this, it makes a lot of sense for most therapies…. except narrative therapy. My current understanding of narrative therapy seems so much more than and so different from catharsis and internalization practices, but I’m having trouble pinpointing exactly what is more and different than those practices about narrative therapy. I think a better understanding of the philosophical background of narrative therapy and perhaps the political implications for these ideas may also be important to better appreciating the difference. James

Bonnie, I am really glad you posted this link. I hadn’t read this before, but have found myself thinking about it these past few days. I only have a few minutes but I have wanted to say something. This makes me think of an interesting book I read called Constructing the Self, Constructing America by Philip Cushman. He gives a cultural history of psychotherapy that makes for interesting reading. We do live in such an individualistic culture. We think of our “self” as this bounded, rational entitity. We don’t do groups well, yet we are in them. Thanks again. There is much to be said on this.

Reflections by Members of The Narrative Practices Adelaide Certificate Programme

Tim Goldfinch: April 30, 2011

Hi Peggy, Italo, Bonnie, Maggie and Sonja

Thank you for such a thoughtful and inspiring conversation about post-structuralism and therapy. I was drawn to your posts following Maggie’s reflections on the NPA Study Group’s posts on Externalisation and as a result of reflections on my own journey in developing a personal/professional poststructuralist identity in the work that I do.

This is my first full post in the broader forum and I’m relatively inexperienced in participating in this process, as well as being at the early stages of my learning in relation to Narrative Practice, so please excuse me if I’m a little clumsy with this process and while I learn how to usefully contribute to these conversations. In some ways I think my post might better sit in the Cross Contextual Exchange part of the forum. However, I feel it also sits well with the themes you discuss above.

Your overall conversation has been very helpful for me as I begin to navigate my way through a number of personal and professional intersections and has enabled me to take steps to more clearly locate myself in a poststructuralist and narrative approach to my own practice.

I’m a social worker here in Adelaide and work with young people under long-term Guardianship of the Minister, which in other jurisdictions might be understood as working with young people (and their foster carers) in the care of the state. I come to my current position with a history of, and range of experiences, working within and adjacent to the statutory child protection system here in South Australia.

Working as I do in a large organisation that is heavily influenced by legislation, accountability to the courts, protocols, and the inevitable and sometimes uncomfortable manifestations of vertical power, I experienced many resonances in response to Peggy’s original questions i.e.

“How do you respond to the challenge in those places in which the dominant thinking is structuralist, and the effects aren’t really important to the ones that make the decisions, because of this other way of thinking?”

I should also add that due to the adversarial nature of court processes in relation to child abuse, I and many of my colleagues very often find ourselves located in a context where structuralist thinking and its effects are all too visible in the lives of the people that we work with.

Initially, I wondered whether I would be able to navigate my way through this context, the challenge seemingly too large to deal with when I first started to implement a poststructuralist approach to my work. However, I want to share with you how, with each small step I make during this process, I find myself more comfortably negotiating the landscape of this journey.

My use of language was the obvious starting place and I’ve spoken about this in another post in the NPA forum. In my earliest attempts to step into a poststructuralist approach to my work, more often than not I felt as if I was trying to think in one language and speak in another (a kind of bilingual/non-native speaker experience) and consequently felt as if I had an first hand understanding of some of the effects of the dichotomous thinking suggested by Peggy. I don’t have the same experience now and feel as if I’ve begun piecing together maps that are helping to guide me in my further explorations of a poststructuralist approach to practice in my agency.

Cate Ryan’s comments (another member of my study group) in her post “Multistories and Australia’s Journey towards Reconciliation” about her recognition of the effects of a single story, Peggy your thoughts in your post about taking time to listen and understand other points of view, as well as Maggie, your words about the care you take in highlighting the positive intention of the history of structuralist ways of working when you teach these distinctions, have also led me to different place in relation to my thinking.

As a result of your comments, I’ve come to recognize a broader context of intention in my agency that seeks to reach for and engage in practices that are in fact consistent with some of the values and philosophies underpinning Poststructuralism i.e. respect, collaboration and transparency in decision making, the underlying principles and values that inform social work, not to mention the commitment of many of my colleagues to enact those principles.

These values and commitments (which are in fact are part of our agency’s preferred vision of practice) provide a strong reference point for me to more easily enter into conversations with and seek support from my colleagues about my journey. Indeed, I’ve also been made aware of an opportunity to seek the support of one of our Principal Social Workers (a key reference person regarding professional practice and development in our agency) who has already demonstrated a strong interest in developing poststructuralist approaches to practice in our organisation.

When I reflect on these small steps and opportunities in my journey toward more effectively engaging in a poststructuralist approach in my workplace and recognise that within this context there are people with values and intentions that are similar to my own and whose stories might have been submerged and/or silenced by some of the constraints our workplace i.e. workloads, lack of resources, administrative and accountability burdens, as well as having to manage the daily effects of working with people struggling with abuse and trauma, far from feeling overwhelmed and/or despondent about structuralism when it appears to dominate people’s thinking and work practices, I’m actually left feeling excited about the potential for increased engagement with my colleagues about alternative ways of thinking about and working with people.

Bonnie’s comments about honouring the distinction between structuralist and poststructuralist thinking through curiosity and a mutual exploration of these effects strike a very strong chord for me. She put so well when she said:

“If we consider the various assumptions of thought, look at the effects and then take a position on the effects- we are not taking a position on the assumptions- but on the effects of these assumptions- then we are in the land of intention, and personal choice”.

For me this is such a useful position to assume in the context of my own workplace, as well as with professionals from other agencies that work alongside me.

The questions I have at the moment, ones that seem to take more time than I currently have available to fully explore and consider, range around how structural and procedural aspects of workplaces and organisations (like a statutory child protection agency) might reflect the social metaphors by which we live, and how these might shape the way we work with people i.e. in a hard pressed, resource thin social work agency, where workers are seen as objects of production rather than people who collaborate with others and/or help facilitate change, how this situation might influence the type of work that occurs, and with whom?… In my more recent exploration of the use and effects of structuralist/internalising language in my own practice, I was left wondering whether there might be a link between stucturalist thinking and the pressure that some workers might experience to reach certain outcomes. Questions like this remind me of the socio-political context of workers and therapists as well as the problems that people bring with them to our workplace.

Regards, Tim.

Sonja Bar-Am: April 30, 2011

Hi Tim, Hi All,
Welcome Tim to the wider forum, it’s great to hear/read your careful thoughtful deliberations in identifying what questions interest you.
What stood out to me from your post is your active agency in making what might otherwise have been abstracted ‘poststructuralist thinking or good sounding philosophy-come-policy ideas’ into more tangible actions. Your steps in activating ways of thinking that are fast becoming important to you. You say..

“These values and commitments (which are in fact are part of our agency’s preferred vision of practice) provide a strong reference point for me to more easily enter into conversations with and seek support from my colleagues about my journey. Indeed, I’ve also been made aware of an opportunity to seek the support of one of our Principal Social Workers (a key reference person regarding professional practice and development in our agency) who has already demonstrated a strong interest in developing poststructuralist approaches to practice in our organisation.wow .. Opportunities to seek support! It gets me being curious about what you might be finding important about that particular type of support from others? Is this a new discovery for you, or is there a history of a special supportive type of collaboration with others that you value and that might stand you in good sted in enacting your work and justice for children?”It sounds exciting and energizing, there are so many questions…I am wondering also how child protection issues are thought about and actioned in other parts of the world? Cheers Sonja…

Tim: April 30, 2011

Hi Sonja, Hi All,

Thank you for your warm welcome. My entry into this wider forum in some ways reflects a similar type of journey I’ve been initiating in my workplace, so your questions are particularly relevant to me. For some time now I’ve been aware of the effects of isolation in the work that my colleagues and I do, and I know this might sound unusual for a social worker to say, but it’s only recently, and I might say even through taking steps to enter into and engage with this learning collaboratory and the overall context of this experience i.e. a more active engagement with narrative ideas, a more conscientious consideration of the social construction of problems and identity and reflecting upon how I have turned the lens of internalizing practice on myself, that I feel more able to take steps to seek this kind of support from others in my professional journey… A very liberating and exciting experience for me.

One of the things that I’m finding important about reaching out to others for support of this kind is how it’s me to challenge my own internalised notions of expertise and take pleasure in the opportunities to join with and collaborate with others in ways that are affirming of our preferred ways of practicing and being in the workplace. It’s an opportunity to step into a preferred vision of profession identity that is (hopefully) unburdened by the effects isolation; which in my workplace could be seen as one aspect of a “socio-political context” which, in my opinion, strongly contributes to the all to regular experience of burnout in our organization.

Regards, Tim

 

Click here to read/join further conversation about Foucault, modern power and inquiry.