Skip to content
1981
Volume 27, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 0263-0672
  • E-ISSN: 2157-1430

Abstract

The following paper is based on research into a dramatic model of group supervision that was also informed by ideas from Jungian psychology. Postgraduate dramatherapy students were given the opportunity to reflect, embody and dramatise what they considered to be ‘significant moments’ from their placement practice over a period of ten weeks. A semi-structured interview was then carried out with each of the nine participants.

Analysis of their responses identified two emerging themes -1) a diversity of perspectives on the same session, where students who participated in the same work had different experiences and 2) working with the drama and the body in supervision offered the chance to reconnect with and investigate body-based experiences from practice.

Through continuing to use the art form of drama in supervision (in particular role-playing the client), it seemed that qualities and nuances of the session and the therapeutic relationship could be explored. In particular, some of the unconscious communication between therapist and client seemed to be exposed through working with the body and drama.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1080/02630672.2005.9689663
2024-05-28
2026-04-21

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ChesnerA. (1999). ‘Dramatherapy Supervision: Historical issues and supervisory settings’. Supervision and Dramatherapy Tselikas-PortmannE. London: Jessica Kingsley.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. CorbettL. (2003). ‘Supervision and the Mentor Archetype’. Supervision and Being Supervised- A Practice in Search of Theory WienerJ. MizenR. DuckhamJ. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Couroucli-RobertsonK. (1999). ‘Supervisory Triangles and the Helicopter Ability’. Supervision and Dramatherapy Tselikas-PortmannE. London: Jessica Kingsley.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. EmunahR. (1989). ‘The Use of Dramatic Enactment in the Training of Dramatherapists’. The Arts in Psychotherapy 16, no. 3 2936.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. FieldN. (1989). ‘Listening with the Body: An Exploration in the Countertransference’. The British Journal of Psychotherapy 5, (4) 512522.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. FordhamM. (1957). New Developments in Analytical Psychology London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. HallJ. A. (1995). ‘Dreams and Transference/Countertransference: The Transformative Field’. Transference Countertransference Schwartz-Salant SteinMurray Illinois, USA: Chiron.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. HawkinsP. ShohetR. (1990). Supervision In The Helping Professions Bristol, USA: Open University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. HillmanJ. (1977). The Myth of Analysis Illinois: Northwestern University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. JenningsS. (1999). ‘Theatre-based Supervision: A Supervisory model for Multi-disciplinary Supervisees’. Supervision and Dramatherapy Tselikas-PortmannE. London: Jessica Kingsley.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. JungC. G. (1953–78). The Collected Works of C.G. Jung ReadH. Sir FordhamM. AdlerG. HullR. F.C. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul umes cited: 7. The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche 2nd ed. (1969) 17. Symbols and the Interpretation of Dreams 2nd ed. (1961).
    [Google Scholar]
  12. JungC. G. (1998). The Psychology of the Transference London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. KuglerP. (1995). Jungian Perspectives on Clinical Supervision Einsiedeln, Switzerland: Daimon.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. LahadM. (2000). Creative Supervision: The Use of Expressive Arts Methods in Supervision and Self-Supervision London: Jessica Kingsley.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. LewisP. (2000). Current Approaches in Dramatherapy Illinois: Charles C Thomas.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. McNiffS. (1998). Art-Based Research London: Jessica Kingsley.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. SamuelsA. (1985). ‘Countertransference, the Mundus Imaginalis, and a Research Project’. Journal of Analytical Psychology 30, 4751.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Schwartz-SalantN. (1998). The Mystery of Human Relationship, Alchemy and the Transformation of the Self London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Schwartz-SalantN. (1995). ‘Archetypal Factors Underlying Sexual Acting-Out in the Transference/Countertransference Process’. Transference Countertransference Schwartz-Salant SteinMurray Illinois, USA: Chiron.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. SedgwickD. (2000). The Wounded Healer: Countertransference from Jungian Perspective Hove, UK: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. SteinM. (1995). ‘Power, Shamanism and Maieutics in the Countertransference’. Transference Countertransference Schwartz-Salant SteinMurray Illinois, USA: Chiron.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Tselikas-PortmannE. (1999). Supervision and Dramatherapy London: Jessica Kingsley.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Von-FranzM. L. (1980). Projection and Re-Collection in Jungian Psychology- Reflections of the Soul Illinois: Open Court Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Von-FranzM. L. (1970). The Golden Ass of Apuleius- The Liberation of the Feminine in Man London: Shambhala.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Von-FranzM. L. (1999). Archetypal Dimensions of The Psyche Boston: Shambhala.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. WienerJ. R. Mizen DuckhamJ. (2003). Supervision and Being Supervised- A Practice in Search of Theory New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1080/02630672.2005.9689663
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test