http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/index.htmlHot News!enkingfisher@lagunamadre.netCopyright 2009 Scott and Kathy Sparrow2010-03-01T14:36:01-06:00 hourly 1 2000-01-01T12:00+00:00 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:40:25 -0500kingfisher@lagunamadre.netgroup dream work, five star method2010-03-01T14:36:01-06:00http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/93816a0097963136e4dc1adaa130b258-13.html#unique-entry-id-13http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/93816a0097963136e4dc1adaa130b258-13.html#unique-entry-id-13Students of the FiveStar Method often ask me how to apply the FSM in a therapeutic or personal growth group. Interestingly, I originally conceived the FSM as a group dream work method, probably because I received some training years ago with Montague Ullman, whose approach to group dream work is well known and highly effective. But after using the FSM in group and individual work, I've discovered that it doesn't depend on a group for its effectiveness. That being said, it can offer a group that is lead by a seasoned leader a very dynamic interactive process, which can enhance personal insight, faciliate interpersonal learning, and deepen intimacy.

The problem, as most therapists realize, is that a group of inexperienced group members will often make precipitous and invasive interpretations that effectively short-circuit the process of slower and surer discovery, and override the dreamer's role as the ultimate authority. This is partly due to the age-old belief that dream analysis involves figuring out what the dream is saying, or what it means. Within this tradition, dream workers focus on dream images or "symbols" as the carrier of meaning, and may set about to "solve the puzzle," rather than viewing the dream through the lens of cocreative or relational dream theory, which treats the dream as an interactive between the dreamer and the dream content that unfolds in real time. As the first systematic approach to relational dream work, the FSM focuses prinicipally on the dreamer's responses to the dream imagery--his or her feelings, thoughts, and reactions in response to what manifests "out there" in the dream. The FSM also views theses responses as "cocreative" of the dream's outcome, because the dreamer's reactions clearly affects how the imagery behaves, and so on, in an interactive feedback look. Until a group becomes familiar with this relational reorientation, they will operate according to the old model, and they will focus on interpreting the images rather than helping the dreamer see how he or she is interacting with, or relating to the dream content.

So it's important to put the group on notice from the outset that they will first have to learn how to contribute the dream work process, and that means the leader must be willing to control the process in a disciplined way until everyone gets the hang of it. You don't have to be a stormtrooper in providing corrective feedback, but you do have to intervene immediately to redirect wayward projections.

It helps to break down the five steps of the FSM into clearly delineated stages, and announce beforehand the focused tasks assigned to each stage. Much of your work will be to keep the group members from getting ahead of the process, so you can intervene with messages such as, "That's about the imagery. We're not there yet, so hold onto those ideas until we get there." Also, you can encourage savvy group members to help you "police" the process until everyone has adjusted to the requirements of the FSM. Some client/members will catch on quickly, but some will find the shift in worldview to be quite difficult to negotiate. But remember, controlling the process is very important, and if you're inclined to be overly polite, you will lose control of the process, and the dream work will quickly deteriorate into a trivial guessing game. So before you introduce the FSM to a group, you need to take stock of your readiness, as well as your group's capacity to adopt a very advanced and powerful therapeutic intervention.

In my next blog, I will recount a session of FSM group work to show you how the method can facilitate therapeutic movement.
]]>kingfisher@lagunamadre.netusing language to facilitate change2010-02-22T16:59:35-06:00http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/f1c07a4224d2a79f7ae98f2b6e9e5922-10.html#unique-entry-id-10http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/f1c07a4224d2a79f7ae98f2b6e9e5922-10.html#unique-entry-id-10Last week, I presented on Strategic Family Therapy in my Marriage and Family class. My students always love the stories of Haley's mentor, Milton Erickson, intervening in such a way as to circumvent client resistance and facilitate deep change through hypnotherapy and the sheer power of language. I have always loved these stories, and I use such methods from time to time. One of my favorite stories may or may not be true, but it is of Erickson as a young boy on his family's farm. He father was trying to get a cow to go into the barn, and was struggling at the halter. The cow was firmly uninterested in cooperating. The young Erickson convinced his father to let him help after his dad told him there was nothing he could do. Milton grabbed the cow's tail and ... pulled it away from the barn door. The cow walked through the door with Milton guiding him from behind. Everyone smiles when they hear this story. We all know that what Milton did was much more effective than his father's direct efforts.

In my opinion, a master therapist uses this philosophy even if he or she doesn't use the terms "strategic," or "paradoxical" to describe them, because fundamentally a seasoned therapist knows that the greatest accelerant to a person's recovery is getting the client's energy harnessed in the service of change. The problem is that our clients are often doing battle with themselves, thinking that if they can defeat a symptom, then they will be better off than before. They declare war on the symptom, and they end up being casualties of internal conflict. Most symptoms, however, express deep and reasonable aspirations, but the person has lost sight of that underlying intent. Think of the symptom (or unwanted behavior) as lying outside the circle of the self -- or in the case of family therapy, outside the family's values. As long as it's a threat, the individual client or family will try to defeat it. But if the symptom is, for example, an individual's own bodily desires, or a 14-year old "acting out" child, then the warfare that ensues is doomed from the outset. A master therapistmust find a way to bring that symptom inside the circle of the client's own self-identity or the family's rules and values. How?

It doesn't take trickery, even though brilliant interventions work like magic. It takes, fundamentally, a great deal of compassion and a commensurate willingness not to get bogged down in thinking of the problem the way that the client(s) do. Let's get practical, and look at an example of a situation that many therapists might have a hard time dealing with constructively: addiction to porn. How do you help a person achieve the goal of avoiding porn sites? A direct approach might call for applying willpower to defeat the problem. But of course, all you're doing as a therapist is trying to pull the cow into the barn when the client has already failed. Not likely that he or she is going to succeed just because you throw your weight behind their efforts, right?

A master therapist is not going to fall for that kind of warfare. But how can one be effective in achieving this very important therapeutic goal? The first step is to bring the symptom into the circle of the self. That is, the therapist has to reach deeply into the client's history and underlying aspirations and understand how this symptom is an attempt to achieve a reasonable, even necessary goal. What would that look like? The therapist, in using reframing in this circumstance has to find a way to reframe the problem as tolerable and even useful, and only then endeavor to redirect the client's focus. The therapist might say, "It appears to me that your desire to view sexually explicit material represents your desire for intimacy in a way that doesn't expose you to being hurt. As long as your fear of being hurt remains high, you will probably want to continue doing this. But if we can work on your fear of being hurt in relationships, I am pretty sure your desire for intimacy will assume other forms."

The therapist has thus succeeded in defining a course of action that does not declare war on the symptom itself. If the client accept this, it's as if the perimeter of the self has expanded, permitting the symptom to be incorporated into a larger circle. Does this mean that the client is going to feel better about viewing porn sites? That scenario is what keeps us from using such interventions. But it's not what happens. Whenever a symptom fits into a larger, more meaningful framework, the client's control of it usually increases, and his or her desire to pursue it decreases, even though that's not the therapist's initial (stated) goal.

If you want to grasp this methodology, think in terms of "normalizing" the client's struggle. I once told a woman who was suicidally depressed, "If you weren't depressed, you'd be crazy." That impressed her, because no one had ever appreciated the full extent of her suffering. We need to find a way to reframe the symptom so that it isn't so bad any more, and thus frees to the client not to do battle with it. It doesn't work, however, to skip reframing and to say, "That's not so bad," because all that does is to minimize your client's struggle. But if you can recast the struggle in a new light, then your efforts to normalize the symptom will probably work. When I honored my client's depression, she was able to see it as a rational response to a terrible set of circumstances, and thereby to accept her symptom.

It takes compassion, an accurate grasp of the client's underlying intentions, and a reframing that brings a symptom into the circle of the self.

Of course, there are several tactics that can accomplish this, including 1) predicting the continuation of the symptom, 2) prescribing the symptom, 3) reframing the symptom, 4) onedownsmanship, and 5) restraining or slowing the process of positive change. But they have little worth, in my opinion, unless they are wedded to a deep compassion for your client, who needs above all else to be respected and to gain self respect in the struggle for healing.
]]>kingfisher@lagunamadre.netdream imagery, cocreative dream theory, dreamer response2010-01-25T20:23:18-06:00http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/d19a67c9b3fdb3d1665f83882eee5783-9.html#unique-entry-id-9http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/d19a67c9b3fdb3d1665f83882eee5783-9.html#unique-entry-id-9Traditional dream work treats a dream image as a "given," a part of a text or narrative created by the subconscious mind and whose appearance is determined from the beginning of the dream. Cocreative theory, in contrast, treats the imagery as the "mutable interface" (my words) between the dreamer's consciousness and the dream content, which is unformed until it is observed. In cocreative theory, the dream image is a "quantum" event. That is, it does not exist prior to perception, but comes into consciousness as a cocreated product of the observer's "set" and the content's agenda. So the image is what physicists might call a resultant vector of two forces meeting. What makes this even more complex is that the image is a moment-to-moment, fluctuating interface--subject to change in response to the dreamer's reaction to it. Thus the image and dreamer are in a synchronous, reciprocal feedback loop. Modern family therapy is founded on this premise, which can be succinctly summarized as, "Reciprocity is the governing principle of relationships" (Nichols and Schwartz, 2008). Previously, this founding principle of systems theory has not been applied to dreams for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the age-old Greek theory of mimesis--that dreams represent something in our waking lives. So we ask, "What does Jane represent to you?" rather than, "What is the quality of relationship between you and the Jane figure and how is she changing in response to your style of relating to her, and vice versa?" This is a longer question, and generates a more complex answer, but it preserves the rich, dynamic, relational process that has been heretofore overlooked entirely in traditional dream work. This process is the same process that we understand to be at work in waking relationships. So cocreative dream theory sees the dream as possessing all of the ambiguity and indeterminacy of a waking experience, which unfolds according to the interaction between the observer and the phenomenal realm.

I have had wonderful mentors in my life. I am currently working with a particular man, who is undoubtedly one of the best dream analysts that I have ever met. I love my work with him. But his model of dream work does not focus on the dreamer's response to the dream. Like Jung, my mentor is acutely attuned to the imagery, and brings a prodigious, intuitive understanding of imagery into our work. While I would never tell him how to work with my dreams, I did notice recently how we would have treated a dream of mine slightly differently. Let me briefly summarize the dream:

I am at the opening to a cave. I see a stone wall ahead of me, and as I look up the face of the wall, a golden man crouches on the edge of a ledge on the wall. He hurls an axe or hammer toward the floor, near to where I stand. It buries itself in the stone floor. I know that the impact of the hammer/axe will set in motion an earthquake that will open up a vault within the cave that contains something previously unavailable and very precious. I am concerned, however, that the falling and collapsing stone might hurt me, so I withdraw from the cave's opening. As the tremors build, I pass by a being who is half deer and half man. I am aware of his power, so I carefully skirt him, and enter a place that is totally dark. I grope blindly through the darkness.

My mentor was surprised at the deer/man image because it is the image of the shaman in many of the native American traditions. And what's more, he is an initiated shaman of the Huichol Indians of central Mexico. While I did not know him when I had the dream two years ago, the dream obviously anticipated his future influence in my life. In our work, he focused on the theme of a meaningful upheaval that would release something essential that had been previously unavailable to me.

However, I was also acutely aware of how I had avoided the deer/man, and wondered if my mentor would zero in on my response to the figure as problematic. He didn't. I have to admit that I was slightly relieved but if I had been working with this dream, the dreamer's avoidant behavior would have been the most important aspect of the dream. Why? As I have said before, regardless of what the images mean or prefigure, if the dreamer is failing to engage them, and establish a relationship, then there's a problem, regardless of the refined quality of the imagery.

As I made my next appointment, I was a bit indecisive. After all, there's a part of me that believes (foolishly) that I can do it on my own. But I overcame that momentary resistance, and made my next appointment. He smiled and said, "I have been aware of your ambivalence." I said, "I think we need to talk about that."

And we will! But my anxious ambivalence was wholly evident in the dream; that is, if one treats the dreamer's responses as freely manifested, and as a cocreative influence. Indeed, he might have confronted my ambivalence a bit earlier if he'd viewed the dream through my approach to dreams, in which an analysis of the dreamer's responses to the imagery precedes and supercedes an analysis of the imagery itself. I don't think he needs my help. Ultimately, it's his approach and his presence that ministers to me at this time.]]>kingfisher@lagunamadre.netdream analysis, dream imagery2010-01-23T11:26:49-06:00http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/my%20newest%20blog%20post.html#unique-entry-id-5http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/my%20newest%20blog%20post.html#unique-entry-id-5In cocreative dream theory, nothing is fixed from the outset. The dreamer and the dream content interact in real time to cocreate the dream experience. A fundamental assumption of this approach is that the dreamer's beliefs, feelings, thoughts, and reactions influence the way the dream unfolds, and that any change in the dreamer's overall attitude or response set is mirrored by changes in the imagery. So the dreamer and the imagery are, to some extent, autonomous systems. But they are bound together in reciprocal interplay. It's kind of like marriage, in which a wife's needs may be perceived as demanding, leading the husband to believe that he needs to distance himself in order to be comfortable. The wife, in turn, sees him "doing what he always does," approaches and become more emphatic. You know what happens then. The interaction between the dreamer and the imagery is very similar if you are able to take off the traditional view of the dream as a fixed message, and see it as relationship process. A therapist working with the couple would endeavor to show them that they both play a part in the conflict, and that they each can bring about change by working on their side of the equation.

So let's look at the image for a moment. At first it may be a black dog, which turn turns into a threatening man, who then has a heart attack and dies when the dreamer hits him over the head with a frying pan. Pretty dramatic, right? In the traditional approach to symbols, the dream work might revolve around what a dog means, who or what the man represents, what a fying pan means, and what a heart attack means. The dreamer's responses might be seen as justified, and thus completely overlooked. This approach bears fruit, but from a cocreative standpoint, we're really missing the boat to take the separate images and analyze them apart from the interactive process. From a relational standpoint, we would be interested in what the dreamer did just before the dog turned into a man. That is, what she was thinking, feeling, and doing? She may have petted the dog, or she may have run from the dog. Mostly like the latter, right? Because in dreams, if you pet a dog or kiss a frog, it's likely to become more approachable and positive, just as in mythology and in fairy tales.

From the standpoint of cocreative dream work-- of which the Five Star Method may be the only systematic method developed thus far--we wish to analyze the dream much the way that a marriage therapist analyzes a complex relationship: We want to track the dreamer's responses over the course of the dream, and assist the dreamer in reviewing and considering alternatives to those responses. Perhaps the dreamer's reactions were based on fear. If so, we discuss how a less fearful response may have impacted the imagery and the eventual outcome. This is the essence of effective relational therapy, regardless of whether it takes place between a husband and wife, or between a dreamer and the dream images: In both cases, we are trying to analyze what is going on between the two parties, and get both of them to assume responsibility for their own actions and assumptions. Of course, dream work is a little different, because we don't have access to the dream imagery. But even family therapy, a therapist knows that systemic change will occur even when a single member of a system changes the way that he or she relates to it. Looking at the dream as an interactive process empowers the dreamer in determing a course of action that may change fundamentally the way that he relates to the dream and to the world.]]>kingfisher@lagunamadre.netspirituality, dreams2009-09-26T13:03:40-05:00http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/de35f08eb41a2e150842a5d474cc2ce5-1.html#unique-entry-id-1http://www.spiritualmentoring.com/page28/files/de35f08eb41a2e150842a5d474cc2ce5-1.html#unique-entry-id-1Some people might think I'm a brainy kind of guy, but actually I love simple, bold ideas. When I was in high school and was sent to a photography seminar, I was the only student with an old Crown Graphic press camera--you know, the big black box camera that weighed about 10 pounds. Everyone else had a 35 mm or a twin-lens reflex camera (sorry, no digital in 1966), so I stuck out as a casualty of my school's relative backwardness. When we turned in our photos at the end, I could only submit 8 shots, because each of my negatives were 4x5 inches, and the pro who taught the class said that he couldn't process any more than that. Everyone else turned in 36 shots. My photos were pretty pathetic, with the excepton of one photo that I took in a remote courtyard. In the middle of the quiet garden, there was a tiny fountain. I loved it. It was a perfectly symmetrical image, much like a mandala, and the focus on the resulting photo was razor sharp. In one sense it was dull and lacked dynamism, but it captured a simple beauty that I loved.

So what is the contemporary equivalent of that simple image in my own work? I suppose it's the idea that permeates everything I do...the idea that life and dreams is one unfolding initiation. That instead of evaluating the quality our experiences on the basis of external conditions, we might learn to see our high and low experiences alike as as challenges that make us draw deeply upon resources that we may not have yet tapped in our lives. And that every experience, no matter how discouraging or unsettling from the outside, can be "redeemed" by a response from the inside, such that our lives unfold toward wholeness in spite of the conditions that we face. Such a stance does not render us passive in the face of adversity; to the contrary, it challenges us to discover the very thing that we are called to do in response to it. Maybe to fight the good fight, perhaps to surrender.

That's the way I see dreams, as many of you know. Years ago, I realized that to "interpret" a dream without regard to what the dreamer did in the dream, and could have done, is to participate in the disavowal of responsibility, and the abdication of the only power that we really have: the power to respond to whatever comes to us. So my approach to dreams focuses on the dreamer's capabilties rather than the speculative and often-arbitrary process of trying to reduce the imagery to something familiar. The deeper meaning that we seek, and the communion for which we all yearn, still eludes us whenever we analyze only the content of our experience. But when we discover our capacity to respond differently, and tto ake responsibility for when we fail in doing what we are called to do, then we become warriors and initiates on a path that leads directly to ecstasy and joy. Of that simple fact, I am sure.]]>