not at all detailed enough..there should be 6 to 8 hours time put into this if
you dont want to take the rgular exam
on 678
Hey there Franz and Max...in JL Moreno's classical work, the distinction
between "tele" and "counter transference" is critical.
Franz seems to be suggesting that the Facilitator becomes enmeshed in the
countertransference and that his"tele for the microfield" becomes distorted.
While this might be true for Franz and should be respected, it would not
necessarily be true for others at least at times
. My sense is that Bert does what Bert does when he does it based on his
clarity regarding that distinction.
Physician heal thyself might be troped in the work to"Physician get clear when
you are clear and when you are not."
The same is true of representitives. In the most intense and healing of
processes, counter transference falls to zero on both leader and reps parts
and the work becomes pure service in hope...there the dance is with neither
arrest nor movement...when we are in the waves of the ocean we have left our
personal surfboards at home, all the best drjmpirone@xxxxxxx
web.mac.com/drjmpirone
On Monday, November 20, 2006, at 06:35PM, "Max Dauskardt"
<max@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Only a few days ago could I get hold of issue 8 of ? the knowing field? from
June 2006
and was glad to read the very interesting discussion about mirror neurons
between Jen Altman and Franz Ruppert.
About halfway down I got distracted from the topic of the discussion by the
following passage:
?Jen:.., the way I?ve seen Bert Hellinger work nowadays, he nearly always
selects the representatives himself. If a client comes to someone and says,
?Will you be my??? he could be channeling information. If the client is not
doing the selection, this becomes more problematic.
Franz : That?s why I don?t? do it. As a facilitator I may mix the client?s
process with my own issues. When I select the representatives instead of the
client I get too involved. As facilitator I am standing on the edge,
observing the system as a whole.
It is the client?s task to select the representatives;
The task of the representatives to express freely what they feel
anuyd the facilitator?s duty to make a solution happen step by step, within
the limits provided by the client.?
I am left wondering, is Franz stating his personal preference of working or
is he suggesting the above to be rules that are to be followed generally?
I fail to see why I get too involved when I select the reps, notwithstanding
of course the general possibility ? I may mix the client?s process with my
own issues? ,
something we eternally have to deal with anyway.
Not sure ?channeling? of information takes place during the moment of
selection, I rather feel, that is happening during and being aided by a
collected placing of the initial reps by the seeker/client.
while it is surely appropriate to ?stand on the edge? observing the system
as a whole, however just as much do I deem it appropriate to at times be
right in the centre of the constellation thus getting an ?insiders feeling?,
to then step back to check that from a different angle.
Franz?s allocating tasks and duties to the human elements of a constellation
seem a touch rigid to me; isn?t the process rather one of a communal
exploration, a journey into the unknown where at times the different parts
melt and converge into one another.
When it comes to me, the constellator, not knowing how to continue for
example, isn?t it frequently very helpful to say so and check with the other
participants, thus possibly getting fresh impulses, rather than breaking off
with a justifying: ?there is no energy here??
Being a constellator to my understanding is the privilege of temporarily
getting ?at times deeply- involved in someone elses family system, along
the way gaining insights into that system?s fate perhaps even it's destiny.
Max
