Hi Wilfried and others,
Since not all CT members with a first language other than English feel
entirely comfortable with English (including myself), the use of English is
naturally selective.
However, I do not share Wilfried's concerns, e.g. the consequence that CT
does not really represent the whole world of constellation work. That's
fine to me.
Integrating or representing any different movements may be of scientific
interest. From a practitioner's point of view I'd rather be specific and
have local knowledge.
That's why I really appreciate local topics. For example, saying "sorry" to
the Aboriginal Australians has been such an important issue to the whole
nation (which is my new home country) for many years. It's been absolutely
fantastic that it got a place in CT - a good place in fact. Labelling such
issues as "only local" is also a form of censorship.
In my formal psychology training, I was always encouraged to be specific -
it limits top down processes.
It may yet be useful, to have a lively reflection about political issues,
such as the American election.
Why should CT facilitators or therapists abstain from these issues, if they
are moved by them?
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all of you
Frank Breuer,
raised in Germany,
recently moved to Sydney, Australia
From: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of wilfriednelles
Sent: Wednesday, 17 December 2008 7:51 AM
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [SPAM][ConstellationTalk] CT function
Hi all
This is a voice from the outside. This so called censorship seems to be a
really exciting
issue. There seem to be a lot of fears and projections, and an
overestimation of CT. It
stimulated me to think about the function of CT and who is included and who
is excluded.
I would like to mention a few points which are much more exclusive than the
new
guidelines (please forgive my language mistakes):
1) This forum is a private initiative, a deliberate service. So Chris has
every right to
handle it in his own way.
2) There is already a hidden "censorship": the language. As this forum is in
English it has
a big bias towards the Anglo-American community. There is, for example, only
one
German facilitator who makes regulary contributions - Sneh, who is married
with an
American and speaks English at home. Only once in a while you'll find a
contribution from
the Latin-American or Asian or European countries. It seems, as if the FC
community is
merely American / Australian, although the work itself is much stronger in
other parts of
the world. For example: the hype about the American elections - what had it
to do with
FC? The discussion about the apology of the Australian Prime Minister - it
is a local
phenomenon. Or Dan Cohen's PhD? I mean, it's fine that he made it, and it is
good to
know that there is another dissertation, but there are so many peaces of
profound work in
other countries, which are not even mentioned. So the language of the forum
creates a
reality on it's own. To make it clear: I am not against English as the forum
language, but
we should see the implications. Actually it excludes more people from the
discussion then
any new guideline. To me, who is working in many countries in Europe and
Asia but not in
the Anglo-Saxon countries, it is like reading the newspaper to get an
impression what the
people in America and Australia are talking about.
3) So any forum or even an organisation like ISCA will not reflect the
international
community. By the very fact that the language is English it will reflect
basically the Anglo-
American discussion and view. When, for examle, I read the basic article
about
constellations on the ISCA webpage I didn't feel represented at all. I
honour the huge work
which has been done by those who created this site but reading this article
I felt it is a
different world. To me it is a very artificial construction about FC and
it's "roots" (which
are merely products of thought) which tries hard to look sophisticated and
scientific. I
didn't find any depth in it. No soul, no spirit, just thought. This of
course is not only a
question of language, but it seems clear that the language creates a shift
in the
perspectives and discussions. This may not be bad, and I don't see any
alternative to
English as the international language, but it has it's consequences.
4) I think the forum is a very useful tool to connect, but not more. And it
is an
American-Australian forum, it doesn't represent or integrate something like
the
international FC community. And similar will be a blog on the ISCA website.
5) To write this took me twice or three times as long then to write in my
own language.
And I am only able to share informations, I am not able to express myself
authentically.
Wilfried Nelles, Germany
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
