Moreno's Heritage (Adam's response to Peter)

Sun Apr 26 19:39:28 CDT 2009

1. Dear Peter,

         Well, I think I agree pretty much with everything you say. About your last point, the need for a textbook: 

    Have you ever seen or looked over my book, Foundations of Psychodrama, expanded and revised in its 4th ed in 2000?  I think that is a textbook. No doubt it could benefit from further revision, but I await some point-by-point suggestions as to how to improve it. 

2. In that book I clearly affirm and will here do so further that indeed I think and am quite certain that Moreno was a seminal thinker, a visionary, clearly 50 -150 years before his time. I agree with him fully about a number of his concepts, 
    the central metaphysical function of creativity and the importance of living with it
       the problem that comes with relying on the cultural conserve
          the value of spontaneity as the most effective way to maximize creativity
      The use of drama as a vehicle for this endeavor
    The appreciation of the personal, interpersonal, and group dynamic of rapport or tele
            The possibilities that as we grow more willing to be conscious about this dynamic we may adjust our social endeavors accordingly
   and on and on... 

    These seminal ideas I give fully to Moreno. And I also say that much of what he has written needs to be build on, occasionally revised, and that while respecting him, that doesn't mean we should be afraid to critique certain ideas, ways of presenting an idea, and other matters. 
        How was this all not clear to you? 

       In my Foundations of Psychodrama book, by the way, I commented on a history of Moreno, why his stuff is great, and why it's not more widely accepted, by quoting Jung:  

Carl G. Jung, in the 1948 foreword to Esther G. Harding's book, Psychic energy: Its source and its transformation (p. xi) ( New York: Pantheon Books), wrote, regarding the evolution of not just the different schools of psychology or psychotherapy, but more generally about the emergence of new ideas, the following:

"The pioneer in a new field has the good fortune to be able to draw valid conclusions from his total experience. The efforts and exertions, the doubts and uncertainties of this voyage of discovery have penetrated his marrow too deeply to allow the perspective and clarity which are necessary for a comprehensive presentation. Those of the second generation, who base their work on his groping attempts, the chance hits, the circuitous approaches, the half-truths and mistakes of the pioneer, are less burdened and can take more direct roads, envisage further goals. They are able to cast off many doubts and hesitations, concentrate on essentials, and in this way map out a simpler and clearer picture of the newly discovered territory. The simplification and clarification redound to the benefit of those of the third generation who are thus equipped from the onset with an over-all chart. With this chart they are enabled to formulate new problems and mark out the boundaries more sharply than ever before."

Have I responded to your comments or have I perhaps missed the point?   Warmly, Adam

     Warmly, Adam

 ----- Original Message ----- 

  From: Peter Howie 
  To: Group talk Listserv 
  Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 7:05 PM
  Subject: Re: scholarship and liveliness of mind

  Hi again Adam,

  I've got myself into one of those times when there seems to be some serious work everyday of the week, for weeks on end. Fun but tiring and not so much left over for this stuff.

  Having said that...

  With regards to reifying or idealising Moreno I have a couple of reflections and a few comments. The comments are easy so lets start there..... come to think of it both areas are tough. So unfortunately I will still simplify but I hope you get the gist. 

  In relations to Moreno's writings I am reminded of two things : First is a quote perhaps apocryphal rather than true but related to Philip Adams (fam,ous local radio personality and philosopher) by Mikhail Gorbachev a few years ago when he was being asked about his revolution which opened up the USSR.

  "You may know that your neighbours, the Chinese, who are not too far from you, years ago they invited a French delegation to come to China. That was when Premier Zhou Enlai was still alive. A young woman from that French delegation put this question to Zhou Enlai, 'Mr Premier, what is your assessment of the impact of the French Revolution on the world and, in particular, on China?' He answered very quickly, almost without missing a beat, he said, 'It is too early, it is too soon to tell,' and that was 170 years after the French Revolution."

  And the second things is And the other is that it wasn't until 75 years after the publishing of his theory of evolution that Darwin began to be influential.

  This is all to say that much of what Moreno wrote, he was only describing the coat-tails of or the tail-end bit and there was a lot more connected to it. This is similar to a lot of profound writings that take more than unpackaging with a critical eye. They require life experience and life challenges to make more of. I think all of it requires to be taken further not the other way around. However the desire to take it further comes from a profound capacity to reverse roles with the man. This is somewhat problematic because, well, he isn't around in that traditional sense. But his idea of tele, as a thing, an actuality that connects us up one to another is a rather profound and troubling idea especially if we were to consider it less an idea and more a practical reality. So rather than Moreno the father more we could have Moreno to explorer. He opened up vast areas of the human universe and most of it is still lying idle. Some areas have been expended and stretched and mined. Others are still sitting there, as they were before he and other discussed them. Moreno was more into the ontological side of philosophy but at the same time was into the experiencing of being not just the understanding of it. Some of his challenges are rather Zen but what the hey! I am still contemplating some of the outrageous suggestions/provocations/challenges in his Theatre of Spontaneity (which I can't find at the moment as I must have lent it out). I am thinking of the one about (paraphrased) "God did it the first time and it was a stuff up and now we can do it again on the psychodrama stage and complete something."

  This is another way of saying that I don't think many people are under his shadow because they would have to find it first. Here we are discussing the purpose of the writing as against the substance of the writing or the heart of the law as against the letter of the law. Often though we need to understand the letter of the law, the letters and words of Moreno in order to take the next steps. I am not so post-modern that I believe that the human world is without structure and boundaries. But I am not sure about others. Adam my favourite book at the moment (for the last 12 months actually) is "On being certain: believing you are right even when you are not" by Robert Burton and I hope to do a little critique and put it on my blog. This book is easier to read than Moreno but its implications are of a similar order. The implications will take and sensible person a long time to integrate and make sense of. This is my way of saying that the ideas are still in play. Substantially still in play. 

  Part of the dilemma with regards sticking with an idea way past its use-by-date has to do with cognitive dissonance. And another recently favourite book dealt with that called "Mistakes were made (but not by me)" by Tavris and Aronson. Like many books it is one idea stretched forever and applied to everything but they have done pretty well with it. I spent quite a few years in a spiritual group - way after I knew it was suspicious but I had made significant investments so I found I could with some ease reorganise myself to still feel OK about being in the group. Possibly explains some of my interest in the rubbery qualities of human thought and belief.

  I am thinking we need a text book. Something with the basics explicated in some depth. A major work no doubt.

  Cheers

  Peter

  Peter Howie B.Sc, TEP
  Managing Director
  The Moreno Collegium for Human Centred Learning, Research and Development
  0411 873 851
  www.morenocollegium.com.au

  On 15/04/2009, at 12:37 AM, Adam Blatner wrote:

    Dear Peter, thanks for your kind words. In general I think you're right. Last night I was reading Alfred North Whitehead's essay, "The Aims of Education" (1912, presentation to an association of educators), and he was passionate about his wanting a lively mind and against the teaching of "inert ideas." What I'm getting at isn't about Moreno, really, but rather trying to empower people to move out from under his shadow and have the courage to improvise with theory and technique, to explore, to be like Moreno in that way, rather than through imitation of content.
           So you pick up (as if you were an accurate double) some of my feelings of mild desperation and an occasional slide into slight grumpiness well. Your conjectures are valid, and so I was delighted to see the recent anthology on theory. (Actually, I was the one who around 2003 was approached first to do that, but because I was working on the Interactive & Improvisational Drama book   { www.interactiveimprov.com/  }, I referred it to Manuela Maciel because of her many international connections as head of the IAGP-PD section,  and she brought in Jorge and Clark as co-editors.)

       In the spirit of empowerment, it is not necessary that you know all of Moreno's work to critique it: The focus should not be on the idea that you're critiquing the whole of Moreno. That isn't important. What is important is that this or that idea be sharpened, extended, refined, re-thought, and so forth: What is important is your feeling of being supported in being mentally fully alive, curious, playful in the present moment.

           I have been fascinated at seeing how powerful the pull of heroic idealization can be; it serves to substitute for originality, and allows oneself to be carried by one's loyalty or affiliation with one's hero. All this is a form of Maya (the Hindu goddess of illusion), sticky indeed. I get caught up this way in rooting for my home team in football---every goal is a victory I feel, every goal for the other side is a spasm of grief and frustration, even as part of me is watching and wondering, smiling, noticing that it's all illusion, the game, and more, my identification with it.

       You're mistaken about my need for erudition; and I've given up on any academic pretensions, alas. (I would like to see more involvements by people trying to develop academic status because it would raise the status of the field in the USA.) However, many if not most academics can get dead-in-the-head in a way that's even more stifling than non-academics. The illusion that one has learned "enough" can be intellectually fatal.

      I'm back-channeling this to you because I don't know if the group wants to hear about the finer dimensions of my psyche. Perhaps these are even somewhat annoying to many.  But thanks for your support and friendliness. I like your stuff too. Do not be intimidated by your lack of 100% knowledge of Moreno's stuff---it's not a requirement!!

    ----- Original Message ----- From: <peterhowie at advisor.co.nz>
    To: "grouptalk Listserv" <list at grouptalkweb.org>
    Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 7:06 PM
    Subject: RE: re Moreno's greatness

    Dear Adam,

    I've had this thought for a while now and this is as good a time as any to air it. It strikes me that you, of possibly all recent and current practitioners, have written the most, and the most broadly, on Moreno. Perhaps Tian Daytan is catching up. My current hypothesis is that you lack a kind of academic peer amongst us most of the time and this frustrates and dissapoints you. As a consequence you are,again and again, forced or motivated to poke holes in the ediface that is Moreno. Becasue others aren't and the holes are hige when seen through the eyes of one who has stuidied Moreno's works in depth. This is despite having done as much as anyone to actually and actively promote Moreno.

    At times your provocations feel a bit like the University Philosophy Professor throwing out challenges to the first year students with both a delight and a desperation and when feeling tired a mild grumpiness.

    All philosophies can be viewed from another's vantage point and Moreno is no different. But can a person view the philosophy from the vantage point of the philosopher who developed it? Many people can critique Moreno - that is the easy bit. Understanding him is the greater challenge, as it is for many, many philosophers and their philosophies. I think you are fully capable of reasonably critiquing Moreno becasue you have got into his shoes many times during you writing (and your writing on his writing)and your practice. My conjecture is that you would like others to have written, thought, considered, played with, proved and disproved, manipulated and deconstructed Moreno's work as well.  And that you feel somewhat lonely in this area.

    For instance, if I am only aware of 40 - 50 % of Moreno's works/ideas/main conjectures, then what do my criticisms mean. They must be taken in context. If I know Moreno's writings but not the people he refers to, then again where do I take my meanings? If I don't take context into account when reading Moreno then what might I be missing. For instance, what was going on in the early 1930's that make Who Shall Survive so poignant? Also, reading one of the many European, Australian, Asian or US philosophers and some of them make Moreno seem crystal clear.

    Some people read the Tao Te Ching and get great meaning from it. But are they aware that it is written during a Confucian time and some of the poetic effects are only anti-Confucian allusions or relate to the times in which it is thought to have been written?

    I get the feeling Adam that you would like more erudite and perhaps more academic colleagues and as many on this list relate as practitioners that is a problematic area for you. But I notice you keep coming back and supporting relentlessly both people and arguments at different times. You connect people and network people where you can. So your commitment is clear to promulgating 'something psychodramatic'. And I love you for it.

    Cheers from over here

    Peter in Brisbane

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Grouptalk mailing list
  List at grouptalkweb.org
  http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.4/2081 - Release Date: 04/26/09 09:44:00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20090426/08f38ec7/attachment.html>