Location, a term coined by S.H. Foulkes
Location is the work which finds meaning to the unconscious material the group is working about. The process of Location discovers how the protagonist, each member and the group as a whole are influenced and are responding to the themes that are evolving in the group. The responsibility to discover the Location is of the therapist, but not only. It happens that the group or a member come to the realization of the issue in any specific case.
Historical context
In order to understand Foulkes’ term, Location, we have to put it in its historical context. Nitzgen, in his article, Hidden Legacies, looks at the evolution of the concept when reading in German the original Foulkes’ paper “Biology in the Light of the work of Kurt Goldstein” (1936). There, Foulkes refuted neuron theory and claimed that ‘the nervous system is considered as a network . . . always functioning as a whole’ (1990: 43; Foulkes). It seems that for Foulkes to speak of localization and network, made sense initially, in a neurobiological context(mine).
Years later, Foulkes’ focus shifted. He was trying to understand “the Individual as a whole within a total situation” (1948: 1); i.e. on the location of mental disturbances in a social context. This time the network was the social environment. He was looking at the organism from a social- psychological perspective. For that reason, he introduced the new concept of location; this concept indicated his movement from neurobiological terms to social-psychological terms.
In his words, Foulkes explained that “if one looks at a psychological disturbance principally as located, taking place, in between persons, it follows that it can never be wholly confined to a person in isolation”. The human being, as the neuron, is part of a network.
May be one individual reenacts a dilemma, this affects in different ways all the members in the group. Foulkes searches for the total configuration that “puts a different emphasis on the disturbance as manifested in any individual concerned” (1948: 127). The group as a whole will produce something that is unique to the group in that specific moment.
Foulkes’ neurobiological views are at the roots of his later development, when looking at the individual in a total (social) situation.
Location in Foulkes writings
At the beginning, Foulkes related to the Location of a Disturbance:
“When you look at a disturbance as taking place in between persons, it follows that it can never be wholly confined to a person in isolation (1948:127). Foulkes view of disturbance is radical: it does not belong to a singular person; it is something that is happening between persons.
In 1957, together with Anthony, he stressed that the disturbance is in the group: it “may be located in a latent clash between two members over a certain issue…(that) may be unknown to either member or to the group. After the conductor collects enough evidence, it becomes clear that the location of disturbance lies in the disagreement between two members and the repercussions of this are manifested in the conscious and unconscious effects on the whole group” (1957: 220-221). Foulkes is describing a disturbance in the group. Relationships are the focus of attention, the understanding of the meaning of the disturbance becomes the location. The disturbance can be such that it concerns the individuals that are part of it, and not the pathology of one influencing the other. One example can be competitiveness.
In 1964, when relating to a common matrix, Foulkes stated that it is “axiomatic that everything happening in a group involves the group as a whole as well as each individual member. In what precise way it involves them, or even which aspects are being… mobilized, is a matter of …interest. An unending variety of configurations, including the Conductor in his particular position, can be observed. To this category of concepts belongs…the idea of location of a disturbance in a therapeutic group” (pp:49). From this observation, it is possible to view the group in new ways. The group can be seen from a therapeutic perspective as a source of energy, vitality and creativity. It is possible to search for the location of these sources for healing members in the group, and the group itself.
“The group tends to speak and react to a common theme as if it were a living entity, expressing itself in different ways through various mouths. All contributions are variations on this single theme, even though the group are not consciously aware of the theme and do not know what they are really talking about” (Foulkes & Anthony, 1957: 219, 1965: 238). The need to look at the total situation in the group is stressed here. Foulkes’ concepts of “mirror”, “condenser”, and “chain phenomena” together with “resonance” are concepts that help in understanding the Location of an event (Foulkes & Anthony, 1965).
Foulkes wrote later on: “This describes how any event in the group involves the total network of interrelations and intercommunications… The process of Location corresponds…to the work which brings this configuration in the group to light”, (1964:81). This is, perhaps, the clearest and most integrated definition that Foulkes gave us.
Process
Foulkes defined Location as a process in his writing.
The location is part of a configuration or pattern; it means we are looking at the relations among participants in a group. This is a very complex structure even if we speak of only three participants, and the reason of the pattern that takes place in the group is not always clear to the therapist (Foulkes & Anthony, 1957, Foulkes, 1964). In addition, the group most of the time can be unconscious of what they are speaking about. The theme unfolding in the group can be related to a clash between members (Foulkes, 1948), to the mood of one member that is influencing the others, to a gesture that was misinterpreted, to infinite causes. It is possible to see here the importance of time in revealing location. To come to an understanding of location, it has to be seen as a process, which can take place in a single session, a number of encounters or over a long period of time in the group. (Friedman, 2007).
Location and the therapist
The work in the process of Location for the therapist is “not only to perceive meaning, but also to place it in the appropriate dynamic setting”. To discern the Gestalt (idea of figure and ground as inseparable). “Location presupposes the conductor becoming aware of the relevant configuration of the observable phenomena” (1975: 131) This will help him understand the language in which the group speaks, and respond accordingly (in the same key), in order to be understood. Foulkes (Foulkes and Anthony, 1957) gave us an example in the case of the “Musical Band”: he made contact and observed that members were afraid of performing well and being sent to the front, when they wanted to be discharged. And then he acted: he reassured them the aim was to rehabilitate people for civilian life and not to the front.
Another aspect that Foulkes pointed out was that for the therapist a “difficult and at the same time most important point[s] in the conducting of groups, is the location of disturbances in oneself” …This is where the Conductor must be standing not only inside and outside the group, but also inside and outside himself, at the same time. His problems must be solved inside the group itself, like those of any other member. (Foulkes, 1948, pp. 128). The Group Conductor has to have the courage to learn from the group. It brings to my mind an example of a group in which I was a member: One of the participants was crying; the therapist kept interpreting to her something. The group felt that she needed support. They voiced it to him. At some point he caught the message and after a moment of embarrassment he changed his stance towards her. The group, the crying member and the Conductor experienced relief.
Contemporary contributions to Location
In his comprehensive book “From the Couch to the Circle”, John Schlapobersky dedicated a whole chapter to Location. Since, in his view, the term was inconsistently treated by Foulkes, he linked it to two other important concepts: Translation and Interpretation. These three concepts create together an integrated model for interventions, and for understanding the dynamics of a group.
What follows is a short explanation about the meaning of Translation and Interpretation: a- “Translation (is) the equivalent of making conscious of the repressed unconscious in Psychonalysis” (Foulkes, 1964:111, in Schlapobersky, 2016: 445). b- Interpretation is a concept that has been treated in many different ways by Foulkes along his writing. Foulkes’ most encompassing treat on Interpretation is in his 1975 book. First, he stated that “all group’s members participate in interpretation and it takes place all the time”. Then he added that “interpretation is a practical tool applied consciously by the conductor”. He defined it as ”a verbal communication by the conductor to the group, or to members in the group…to draw their attention to…meaning of which he thinks they are unaware but may become aware through his verbal help” (Foulkes: 1975: 113, in Schlapobersky, 2016: 447).
Schlapobersky (2016: 443) showed “the dynamic relationship between the three principles of therapeutic intervention, in which location is given primacy” In a triangular figure, arrows show the “clockwise movement from the conductor’s understanding-location- to a new body of meaning created in the group by the process of translation that will be initiated by the group. The work of translation will then lead on to interpretation”. These three principles are in a steady and dynamic relationship with one another.
Another contemporary perspective is presented by Friedman (2014), who refers to Foulkes as a pioneer of intersubjective thinking by developing among others, the concept of Location.
“The intersubjective perspective of human relatedness implies a permeability of the psyche together with a reciprocal influence” (Friedman, 2014:194). “Already in 1948 Foulkes defines an unconscious, primordial connection between group participants as transpersonal. By this concept he means that people in the matrix are intersubjectively connected ‘as if X-rays would pass between them’ (Foulkes, 1948:1, in Friedman: 2014:195)”
In the same train of thought: “The Location of pathology is not found in any individual alone, nor is it entirely inter-personal, but to be looked at in his relationships. (Foulkes: 1948,1)”.” The sick mind may be considered relational” (Friedman 2014:199).
A fresh definition of Location (Barwick and Wegman, “Group Therapy. A Group- Analytic Approach”, 2018) relates it to the concepts of matrix and group mind. Before presenting their definitions, a short explanation of “group mind”: in their perspective: the individual brings to the group his personal group matrix forged in relation to his group of origin…(pp:31). The real group mind is crowded not only by the neediness of those that constitute it, but by all the needy family members who invasively crowd each member’s mind (pp:145).
Location, then,” is an aspect of group mind. It refers to a group phenomenon where interacting processes of the group emerge as a communication from an individual or set of individuals in the form of some event” (Barwick and Wegman, pp:330)
“Location makes what is located in the individual (or sub-group) available as a resource (even if initially at times, a disturbing one) for the whole group. This promotes psychic development in both individual(s) and group” (Barwick and Wegman, pp:34). This statement puts in relief the importance of Location in the Group Analytic Group. The work done opens a resource for further development of the group and the individuai.
Location reveals as a key concept that enables the work of the conductor, and leads to relevant and deep understanding in the group.
References
Barwick N. and Weegmann M. 2018. Group Therapy. A group Analytic Approach, Routledge, London and New York.
Foulkes, S. H., 1948. Introduction to Group Analytic Psychotherapy, Heinnneman Medical Books, London.
Foulkes, S. H. 1964. Therapeutic Group Analysis. H. Karnac (Books) Ltd, London.
Foulkes, S. H. 1975. Group Analytic Psychotherapy. Method and Principles. H. Karnac (Books) Ltd., London.
Foulkes, S.H & Anthony, E.J., 1957. Group Psychotherapy. The Psychoanalytic Approach.(facsimile ed.) Karnac.
Foulkes S. H. & Anthony E. J.1965. Group Psychotherapy. The Psychoanalytic Approach. Maresfield Library, London.
Foulkes S. H. 1975 The Leader in the Group, in: E. Foulkes (Ed.) “S.H. Foulkes Selected Papers”, (pp.285-296) London. Karnac.
Friedman, R.; 2007. “Where to Look? Supervising in Group Analysis. A Relations Disorder Perspective”, Group Analysis, 40(2): 251-268.
Friedman, R.; 2014.”Group Analysis Today- Developments in Intersubjectivity. Group Analysis, 47(3): 194-200.
Nitzgen, D. 2010. Hidden Legacies, S.H. Foulkes, Kurt Goldstein and Ernst Cassirer, Group Analysis, 43(3): 354-371.
Schlapobersky, J. R. 2016. From the Couch to the Circle. Group Analytic Psychotherapy in Practice. Routledge, Oxon.