Over the past decades, several art therapy techniques have developed based on the unique features of art as a symbolic language that expresses what cannot be expressed in words. Such aids have improved the process of verbal therapy, which for a long time was the only possible approach. At the same time, photography, as the most familiar and powerful (in terms of emotional impact) artistic medium, began to be used as a natural auxiliary therapeutic tool not only by art therapists (who often combine two types of media in their practice and training programs). Other therapists, who usually do not use art objects in their work, have also noticed the photo.
Sometimes art objects are used in the process of counseling (Art Therapy = art therapy), when the therapist independently chooses certain expressive means of art, knowing which of them is most adequate in the situation of working with a person. In other cases, the art itself becomes a therapeutic process (Therapeutic Art = therapeutic art). Unfortunately, the term “art therapy” is often used to refer to both types of practice (even in the curriculum for art therapists), so it is not surprising that people sometimes get confused when they are told about art therapy, but in fact they use the methods of therapeutic art. Regardless of their differences, both approaches are based on the concept that the natural language of the unconscious is encoded not so much by words as by visual-symbolic representations of experience. The techniques of art therapy and therapeutic art are based on the point of view, according to which artistic creation allows feelings to take shape, and thus develop a truly correlative, metaphorical-symbolic language that establishes a natural connection with unconscious processes.
Studying the field of art therapy, I found it necessary to conceptualize its various forms not as opposites, but as a continuum between two poles (arts in therapy on the one hand, and art as therapy on the other), within which all therapeutic practices using art objects. The analog, discussed in the next section, is the continuum between the poles of “phototherapy” (photographs in therapy) and “therapeutic photography” (photographs as therapy).
It is important to realize that art therapy does not take into account the aesthetic value of clients’ creativity; The success of phototherapy methods lies in the use of photography as a means of communication rather than as a work of art. It is also important to consider that for therapeutic purposes, how visually attractive the photographs are (much like the drawings of clients) is not so important: the aesthetic component of the photograph does not play a role at all when the photographs are used as tools for therapeutic assistance. In training in phototherapy techniques, therapists with experience in artistic photography have difficulty revising their beliefs about the parameters of photograph evaluation or criteria for interpretation.
Most art therapy programs require the trainee to submit a portfolio of work in advance as evidence of skill and competence in one or more of the arts. In contrast, phototherapy trainings only require that the therapist and client simply know what a photograph is, what a camera does, and that the participants receive counseling skills before learning how to use specific assistive techniques in therapy practice. This is one of a number of significant differences between photo and art therapy,’ as phototherapy techniques can be successfully (and competently) taught and used by a variety of mental health professionals, including those who have not received specific art therapy training.
Although clients of art therapists do not need to have artistic talent to participate in the training, many, in my experience, nonetheless come with an awareness of “the limitations of their artistic abilities” (which is usually the result of unsuccessful attempts to make art in their youth) . Photography, on the other hand, is a familiar and relatively “easy-to-use” type of creativity in which most clients already have success. Typically, clients show their pictures to the therapist knowing from experience that no special artistic skills are required to create them (i.e., they agree that they are just pictures, not artistic photographs). Sometimes clients ask questions about these photographs.
Since almost everyone takes photographs or keeps personal photographs of special significance, asking to bring their photographs or take new ones during therapy (the aesthetic value of the photograph does not matter) is often accepted easily and even with pleasure, because sharing photos and discussing them is normal social practice. Phototherapy sees photography as communication, so neither the client nor the therapist is required to have experience in photography, to understand cameras and the art of photography in order to use these techniques. Neither the client nor the therapist feel that their skills are lacking (even if they really are). As long as both know what a snapshot is and what it is, the application of the techniques will be effective.
As mentioned earlier, phototherapy is a system of interrelated techniques applicable to any of the therapeutic practices, it is debatable whether the process of artistic creation, even carried out together with the therapist, is therapy.
Learn more about the features of phototherapy and art therapy (or therapeutic photography), regardless of the theoretical background of the therapist or their preferred working method. However, in my opinion, it is based more on existential theory and phenomenology, including additional components of systemic, constructivist, narrative, gestalt, Jungian and other therapeutic approaches. However, it can be used just as effectively by those who adhere to psychodynamic or other alternative models of therapeutic theory. Therefore, phototherapy is not based on a specific model and is not an independent theory; rather, it is a system of techniques (tools) for activating theoretical knowledge about how to help people.
Perhaps the biggest disappointment for lovers of fixed definitions will be that phototherapy is both art therapy and not art therapy. Phototherapy and art therapy are different, but they are not mutually exclusive and inseparable from each other. Rather, they are completely interconnected, complement each other, but differ in “product” and process, since they use different media types. Both types of therapy give visual form to feelings, make visible the invisible, which is defined as “calling the unconscious” [Spence, 1986]. D. Krauss [Krauss, 1983] very eloquently compares and contrasts art therapy and phototherapy. And, since it is within the scope of this article to study them in more depth, below, in my brief description of the similarities and differences between these practices, several quotations from the works of Krauss2 are given.
As mentioned earlier, by interacting directly with the unconscious, visual symbols allow one to naturally overcome verbal filters (as well as associated explanations, excuses, and similar defensive responses) that automatically limit direct communication with clients’ strong feelings, thoughts, and memories. In both phototherapy and art therapy, such symbolic communications emerge directly from the client’s unconscious, being just one of many levels of possible meanings; in turn, the qualified therapist must assist the client in learning these meanings.
1 There is an opinion that art therapy is also not a theoretical system, but only a set of art techniques used in therapy and based on any theory that the therapist adheres to. However, this subject of irresolvable controversy is not the main one in this article.
2 Readers familiar with Rosie Martin’s article in Syozan Hogan’s Feminist Approaches in Art Therapy (1997). -one may wonder why I cite many parts of this section as text by myself and by David Krauss. However, in reality, it was we who wrote this text (while it turned out that Martin deliberately passed off our text as her own). Details (as well as the publisher’s “Correction Notices”) are available at: www.phototherapy-centre.com/plagiarizedhtm .
According to Krauss:
Both types of therapy are projections, symbolic representations of reality. As a result of our socialization, the use of a camera only makes this projection visible, more accurate and real than other pictorial representations. However, both types are only symbolic assumptions about reality. Both processes enable clients to create, experiential and benefit from the study of symbols through images, allowing them to know themselves in the moment (Krauss 1983:53).
Moreover, although both art therapy and phototherapy use the technique of projecting images, it is clear that initially they do it in different ways. In art therapy, the client’s internal anxieties are released from the subconscious in the process of spontaneous drawing. External stimuli, light or content are not important while the client is drawing images. For example, a client may draw a house that is not in the room where he is drawing. Photographs, on the other hand, are taken where there is “physical content” (in symbolic or specially organized forms). Thus, the content of a photograph depicting a house will be a physical representation of the building itself.
Since art therapy is influenced by internal objects clothed in an external form, and phototherapy is influenced by internalized external objects, it is obvious that these therapeutic techniques work with various aspects of personal symbolism [Krauss, 1983. P. 53].
There are other differences between these areas; for example, people often view a work of art with a subconscious feeling that it expresses the author’s personal position, since authorship is usually inextricably linked to the meaning of the work. The picture is automatically taken as the actual image, which can be reproduced by anyone with a camera. Therefore, when considering a phenomenon captured in someone’s photograph, people subconsciously believe that the photo depicts those objects that they themselves could see and capture if they were in the place of the photographer. In this way, thinking about the goals, needs, feelings, or hopes of the creator of a photograph can become a therapeutic exploration that is not possible within the framework of artistic creation. Since the creator of the photograph can be easily “separated” from the image itself, phototherapy techniques often use art objects (photographs) not created by the client, which is not typical of art therapy.
Krauss goes on to emphasize the value of documentary photography in forming personal stories of clients: “Personal and family photographs … are a generous source of projective and physical data that cannot be obtained in any other way. They serve as a source of biographical information about the client’s relationship with the world outside the therapy process. [ibid], including information about family members and their relationships, captured not with words, but with the help of a camera.
One of the most important benefits of using photographs in therapy in addition to personal artistic expression (see Figure 1 for an example of this combination) is that clients can see themselves in ways that would be impossible without the use of a camera. They can see themselves from the outside (not in a mirror image), from angles that are unusual for them (for example, in profile or from the back, in a dream or in motion, and so on), themselves among other people, for example, in family, with friends or colleagues. To do this objectively with the help of drawings is quite difficult. Since photographic representations are fixed in time and space by an “objective” mechanical device, clients believe that such photographs are more “true” than subjectively drawn portraits.
Feelings and memories cannot be put into words, they exist regardless of whether they are noticed and believed in. When people “stop” the flow of feelings and memories in order to describe or explain them, it automatically distorts everything that was experienced or seen. This explains why non-verbal sensory-based therapies (particularly phototherapy or art therapy, or better, a combination of both) are the most appropriate approaches to work with the predominantly visual, metaphorical language of the unconscious.
My position regarding the place of phototherapy practices in art therapy is based on the realization that establishing a connection with the sphere of feelings is impossible when referring only to the area of the mind (and thought), since memory is not only a part of consciousness, but also a “part” of la (and hearts). I believe that clients should experience both a cognitive and emotional experience, recognizing the role of past events, memories, thoughts and feelings, in order to understand how the past affects their present. Their mind and heart, intuition and conscious cognitive remodeling are essential in order to keep new information available for further use in therapy and treatment. Intuition and catharsis are necessary, however, in my opinion, this is not enough for effective therapy. If these forms of experience are not structured into cognitive models for the purpose of additional “processing”, as well as further consideration and reintegration with emotional events, then they will soon return to the subconscious level, and the information they provide will become inaccessible.
For me, this illustrates one of the key differences between art therapy and therapeutic art (between phototherapy and therapeutic photography): art therapy (art in therapy) touches in a person what therapeutic art (art as therapy) does not. Therapeutic photography should not do this, as it is ethically unsafe, without the “safety net” of a professional who knows how to deal with unexpectedly arising strong emotions in cases where photographs evoke vivid feelings and memories.
However, it is quite possible to confuse therapy with self-help. Even therapists sometimes make this mistake, and it is much more significant than it might seem.
Some people think that if someone gets better because of being creative, then therapy is being done. But it is not. Therapy brings inner change, while mood-enhancing creativity can relieve tension, which is only a small part of the therapeutic process – regardless of theory1.
Another art therapist notes that co-creation is not a therapeutic process, even if the therapist is involved in this:
Creative experience is extremely informative, it can change lives and the like, and at the same time, it is capable of transformation, like a qualitative educational process, however, this is not “therapy” … When artists offer art as a way of treatment or achieving personal growth, the emphasis is on creating a work, which is the main expected result…2
In the same way, “genuine” phototherapy requires clients not only to participate in the process of interacting with its images, but also to consciously explore and then recreate the overall picture of the experiences caused by the images, under the active guidance of a qualified therapist – so,
1 Maira Levick, personal e-mail, September 2, 2001.
2 Carol Lark, post on the American Art Therapy Association Internet Group
so that this information contributes to a better understanding, while remaining available for further conscious memories.
Therefore, for me, effective and comprehensive phototherapy lies in the range of practices closer to the “art in therapy” pole than to the “art as therapy” pole. This does not mean that photography itself does not have therapeutic properties – of course it does. It’s just that “therapeutic photography” (discussed in the next section) is not enough for me. The therapy process requires a qualified specialist to guide the client and help him translate his discoveries also to the cognitive level, so that the results can be used in the further therapeutic process.
source: Weiser J. Phototherapy Techniques: Using Photographic Interactions to Improve People’s Lives // Visual Anthropology: Tuning Optics / Ed. E. Yarskaya-Smirnova, P. Romanova. M.: Variant, TsSPGI, 2009. pp. 64-108
Only the best offers, interesting company news, useful innovations and no spam!
