Day 95 and 96 – Established vs. emerging theories of ExAT

Photo by Sharon McCutcheon on Unsplash

Day 95 and 96 – For the past several years, I have been proposing that Expressive Arts Therapy has 5 established theories and even more emerging theories. Several years ago, I wrote a revision of a chapter I wrote back in 2005. 

 

One section of this revised chapter – which was edited and will not be included in the new chapter coming out reads:

 

These foundational theories within expressive arts therapy grew out of work published beginning in the early 1990s (Atkins, 2002; Halprin, 2003; Knill, Barba, & Fuchs, 1995; Levine, 1992; Levine, 1995; Levine & Levine, 1999; McNiff, 1992; Rogers, 1993).  Knill, Barba, and Fuchs (1995) note, “intermodal expressive therapy is a discipline unto itself, with its own theoretical framework and focus” (emphasis in original, p. 16). In their text, “Foundations of Expressive Arts Therapy,” Levine and Levine (1999) claim that expressive arts therapists are “specialists in intermodality; that is, …capable of grasping the junctures at which one mode of artistic expression needs to give way to, or be supplemented by, another” (p.11).  It is this ‘specialization in intermodality’ that I wish to further eleborate.

 

Before I begin however, I would like to note the paradox of trying to define a “specialization in intermodality.”  The very nature of the integrative approach is founded upon an opening up of possibilities of expression, not a delimiting of experience.  While I will try to explicate some theoretical principles of an integrated arts therapy, these ideas are in no way meant to be the definitive unification of a theory of expressive arts therapy.  Levine and Levine (1999) pose the question of whether a single theoretical framework for expressive therapy is possible or even desirable.  They note that it is the very diversity and multiplicity of theoretical frameworks and practical approaches that gives expressive arts therapy its life.  Yet like Johnson’s call to the creative arts therapies, I feel that unless we as expressive arts therapists are to be “more than a valued decoration on the great edifice of modern psychiatry” (or even on the emerging edifice of creative arts therapies), “we must be able to articulate our unique contributions… differentiate a wide range of professional roles within our profession… [and] provide the conditions for mature leadership” (Johnson, 1984, p. 209).

 

Since the mid-1990s, five major theoretical approaches have risen to the surface of the field:

•       Knill’s Intermodal Theory and Architecture of the Session

•       Levine’s Theory of Poiesis

•       McNiff’s Theory of Art as Medicine and the Creative Studio

•       Rogers’s Person-Centered Expressive Arts Therapy Theory of the Creative Connection

•       Halprin’s Theory of Movement based Expressive Arts Therapy

•        

Within these approaches we see an emphasis on engagement with the imaginal; a focus on aesthetics; the bridge between the arts; the importance of creativity, process, improvisation, play, ritual, and embodiment; an emphasis on deep listening and responsiveness to the emergent – both within the relational context and within the art-making context; and a rootedness in a resource-oriented approach that includes “working with everything we have” (McNiff, 2004, p. 168).

 

I’m trying to write a new article on a “social justice approach to expressive arts therapy” and as I prepare for teaching again – I really want to do a better job of articulating the key concepts within expressive arts therapy… but time (at least for my sabbatical) is running out.

 

For now – I’ll have to leave this hanging.

 

Leave me a comment or contact me directly if you want the references listed here.