Group Analytic Contexts, Issue 77, September 2017

50 Group-Analytic Society International - Contexts
What are the prerequisites for dialogue in the
large group?
By Christer Sandahl, Stockholm
The Berlin symposium was certainly a great success; friendly and
open atmosphere, well organized with a balanced and very interesting
program. I enjoyed all of it and learned a lot. What follows are my
thoughts on the large group and a suggestion for the Barcelona
symposium.
During the years I have experienced many large groups at
GASi symposia and in other contexts. I understand that people find
different aspects of the large group meaningful. What moves me is the
development from psychotic chaos to some kind of personal
encounters in the large group. Those moments when the group
becomes calm and attentive to the interaction between two or more
people are like wonderful music to me: when there is a feeling that
some members of the group meet as “I” and “Thou” in the presence
of all others. In those dialogical moments, there is no pressure for time
and others can wait with their associations. There is spontaneity, but
no impulsivity. This is what group analysis is about for me, to
experience authentic feelings and thinking together. Such
transforming moments seldom happen during the first large group
session, but sometimes later and at best they become gradually more
frequent. During the early years of group analytic symposia this is
what I remember happened, dialogue developed. It made a big
impression on me as a young psychologist. It made me hopeful and
contributed to giving me the courage to work within the field of
organizational psychology.
Unfortunately, and sadly, I have not experienced anything of
this kind lately during the GASi symposia. However, I have frequently
experienced dialogue in other contexts such as IAGP, Nordic and
national group conferences and even in group relations contexts in
France and UK.
In the Berlin large group there were a few short encounters
which might have been the embryo of dialogue. Except for those
moments there was one monologue after the other. I did not
experience much of a development between the first three sessions.
The last day was different, but no dialogue. For me it felt like
examination day at a course in rhetoric. People stood up and said their
thing, one after the other – and they were not interrupted and people
seemed to listen. However, except for one occasion, no dialogue.