A self psychology theory of role in drama therapy

A SELF PSYCHOLOGY THEORY OF ROLE IN DRAMA THERAPY

CHRISTOPHER DOYLE, MA, MFA, RDT, MFCC*

Introduction

Role playing in a drama therapy process can providea powerful, transformative experience. This paper ex-amines the meaning of taking on a role and how roleplaying facilitates healing. A self psychology frame-work is applied to determine a theory of role for un-derstanding pathology and treatment. I am particularlyinterested in distinguishing the relationship betweenroles and selfobjects in the building of a cohesive selfstructure. It is my intention to formulate a theory andpractice based in a role theory that centers on selfobjectfulfillment and the articulation of affective states.

I will begin by providing a brief overview of howsocial scientists and drama therapists have defined“role.” It is important to define the terms “role” and“self” within the field of this paper. I will then organizeimportant ideas in self psychology thinking, especiallyfrom Kohut (1971, 1977, 1984) and Stolorow, Brand-chaft, and Atwood (1987). This will lead into exam-ining the function of roles and selfobjects, as well ashow roles contribute to the integration of affect. Thegoals of therapy will be redefined as integrated withself psychology and role theory. Finally, the functionof the drama therapist will be discussed within theparameters of a psychodynamic approach.

Overview of Role

Many social scientists fundamentally view role asa set of behaviors assigned by society. Mead (1956)

focuses on how individuals experience themselvesindirectly through the views of other members of thesame social group. He writes, “A person is a person-ality because he belongs to a community, because hetakes over the institutions of that community into hisown conduct” (p. 202). The self is constructedthrough a social process which reflects the values andattitudes of a larger community. He defines role as aunit of conserved behavior. The conserved behavior isassigned by society and is enacted through roles.

Goffman (1959) concurs with Mead in that peopleplay roles in relationship to their environment andwhat they want out of the environment. He acknowl-edges the theatrical nature of life and role playing. Heviews identity as a presentation of ourselves in role toa particular audience. Goffman defines role as “. . .theenactment of rights and duties attached to a givenstatus” (p. 16). He goes on to define the self as “. . .adramatic effect arising diffusely from a scene that ispresented, and characteristic issue, the crucial con-cern, is whether it will be credited or discredited” (p.252).

Scheff (1984) emphasizes the “social systemic na-ture of role playing” (p. 50). The individual plays hisrole by articulating his behavior with the cues andactions of the other persons involved in the transac-tion. The proper performance of a role is dependenton having a cooperative audience. Our surroundingsenact upon us in a certain way and it is almost im-possible to not behave accordingly.

* Christopher Doyle is the Clinical Supervisor at Willow Creek Treatment Center in Santa Rosa, CA. Willow Creek is a residential facilityfor SED adolescents, offering day treatment services and a nonpublic school.

The Arts in Psychotherapy, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 223–235, 1998Copyright © 1998 Elsevier Science LtdPrinted in the USA. All rights reserved

0197-4556/98 $19.001 .00

PII SO197-4556(98)00018-5

223

Like other social scientists, Moreno (1953) sawhuman beings as role players. He writes:

The concept underlying this approach is the rec-ognition that man is a roleplayer, that everyindividual is characterized by a certain range ofroles which dominate his behavior, and that ev-ery culture is characterized by a certain set ofroles which it imposes with a varying degree ofsuccess upon its membership. (p. 88)

Moreno (1961) defined role as “. . .the actual andtangible forms which the self takes,” and goes on tosay the function of the role is “. . .to enter the uncon-scious from the social world and bring shape andorder to it” (p. 519). An interesting viewpoint crys-tallized by Moreno (1953) is that the self emergesfrom the roles we play. In other words, the ego ismade tangible through roles.

Landy (1986, 1990, 1993) has put forth severaldefinitions of role. In 1986, he wrote that role is amediator between self and other. In 1990, he viewedrole as the “. . .containers of all the thoughts andfeelings we have about ourselves and others in oursocial and imaginary worlds” (p. 230). More recently(1993), he viewed role as “. . .a basic unit of person-ality containing specific qualities that provide unique-ness and coherence to that unit” (p. 7). He wrote, “Indrama therapy, role is the form of one’s dramaticaction” (p. 31). In these three definitions, Landy seesrole as a mediator, a container and a unit of person-ality. Landy’s struggle in nailing down a definition ofrole points to its complexity. Landy seems to agreewith Moreno’s view that the self emerges from therole when he writes, “One plays a role, then, to get outof oneself, to locate a form for one’s thought andfeeling” (p. 39). Landy and Moreno break away fromother social scientists by clearly stating that roles aremore than assigned behaviors. Roles portray the par-ticles of the self, along with the expectations of cul-ture and other external forces.

Landy (1993) and Moreno (1953) also explore ingreat depth what it means to play roles in drama.Moreno (1953) writes of surplus reality, a realitywhich includes the roles we imagine in fantasies, theroles in dreams, the roles we play in psychodrama.These surplus reality roles are no less significant inthe creation of personality than roles enacted in life.In fact, Moreno was primarily interested in surplusreality roles as tools for making the unconscious con-scious. Like Moreno (1953), Landy (1993) empha-

sizes role playing in drama as a means to contain andexpress parts of the personality.

Blatner and Blatner (1988a, 1988b) write exten-sively about role playing and role dynamics. AdamBlatner (1985) defines role as “. . .complexes of atti-tudes, beliefs, expectations, and skills that make upthe units of behavior” (p. 13). He goes on, with AleeBlatner (Blatner & Blatner, 1988a), to write, “Peopleplay a multiplicity of roles in their lives, and by un-derstanding and becoming creative with these roles,we can learn to make our lives richer and more ef-fective” (p. 20). Role dynamics emphasize our depen-dence on roles and role playing. Relationships aredefined by roles and consist of several roles weavingin and out of one another (Blatner & Blatner, 1988b).

Mead (1956), Goffman (1959), and Scheff (1984)focus on how roles relate to society and culture. Weassume roles because they are given to us by ourcommunity. However, the roles we play also dependupon how we want to be seen by others. Moreno(1953) personalized the nature of role by focusing onits unconscious nature and how role is an expressionof the ego. Landy (1991, Blatner and Blatner 1988b)emphasize the direction of Moreno (1953, 1961) andLandy (1993) by pointing out that a personal under-standing of the roles we play leads us toward a richerand healthier life.

Here is the definition of role that I use for thisstudy: Role is an expression of an aspect of the self.Whether the role is dramatically portrayed in the the-ater or enacted in daily life, whether it is thought of ina daydream, projected onto an external object or dra-matized through improvisation—roles express an as-pect of the self. I clearly align myself with Moreno(1953, 1961), Landy (1993) and Blatner and Blatner(1988a) when I say that roles provide tangible formswhich articulate who we are. Unlike Landy (1991,1993), I do not focus on the theatrical basis of roles orroles grounded in world theatre. I seek to explore theinner, personal experience of roles as they aid in selfdiscovery and human development. Moreno (1953)discovered that the self emerges from the roles weplay; I am interested in exploring how we can useroles to strengthen that self by building structure andcohesion. I am not as concerned with Moreno’s(1953) views of role taking, playing and creating as Iam concerned with what the role means and how theroles are involved as tools for healing the self.

An important point to make here is that while weexpress our self through role, we concurrently expressaffect through role. It is impossible to play a role

224 CHRISTOPHER DOYLE

without giving voice to emotion, even if the emotionis hidden under defenses. If a person is playing a role,he is also expressing affect through that role.

Role and the Self

As role is an expression of the self, it is importantto define what is meant by the self. In self psychologyterms, and probably most simply described, the self is“. . .the center of the individual’s psychological uni-verse” (Kohut, 1977, p. 311). In this view, the self isdescribed as the “I” who says “I am happy.” Kohut(1977, 1984) also writes of the self as the independentcenter of initiative. Wolf (1988) writes,

That part of the personality which confers thesense of selfhood and which is evoked and sus-tained by a constant supply of responsivenessfrom the functioning of selfobjects—this pro-viding a continuous matrix of selfobject expe-riences—we call the self. (p. 38)

Stolorow et al. (1987) define the self as the organiza-tion of experience. Atwood and Stolorow (1984) havedefined self as “. . .a psychological structure throughwhich self-experience acquires cohesion and continu-ity. . .” (p. 34).

In this light, another way of saying that roles ex-press aspects of the self would be this: Roles expressthe various parts of an individual’s psychological uni-verse. Roles provide a concrete, palpable form for themultiplicity of the inner workings of a person. Asroles give form to drama, roles depict the myriadpieces of the reality of who we are.

The totality of the various parts of self which aredefined through roles is called the role repertoire. Therole repertoire is simply all the roles a person haswithin her psychological structure. As Moreno (1953)points out, roles within the role repertoire includepsychosomatic (sleeper, eater, etc.), psychodramatic(a son, a father, etc.) and social roles (the son, thefather, etc.). Sternberg and Garcia (1989) write, “Rolerepertoire is a term used to denote the group of de-veloped roles we use and have used in our lives” (p.44). I would also include the roles that are not playedand are not used necessarily in life, such as roleswithin surplus reality and the roles which emergespontaneously in creative enactments. Emunah (1994)writes, “The behaviors, roles, and emotions portrayedin drama become part of one’s repertoire, a repertoirethat can be drawn upon in life situations” (p. xiv).

The role repertoire additionally contains the reper-toire of affective expression. Every role provides con-tainment for an enunciation of an aspect of the selfand its corresponding subjective experience. In otherwords, roles not only express who we are, but theyallow us to express the individual emotional nature ofwho we are in a given moment. Corsini (1966) sup-ports the idea of roles and their relationship to indi-vidual expression. He writes, “In role playing we tendto act ourselves” (p. 73). He continues, “Whenever aperson roleplays, he demonstrates his unique person-ality” (p. 76). Landy (1993) encourages this line ofthinking when he writes, “. . .even the most outra-geous fiction. . .contains some grain of truth as it re-lates in some basic way to the imagination. . .” (p.17). These statements point to the fact that throughrole we declare our self—the outward appearance aswell as the inner experience.

A Self Psychology Theory of Roles

Roles are a natural part of human life. It is throughroles that we express our selves; it is through rolesthat we exist in relationship. I will now describe cen-tral components of self psychology thought and out-line a role theory based in selfobject responsivenessand internalized selfobject functions. Once a self psy-chology framework is established, I will discuss rolesand their relationship to selfobject functions and af-fect integration.

Self Psychology Basics

I assume that the reader is familiar with somecentral elements of self psychology theory. I willbriefly review some chief components. For the pur-poses of this paper, I do not embrace or discuss allideas expressed in the body of self psychology theory.

Self psychology examines how self structure isbuilt and maintained through the fulfillment andmaintenance of selfobject needs. We are born withbasic selfobject needs. A selfobject is the experienceof a person or thing which functions to strengthen theself (Kohut, 1984). An infant gazing into the eyes ofan adoring mother uses the experience of the adoringmother to strengthen its developing self. In this case,the infant experiences the mother as a selfobject.Through a repeated process of experiencing themother as a selfobject, the infant slowly comes to relyon the mother for nurturing, love and protection. Butno mother is perfect. There will be occasions when

225SELF PSYCHOLOGY ROLE THEORY

the mother is not available to be a responsive selfob-ject for the infant. On these occasions, because theinfant has already had repeated exposure to a lovingand empathically responsive selfobject mother, theinfant fulfills his mother selfobject needs for himself.He internally recreates the selfobject experience of hismother and consequently builds self structure.

The purpose of therapy in self psychology is tostrengthen the self (Kohut, 1971, 1977, 1984). Pathol-ogy is created by early empathic failures where self-object needs are not met (Baker & Baker, 1987).Unmet or overstimulated selfobject needs can be theabsence of an essential caregiver, or the caregiver’slack of appropriate response to human needs, such asto be cared for and loved.

In therapy, the client uses the therapist as a self-object who is experienced as a part of the client’s ownself structure. The role of the therapist is to be em-pathically attuned to the needs of the client and torespond in ways which serve to strengthen the self(Wolf, 1988). Kohut and Wolf (1986) emphasize twophases of empathy: understanding and explaining. Tounderstand means to sense oneself into another’s ex-perience. To explain is to provide a verbal expressionof the meaning of the experience from the vantagepoint of the client’s subjective experience. The feel-ing of being understood is in itself therapeutic. Sim-ply knowing that one is understood makes one feelbetter. Wolf (1988) writes, “A person’s sense of selfis enhanced by the knowledge that another personunderstands his inner experience” (p. 36).

During the explaining phase, the therapist makesan interpretation related to some experience in theclient, such as an event in the client’s life or some-thing related to the transference in the therapy. Therole of the therapist hinges on finding out where theclient’s selfobject needs were not met in childhood.This discovery is made through analyzing the trans-ference in the therapist/client relationship. The thera-pist seeks to understand the client and make empathi-cally responsive interpretations (Kohut & Wolf,1986). Empathic responsiveness refers to a responseby the therapist which deepens the client’s sense ofself and cohesion.

Selfobject functions become internalized throughwhat Kohut (1971, 1977, 1984) called a transmutinginternalization. The client uses the therapist as a self-object and comes to experience his self as more co-hesive and whole. The client internalizes functionsthat were provided by the therapist and moves fromneeding archaic selfobject fulfillment to more mature

selfobject fulfillment. Archaic selfobject fulfillmentrefers to the kind of selfobject functions needed by aperson in an early stage of self development to feel asense of cohesion. An example of this might be foundin the loving gaze of mother as she looks adoringly ather child. In healthy development, as we mature, wecome to no longer need the gaze of mother to feelsoothed and whole, but the thought of mother canprovide this feeling of cohesion. Eventually, the func-tion of the mother gaze experience becomes internal-ized and other objects in the environment trigger thecomfort that once was attained only through directcontact with mother.

Kohut’s (1984) view of transmuting internalizationdepends on optimal frustration, where a client expe-riences frustration triggered by a disruption in thetherapeutic relationship which points to unmet archaicselfobject needs. The optimal frustration provides achallenge for the client. For example, let us say thetherapist comes late for an appointment. This poten-tially triggers archaic rage in the client related to anabsent early caregiver. The client is challenged eitherto unconsciously repeat the experience of rage or togrow. If the therapeutic bond has not been estab-lished, and if there have not been repeated experi-ences where the client knew the therapist cared, un-derstood, and was on time, the client may experiencearchaic rage and vent this rage at the therapist whenhe appears for the appointment. But if a therapeuticbond has been built, and if the client has repeatedexperiences of the therapist being on time and dem-onstrating that he cares and understands him, the cli-ent may grow. The client might say to himself, “Well,my therapist is late, but I know he cares. He has beenon time in the past and will eventually come. I will beall right; there is nothing wrong with me or my ther-apist—even though I may be frustrated.” In this case,the optimal frustration—triggered by the lateness ofthe therapist—creates an opportunity for the client tohave a transmuting internalization of the therapist self-object function. The client produces internal selfsoothing, maintains a cohesive sense of self, and in-ternalizes nurturing functions formerly provided bythe client’s experience of the therapist. It can also bestated that the optimal frustration provided an oppor-tunity for the client to learn a new role.

Roles and Selfobjects

The internalization of selfobject functions througha therapeutic process applies directly to roles. Selfob-


ject functions can become internalized through theplaying of roles which serve to consolidate the self.Wolf (1988) writes of how selfobject functions can berepresented by other objects. Objects in the environ-ment take on selfobject functions as a person devel-ops. Smells from the kitchen, sounds of the television,siblings—can represent mother and her functions. Achild can be soothed by eating a meal that calls forththe subjective experience of mother. The meal is notmother but it functions as a mirroring or idealizedselfobject.

Kohut and Wolf (1986) also address this kind ofselfobject fulfillment. They write,

When we feel uplifted by our admiration for agreat cultural ideal, for example, an earlier up-lifting experience of being picked up by ourstrong and admired mother and having beenallowed to merge with her greatness, calmness,and security may be said to form the uncon-scious undertones of the joy we are experienc-ing as adults. (p. 50)

In this example, the inner admiration for the culturalideal calls forth the fulfillment of archaic selfobjectneeds. A client’s experience of playing a role canserve the same purpose.

It is a central tenet of this paper that playing rolescan provide a selfobject experience. It is necessary todifferentiate between selfobject experience and self-object function. A selfobject experience is the subjec-tive experience of an external object which serves toconsolidate the self. A selfobject function refers toany object which serves to create a selfobject experi-ence. The role is the external expression of the self; itis a means for taking a part of the self and giving itform, thus creating an external object from an internalexperience. What a client projects onto a role, how heplays the role, what it means to him, can all be lookedat in terms of the analysis of the selfobject function. Arole in and of itself is not a selfobject. The client’sexperience of the role can assume selfobject func-tions. The playing out of specific roles which elicitselfobject fulfillment provides the opportunity for aselfobject experience and can, in fact, build self struc-ture.

If a client plays a role which subjectively confirmshis sense of self and gives him an experience of beingaccepted and loved, then it can be said that the expe-rience of the role can function as a mirroring selfob-ject. For example, a client can play a nurturing mother

to himself as a young child. The role of mother is notthe selfobject, but the patient’s experience of playingthe role—perhaps of both mother and child—providesthe selfobject function of mirroring. Through theplaying of the mother role, the patient can internalizethis mirroring function and have a selfobject experi-ence.

I worked with a client who deeply enjoyed playinghis doctor. Many times, at the end of the session, hewould request to play his doctor and comment, in roleas his doctor, on the therapy session. The playing outof the role of the doctor visibly soothed the client. Forthe client, the doctor in life was experienced as anidealized selfobject. Playing the doctor role in therapyprovided this client with a selfobject experience. Hewas internalizing this function through playing therole. He later incorporated this role into his life.

It is important to note that not all roles fulfillselfobject functions for a client. It is the client’s sub-jective experience of a role which determines whetherit is functioning as a selfobject. This distinction iscrucial. If the role is experienced in a way whichfunctions to mirror or idealize the self and creates asense of cohesion and consolidation to the self whilebuilding structure, then it is functioning as a selfob-ject. It can be argued that not all selfobjects consoli-date the self, but for our purposes here, when I refer toselfobjects, I refer to selfobjects which do consolidatethe self.

In terms of optimal frustration and transmutinginternalization, a client can experience a role as an aidtoward building self structure. For example, let us saythere is a client who has extreme difficulty expressinganger in his life. However, in the drama therapy mi-lieu, he can express anger through roles. Time andtime again in therapy he is able to express anger andnot fragment. The playing of “angry” roles becomesincreasingly comfortable. Life will afford this clientwith situations where he is challenged to continue tosquelch his anger or to learn a new role and let theanger find expression. Because this client has experi-enced repeated instances of expressing anger safelyand successfully through role, he may be more likelyto internalize his role playing experiences and applythem to a life situation.

I wish to emphasize a further point: The better aclient plays a role which serves a selfobject function,the deeper the potential internalization of that func-tion. Emunah (1994) emphasizes this fact when shewrites how the “. . .aesthetic perspective will oftendeepen the psychological content. . .” (p. 111). Emu-


nah (1994) also writes about the need to developacting skills so that real life scenes can be played withgreater authenticity, thereby deepening the therapeu-tic potential. Aesthetics are significantly important indrama therapy because they strengthen affect expres-sion and have the potential to deepen selfobject inter-nalization.

Roles and Affect Integration

A self psychology theory of roles incorporates theintegration of affect as central to developing a cohe-sive self. Roles express the self; affect can be seen asthe self being expressed in a specific way. We arealways expressing affect through the roles we play.Selfobjects must function to integrate affect.

Stolorow et al. (1987) point to affect integration asthe purpose of self psychology treatment. For them,affect is central to the nature of selfobject functions.They write, “. . .the fundamental goal of psychoana-lytic therapy is the unfolding, illumination, and trans-formation of the patient’s subjective world” (p. 9).Selfobject functions are those which contribute to theintegration of affect into the organization of self ex-perience. Stolorow et al. (1987) continue, “. . .selfob-ject functions pertain fundamentally to the affectivedimension of self-experience, and that the need forselfobject ties pertains to the need for specific, requi-site responsiveness to varying affect states throughoutdevelopment” (p. 67). In other words, our need forselfobject fulfillment is not simply limited to mirror-ing, idealization, twinship, etc. We need selfobjects torespond to our affective states in ways that enable usto integrate these states into the experience of self.

According to this theory, there are four aspects ofaffect development: differentiation, synthesization,toleration and desomatization/cognitive articulation.In differentiation, the selfobject helps a person per-ceive and differentiate affect states. Stolorow et al.(1987) write,

The earliest processes of self-demarcation andindividualization thus require the presence of acaregiver who, by virtue of a firmly structuredsense of self and other, is able reliably to rec-ognize, distinguish, and respond appropriatelyto the child’s distinctive affect states. (p. 70)

The articulation of self experience is enhanced whena person is able to know when he is experiencing an

emotion and that this experience is different fromother affect states.

The second aspect of affect integration is to syn-thesize the affect states. This describes an ability toaccept and comprehend the contradictory affectivestates as emerging from one self. It is possible to loveand hate the same person at the same time, and thisexperience does not create fragmentation.

Affect tolerance depicts the ability to tolerate andhold all the contradictory and powerful affect states.A selfobject in this regard acts as a holding environ-ment for the different affect states. Stolorow et al.(1987) write,

Through countless experiences throughout earlydevelopment, the caregiver, by comprehending,interpreting, accepting, and responding em-pathically to the child’s unique and constantlyshifting feeling states, is at the same time en-abling him to monitor, articulate, and under-standingly respond to them on his own. (p. 72)

When a caregiver is empathically responsive to affectstates, “a process of internalization occurs, culminat-ing in the child’s ability to use his own emotionalreactions as self-signals” (p. 72). Affect tolerance dif-fers from affect integration in that in affect tolerance,an internalization exists which enables the child toself-contain affect states.

The fourth and final aspect of affect developmentis the desomatization and cognitive articulation ofaffect. This aspect points to the ability to verballyarticulate affect by developing a cognitive affectivescheme. At an archaic level, affects are in the bodyand are expressed only through the body. A personcannot fully articulate an affect state until he can labelit. The purpose of a selfobject in this regard is to putwords to feelings, thus enabling a person to external-ize subjective experience. The naming of subjectiveexperience takes emotions out of the body and into acognitive framework. Stolorow et al. (1987) write,“The caregiver’s verbal articulations of the child’sinitially somatically experienced affects thus serve avital selfobject function in promoting the structural-ization of self experience” (p. 73). They continue toemphasize that psychosomatic symptoms are the re-sult of unarticulated affect, and “. . .when the analystbecomes established as an affect-articulating and con-taining selfobject, the psychosomatic symptoms tendto recede or disappear. . .” (p. 73). All defenses totherapy are seen as fear of the repetition of early


trauma, where the selfobject fails at being empathi-cally rooted in the patient’s affective experience.

Alice Miller (1981) also emphasizes the signifi-cance of being able to experience and contain one’semotional states. She points out that affect integrationbuilds self esteem which is based on “. . .the authen-ticity of one’s own feelings and not on the possessionof certain qualities” (p. 39). Although she does notspecifically use Stolorow et al.’s (1987) terms, affectdifferentiation, synthesization, toleration and articula-tion can be seen as a means to experience oneselfauthentically.

Drama therapy provides an excellent vehicle forthe integration of affect. Emotions are expressedthrough role, and it is a central purpose of a dramatherapist to help the client to integrate the role reper-toire. As the integration of affect is central to the selfpsychology discussed here, the integration of the rolerepertoire is central to drama therapy. I will go on tostate that the integration of the role repertoire and theintegration of affect can be the same thing. If a clientis integrating a role, he can potentially integrate af-fect. If the client can come to differentiate, synthesize,tolerate and articulate the various roles in the rolerepertoire, he will have an integration of affect, aswell as an integration of the role repertoire.

Goal of Drama Therapy

The strengthening of the self is a goal throughoutself psychology. A strengthened self has the capacityto be a consolidated self. Consolidation of the selfoccurs when self structure is built through the inter-nalization of selfobject functions and a person expe-riences himself with a sense of wholeness and cohe-sion (Wolf, 1988). Kohut (1971, 1977, 1984) writesof consolidation of the self as experiencing one’s selfas whole, arising out of the same self. Stolorow et al.(1987) emphasize the capacity to integrate affectiveexperience. Winnicott (1986), although not a self psy-chologist, writes of a true self, which is “. . .the in-herited potential which is experiencing a continuity ofbeing, and acquiring in its own way and at its ownspeed a personal psychic reality and a personal bodyscheme” (p. 242).

In drama therapy with a self psychology theory ofrole, there are two central goals. The first goal is todevelop and refine roles which consolidate the selfand build self structure. Consolidation of the selfmeans to have an expanded role repertoire inclusiveof roles which provide selfobject experiences and to

acknowledge these roles as existing in one cohesiveself. Roles which provide selfobject experiences in-clude those which mirror, sooth, and create bondswith other human beings.

The second goal is to integrate the role repertoire.Integration of the role repertoire means to differenti-ate, synthesize, tolerate and articulate the role reper-toire and the related affective experience. The thera-pist helps the client to differentiate his roles,synthesize the roles as emerging from one self, toler-ate the roles by not being disrupted by the contradic-tory and powerful states, and to desomatize and artic-ulate the roles by giving them names and form.

A Self Psychology Drama Therapy

A self psychology theory of role sees the roleswhich emerge in therapy as capable of providing aselfobject experience for the client. Through roles, weexpress aspects of our self. Affect is associated withany expression of the self. In this section, I will ex-plore how drama therapy contributes to self psychol-ogy treatment. I will also discuss the intersubjectiverelationship between the drama therapist and her cli-ent. This will conclude with an elucidation of thefunction of the drama therapist.

Roles in Self Psychology Treatment

The use of role to build self structure is an impor-tant contribution that drama therapy offers to selfpsychology. Landy (1991) points out how role signif-icantly distinguishes drama therapy from other formsof psychotherapy. Self psychology in its own right isan important and profound means of conducting psy-chotherapy. The combination of drama therapy andself psychology creates a form of therapy which usesrole as a means of affording selfobject experiencesand the internalization of self consolidating functions.

Role playing in therapy has long been acknowl-edged as important. Mead (1956) writes, “. . .psycho-analytic treatment requires the enactment and induc-tion of roles in order to regulate the discharge ofaffects, resolve differences, and maintain communi-cation” (p. 17). Mead emphasized that each individualis a collection of introjected and internalized roles,and that the enactment of these roles is crucial toindividual and social development.

Drama therapy gives us access to external expres-sions of the self which self psychology conductedverbally cannot attain. Emunah (1994) writes:


Facets of our personalities that have been con-cealed, from others, and often from ourselves,can be unleashed via the dramatic role. The roleenables previously unacknowledged or untoler-ated parts to be given voice, and at the sametime to be contained within the safe arena of thedramatic act. (p. xv)

Johnson (1992) echoes this with, “The purpose ofdrama therapy work of this type is to increase theclient’s access to and tolerance of internal states thathave for various reasons been cast aside, labelled asunacceptable, or are seen as threatening” (p. 128).Through the playing of roles we are able to unleashparts of our self which we are usually not willing toexpress. We are also given the opportunity to expressparts of ourselves which we long to express but haveno other means to do so. Perhaps Moreno (1961) saysit best:

Everybody is expected to live up to his officialrole in life; a teacher is to act as a teacher, apupil as a pupil, and so forth. But the individualcraves to embody far more roles than those he isallowed to act out in life, and even within thesame role, one or more varieties of it. Everyindividual is filled with different roles in whichhe wants to become active and that are presentin him in different stages of development. It isfrom the active pressure which these multipleindividual units exert upon the manifest officialrole that a feeling of anxiety is often produced.Role playing is then a method of liberating andstructuring these unofficial roles. (p. 520)

Another important aspect that roles bring to selfpsychology is that roles can express the unconscious.Roles portray the surplus reality that we are aware ofas well as that of which we are unaware. Moreno(1953) writes, “Role emergence is prior to the emer-gence of the self” (p. 76). Wolf (1988), in discussingself psychology, concurs with this when he writes,“To enact is to express in an interpersonal context themeaning of an unconscious or preconscious commu-nication by way of a more or less dramatized inter-action” (p. 100). Blatner and Blatner (1988b) addressan additional component, “. . .whatever role is beingexpressed, there is a likelihood that there is also anopposing tendency latent in the patient’s personality”(p. 109).

My point in emphasizing these benefits of role

playing is to stress that in a therapy geared toward theenactment of roles, more of a client’s self is madeavailable. Much more information is put out in theopen for the client and the therapist to work on—andthe work can be done within the symbolism of therole. Through this process, the role repertoire is man-ifested and given an opportunity to expand. Emunah(1994) emphasizes expansion of the role repertoirealong with the development of role flexibility. Shewrites (1994), “Expansion of the role repertoire in-volves not only playing a greater number of roles, butplaying each role with greater flexibility, commit-ment, and integrity” (p. 32). Role flexibility is thecapacity to play one role multi-dimensionally withinchanging social constructs. In self psychology think-ing, expansion of the role repertoire and role flexibil-ity correlates with having greater psychologicaldepth. The more ways a person has to express parts ofthe self, the more ways a person has to organize selfexperience, and in effect, know oneself and shareoneself with others.

Role playing in drama therapy is also valuable as adiagnostic tool from a self psychology standpoint.Nelson and Strean (1968) write, “. . .we have fre-quently been enabled to evaluate the ego strength andcapacity for object relationships in terms of the cli-ent’s capacity to take on the role of more and morepeople” (p. 274). In a self psychology system ofthinking, role playing can help the therapist makeclient assessments.

The drama therapist can examine a client’s level ofaffect integration through the analysis of the roles aclient assumes and the emotions expressed throughthese roles. A client with a limited role repertoirecould be demonstrating her limits in affect expressionand integration, as well as restrictions in having ful-filling selfobject experiences. A client with an expan-sive role repertoire can be someone who has a widerange of affect. A client with a limited role repertoiredoes not necessarily point to limitations in affect ex-pression and integration. But it is important to re-member that the roles a client plays—how she playsthem, and what the roles mean to her—give the ther-apist information about the client’s development ofselfobject relations. Landy (1986) points to this whenhe writes, “The more one is able to take in and playout the roles of others, the more one develops aunique self” (p. 91). Given that the self is expressedthrough roles, the therapist, through examining therepertoire of roles, can obtain much information abouta client’s state of self.


Exploring the repertoire of roles also involves ex-amining the functions of each role. Blatner (1985)writes, “One way of thinking about the functions ofroles is that they are vehicles for the satisfaction ofhuman motivations” (p. 13). The roles a client playscan uncover conscious and unconscious motivations.A client who is unable to express affect in life may beable to express a large spectrum of affect through rolein drama therapy—and the drama therapist can askherself, “What selfobject experiences does this clientneed in life and is not able to acquire?” The answer tothis question may be in the roles the client plays intherapy.

A person’s ability to contain and articulate rolesprovides the therapist with information about the cli-ent’s capacity—whether experienced in life ornot—to contain, articulate and integrate affect. Manyclients who are unable to express affect in life are alsounable to express affect through role. These clientsare perhaps so shut down emotionally that they cannotimagine what it would be like to experience a feelingto any depth, thus limiting their ability to imagine andplay a role which requires feeling. Others can displaya tremendous range of affect in role but not in life. Aclient fitting this description may not feel safe in lifeto express affect, but finds enough safety within thecontainer of the role to do so. Others are able toexperience a wide range of affect in life and areunable to express affect in role. These clients may beinhibited or threatened by the social act of role play-ing, expecting humiliation or some form of retrauma-tization. Also in this case, there may be a fear ofboundary confusion. Finally, there are clients who canplay a wide range of affect within a role but who havea limited role repertoire. These clients may have dif-ficulty seeing a multiplicity of perspectives, limitingtheir affective awareness to a single viewpoint.

The therapist must help each individual client towork through the psychological blocks that prevent afull human experience and expression. Ultimately, theroles played in therapy may be integrated into lifeoutside therapy. As Landy (1993) writes, “. . .thedrama therapy client seeks to construct an internalsystem of roles that translates into meaningful actionin the world” (p. 30).

I once worked with a depressed client who hadrecently attempted suicide. In therapy, this client wasable to play a wide spectrum of roles. But her abilityto express affect through these roles was extremelylimited. All her roles assumed the same flat, melan-choly, sulky attitude that the client assumed when not

in role. From these facts, I could determine that thisclient’s affective expression and integration were lim-ited. She did not have access to a differentiation ofaffect states, nor an ability to tolerate and articulateher emotions. Her ability to attain selfobject fulfill-ment through roles was limited. I made it a focus oftherapy to develop roles which contained various af-fective states. We worked from an aesthetic, theatricalstandpoint to make the roles alive through a morerealistic presentation of affective states. The clientwas able to eventually tolerate anger about her presentliving situation and the sadness she felt about therecent loss of an important relationship which had ledto her suicide attempt. Unfortunately, my work withthis client was cut short by her being discharged fromthe clinical setting.

Role playing in drama therapy can be extremelyvaluable in helping clients to successfully internalizefulfilling selfobject experiences. Traditional self psy-chology depends on the relationship between therapistand client, where the therapist becomes a selfobjectfor the client and the client eventually internalizessome of the therapist’s functions. Drama therapytreatment also contains this relational aspect. Butdrama therapy has the added component of involvingthe expression of the client’s self through role and theintegration and consolidation of the self through theintegration of the role repertoire. Selfobject functionscan be expressed through role and clients may haveselfobject experiences through dramatic enactments.

A client I once worked with complained aboutfeeling helpless and childish, unable to take respon-sibility in her life. Through the experience of playinga strong parental figure in a group drama therapysession, this client experienced the beginnings of theinternalization of an idealized selfobject. This led herto become able to play a parent to her inner child. Sheset up a scene in which she spoke to herself as ayoung girl. Her adult role told her little girl role thatshe is not responsible for her father’s abandonmentand her mother’s anger. In another scene, she offeredloving, nurturing advice to herself as an adult, andbecame able to address her fears of being responsible.She tolerated and contained these fears through therole she played. Through the role of nurturing parent,she performed her own selfobject function and sus-tained a selfobject experience. This event led her toinsights about her past and current situations. She wasable to verbally articulate future directions in her lifeinvolving being decisive and responsible as an adult.


Function of the Drama Therapist

Drama therapy is an experience between at leasttwo people. There is no such thing as only the client,or only the therapist. Between therapist and client,there exists an intersubjective field of experience.Stolorow et al. (1987) write:

A fundamental assumption that has guided ourwork is that the only reality relevant and acces-sible to psychoanalytic inquiry. . .is subjectivereality—that of the patient, that of the analyst,and the psychological field created by the inter-play between the two. (p. 4)

In this light, the client and therapist together deter-mine a reality of experience between them. Symp-toms are observed within the context of the therapeu-tic relationship. Miller (1981) writes,

. . .all the feelings that the patient arouses in hisanalyst, during his analysis, are part of his un-conscious attempt to tell the analyst his storyand at the same time to hide from him—that isto protect himself from the renewed manipula-tion he unconsciously expects. (p. 77)

Every event in therapy can be seen as an expression ofthe subjective interplay between the therapist and cli-ent. Book (1988) accentuates an intersubjective ap-proach to analytical understanding. Through vicariousintrospection, a process where the therapist constantlyis aware of her subjective world in relation to theclient, the drama therapist can use her own internalexperience to understand her client’s internal experi-ence.

I recall the very first drama therapy group I everled. It was in a psychiatric inpatient locked unit. Theatmosphere in the room was extremely tense. I wasvery nervous and anxious. Upon initial introductions,I had people say their name a response to “If your lifewere a movie, what would the title be?” Client re-sponses to this warm up were superficial and defen-sive. When it came to my turn, I said my name andentitled my life “The Butterflies.” The entire groupburst out into laughter and the energy in the roominstantly relaxed. Through expressing my internaltruth, I expressed a truth for the group. Upon recog-nition of the anxiety, the group became more cohesive

and was able to proceed with an atmosphere of trust.My response to my own internal state was experi-enced as an empathic response for the group. I hadgrasped the intersubjective reality and expressed it.

The way in which the drama therapist responds tothe client and the client’s roles is key to treatmentleading the client towards self consolidation and in-tegration of the role repertoire. The drama therapistlearns how to respond to her client through beingempathic. Empathy is a key term in self psychology.Bacal (1985) describes empathy as “. . .the process bywhich the therapist comes to understand the patient bytuning into his inner world” (p. 202). Kohut (1984),after a lifetime of searching, wrote, “The best defini-tion of empathy. . .is that it is the capacity to think andfeel oneself into the inner life of another person” (p.82).

Empathy can also be seen as a mode of gatheringinformation about the inner life of another (Book,1988). If the drama therapist maintains an attitude ofempathic inquiry, she will stimulate a deeper contex-tual understanding within her client. Book (1988)writes, “A test of successfully being empathic is theextent to which the therapist’s responses stimulateand deepen the patient’s narrative flow” (p. 423).

For a drama therapist to be empathic, she must beattuned to the inner needs of her client and commu-nicate this attunment to the client. Whether the clientis in role or not in role, the drama therapist mustrespond to her client in a way which leads to selfconsolidation for the client. The therapist responsewhich facilitates consolidation is the communicationof empathic understanding. It is not necessarily whatthe drama therapist does—it is more who she is. Thedrama therapist does not seek to reparent her client orcreate an enclave of corrective emotional experiences.She seeks to use her subjective experience to under-stand the inner needs of her client and then respond tothe client in ways which communicate this under-standing.

I worked with an extremely resistant adolescentboy. He openly expressed his hatred of me and ofhaving individual drama therapy with me. I noted tomyself, however, that he came to the therapy sessionsand stayed in the room—even requesting that thedoor remain closed. I noticed that in this young man’spresence, I was intently aware of his fear of beingalone with me. I also noticed that I had a fear of beingalone with him. My fear initiated a desire to force this


young man to open up, to self disclose—so that hisinternal struggles could be out in the open and per-haps the anxiety in the room would be eased. I did notdirectly act upon this desire. Upon one of our earlyencounters in therapy, he firmly assured me that hewas not going to participate in therapy and that hewould not say anything. He sat on the couch in silencewith his arms folded and eyes closed. I experienced inmyself a feeling of victimizing this child by makinghim come to therapy, of forcing him to say or dosomething he didn’t want to do. I used this internalinformation to inform the therapy. I walked out thedoor and instantly returned in role, saying to him,“What do you want to talk to me for? I didn’t do it!Tell your fucking cops to keep their hands off me!Even if I did do it, I wouldn’t tell you!” He instantlyassumed the role of the chief detective and we wereable to play a scene about a young man not wanting totalk. My response to this boy in therapy was a suc-cessful empathic response. Through being aware ofthe intersubjective field, I was able to respond to hisstate in a way which not only engaged him, but placedhim in the position of power and authority over hisexternalized emotional state which I portrayedthrough the role of the suspect.

In all interactions, the way the therapist respondsto the client is extremely significant: it is the heart oftherapy. As in verbal self psychology, it is naturallypossible for the drama therapist to function as a self-object for a client. Unlike a strictly verbal therapist,the drama therapist pays close attention to the way sheresponds to the roles which emerge in therapy. Shecan observe her subjective response to a client’s rolesand make informed choices about how to respond tothese roles. It is helpful if the therapist assumes asustained empathic inquiry toward a client’s roles.

As the roles arise in therapy, the therapist main-tains an attitude of acceptance and tolerance. If thetherapist can accept and tolerate a client’s roles, theclient can come to perform this function for herself.As Baker and Baker (1987) write, “The therapistserves as a selfobject in the therapeutic environmentof sustained, empathic understanding” (p. 7). Indrama therapy, the therapist functions as a selfobjectthrough her sustained, empathic response to the rolerepertoire of the client. She strives to empathicallyunderstand the client’s roles and their relationship toselfobject functions. It is helpful for the drama ther-apist to keep this question alive in her head duringdramatic enactments: “Does this role function as aselfobject for my client, and if so, how?” It is not

necessary to discuss this questioning with the client,but it is important to see roles in their relation toselfobject functioning.

I worked with a man who felt overburdened by allhis conflicting feelings. Maintaining a calm inquisi-tiveness, I asked him to pick an object in the room torepresent each feeling he had—a different object foreach feeling. At first, he was afraid to even try thistask. But through my attitude of acceptance towardhis disrupted state, as well as my tolerance of what-ever feelings he was subjectively experiencing, hebecame willing to try. We labeled each object with aword to represent each feeling. Here, we were con-cretely articulating his affective constellation. I thenhad him place all the objects in a sculpture whichrepresented how they all exist inside him. Once he didthis, he commented that he no longer felt disturbed byhis internal state.

If a therapist responds in a way that is experiencedas shaming by the client, the client will experience arepetition of earlier trauma, of not being understood,tolerated and accepted. But if the therapist can re-spond in a way which communicates empathic under-standing, the client may have a selfobject experience.In a men’s drama therapy group on a psychiatric unit,I once had a man diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenicapproach me in role as a military general. He alsoassigned a role for me. He said, “President Truman, Iadvise that we go ahead and bomb Japan.” I chose torespond in role as the President. I congratulated himon his research into the matter and asked him ques-tions about his findings and logic. He strategicallylaid out a system of thinking which validated an airassault over Japan. I then asked him if he has dis-cussed this with the Secretary of the Navy. He said hehad not. I advised him to do so. I approached anotherman in the group and said, “Secretary, here is a topgeneral who wishes to discuss the Japan issue withyou.” The man who initiated the scene started laugh-ing and turned to me, as himself, and said, “You’resmart! You know what’s going on!” Personally, I amnot so sure I did know exactly what was going on, butI found a response that validated, accepted, and con-tained something truthful in that man. His assigningof the President role to me clearly showed his need forme to be in charge of the group. It is my guess that hehad a selfobject experience in two ways—first,through the playing of the role of a powerful general,thus internalizing an idealized selfobject; and second,through experiencing my tolerance toward his role. I


helped him to contain his destructive urge withoutshaming him.

Responding to a client in role can be powerfullyeffective. Johnson (1992) explores this in great depth.He writes that there are five goals that drama thera-pists attempt to achieve through interventions in role:

1) to help the patient tell his or her story or tosolve a problem; 2) to achieve a catharsis ofemotion; 3) to extend the depth and breadth ofthe client’s inner experience; 4) to help the cli-ent understand the meanings of images, and 5)to strengthen the client’s observing ego andmental flexibility. (p. 128)

These five goals describe various ways in which atherapist can function as a selfobject for a client. Eachgoal involves empathic responsiveness and an attitudeof acceptance, tolerance and understanding toward theclient’s roles.

A drama therapist’s response to a client’s role doesnot necessarily have to be dramatically in role. Themere fact that the therapist can be comfortable in theroom while the client enacts roles may be enough ofa response for a client. There are times when it is mostbeneficial to not respond in role. In fact, I once had aclient who would stop talking to me if I responded inrole to a role she was playing. She needed me to be awitness to her roles, maintaining an external, objec-tive stance to her experience.

In summary, the central function of the therapist isto respond to her client’s roles in ways that help theclient consolidate her self structure and integrate herrole repertoire. Whether in role or not, the dramatherapist seeks ways to differentiate a client’s rolesfrom one another, to synthesize the roles, to toleratethe roles, and to cognitively articulate the roles.

Conclusion

This study applies principles of self psychology torole theory. People can express their selves and affec-tive states through the roles they play at any givenmoment. The goal of drama therapy based in a selfpsychology theory of roles is twofold:

1. To develop and refine roles which aid in self con-solidation and the building of self structure.

2. To integrate role repertoire and affect into a cohe-sive experience of the self.

The central function of the drama therapist is to beempathically attuned to the roles which emerge intherapy and to respond to the client and her roles inways which define and articulate self experience.Consolidation of the self means to have the capacityto differentiate, synthesize, tolerate and contain therole repertoire. It also involves a heightened ability toplay roles which act to self-sooth, self-mirror andcreate bonds with other human beings.

References

Atwood, G., & Stolorow, R. (1984).Structures of subjectivity:Explorations in psychoanalytic phenomenology.Hillsdale, NJ:The Analytic Press.

Bacal, H. (1985). Optimal responsiveness and the therapeutic pro-cess. In A. Goldberg (Ed.),Progress in self psychology(Vol. 1).New York: Guiford Press.

Baker, H., & Baker, M. (1987). Heinz Kohut’s self psychology: Anoverview.American Journal of Psychiatry, 144(1).

Blatner, A. (1985).Role development.New York: Springer Pub-lishing Company.

Blatner, A., & Blatner, A. (1988a).The art of play.New York:Human Sciences Press.

Blatner, A., & Blatner, A. (1988b).Foundations of psychodrama.New York: Springer Publishing Company.

Book, H. (1988). Empathy: Misconceptions and misuses in psy-cyotherapy.American Journal of Psychiatry, 145(4), 420–424.

Corsini, R. (1966).Roleplaying in psychotherapy.Chicago: AldinePublishing Company.

Emunah, R. (1994).Acting for real. New York: Brunner/MazelPublishers.

Goffman, I. (1959).The presentation of the self in everyday life.New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.

Johnson, D. (1992). The drama therapist in role. In S. Jennings(Ed.),Dramatherapy: Theory and practice 2.New York: Rout-ledge.

Kohut, H. (1971).The analysis of the self.New York: InternationalUniversities Press.

Kohut, H. (1977).The restoration of the self.New York: Interna-tional Universities Press.

Kohut, H. (1984).How does analysis cure?Chicago: University ofChicago Press.

Kohut, H., & Wolf, E. (1986). The disorders of the self and theirtreatment: An outline. In A. Morrison (Ed.),Essential paperson narcissism.New York: New York University Press.

Landy, R. (1986).Drama therapy.Springfield: Charles C Thomas.Landy, R. (1990). The concept of role in drama therapy.The Arts

and Psychotherapy, 17.Landy, R. (1991). The dramatic basis of role theory.The Arts and

Psychotherapy, 18.Landy, R. (1993).Persona & performance: The use of role in

drama therapy.New York: Guilford Press.Mead, G. (1956).On social psychology.Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.Miller, A. (1981). The drama of the gifted child.New York: Basic

Books.Moreno, J. L. (1953).Who shall survive?New York: Beacon

House, Inc.


Moreno, J. L. (1961). The role concept: A bridge between psychi-atry and sociology.The American Journal of Psychiatry, 118.

Nelson, M., & Strean. (Ed.). (1968).Roles and paradigms in psy-chotherapy.New York: Grune & Stratton.

Scheff, T. (1984).Being mentally ill: A sociological theory.NewYork: Aldine Publishing Company.

Sternberg, P., & Garcia, A. (1989).Sociodrama: Who’s in yourshoes?New York: Praeger Publishers.

Stolorow, R., Brandchaft, B., & Atwood, G. (1987).Psychoanalytictreatment: An intersubjective approach.Hillsdale, NJ: The An-alytic Press.

Winnicott, D. (1986). The theory of the parent-infant relationship.In A. Morrison (Ed.), Essential papers on narcissism.NewYork: New York University Press.

Wolf, E. (1988). Treating the self.New York: The GuilfordPress.


Documents

A self psychology theory of role in drama therapy