What is it about?
I look at the language used in recent UK publications (mainly book reviews) where 'psychodynamic' and/or 'ecological' music therapy approaches are discussed. I analyse this using Critical Discourse Analysis to help identify the underlying ideological assumptions and power relationships between different theoretical positions.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
It suggests that different music therapy approaches in the UK are not routinely engaging with each other's positions in publications. This represents a potential loss to the practice of music therapy, to clients/service users, and to student music therapists. I want to encourage more cross-approach engagement in music therapy theoretical writing, clinical practice, and training.
Perspectives
I am a music therapy trainer and practitioner, originally trained in what is now considered an 'ecological' approach, but practising in what is often described as a 'psychodynamic' approach. I do not see these approaches as opposed, but as mutually supportive.
Donald Wetherick
Guildhall School of Music and Drama
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Are UK music therapists talking past each other? A critical discourse analysis of three book reviews, British Journal of Music Therapy, September 2019, SAGE Publications,
DOI: 10.1177/1359457519874443.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
