发布图片以发表评论“Using” vs “Working In” Music

评论于“Using” vs “Working In” Music

通过 金伯利2014年3月6日 · 10 评论

I’一直在思考约翰·卡彭特(John Carpente)博士在 他在本周撰写的博客文章中探讨了音乐存在的概念“used”在治疗而不是音乐中“worked in” in therapy。它’这不是一次新对话-我通常会读到有关 音乐AS与音乐IN治疗概念-但是’s an 进口ant dialogue to engage in as it ties into our identity as 音乐治疗师s 和 the uniqueness of our craft.

约翰,您邀请读者分享我们的想法。为了什么’值得,这是我的:

首先,我对“working in” music. It’这是我以前从未听过或未曾考虑过的短语,但我喜欢暗示的音乐互动方面。

对我来说,挑战是二分法的想法表达“using” music versus “working in”音乐。尽管没有直接说明,但论点的一部分似乎是因为其他专业人员可以“use”音乐在他们的实践中,我们作为音乐治疗师不应该’t. For if we “use”音乐在我们的实践中,如何将我们的工作与其他治疗专家的工作区分开?

根据我的经验,这是一个挑战,有时候在临床上音乐治疗师应该“use”以刺激响应的方式播放音乐。我在神经康复环境中做了很多次“used” 和 操作d the music stimulus to facilitate, enhance, 和/or direct a gross, fine, or oral motor skill. In these instances I was not the 上 e who created the skill (i.e. goal) that needed to be addressed—that came from the physical therapist, occupational therapist, or speech language pathologist—but I was the master musician who was able to create 和 present the music stimulus in such a way as to maximize its effect.

My first inclination was to envision this implied 二分法 as a continuum. What if our work fell somewhere 上 a continuum between “using” 和 “working in”音乐?遵循这个想法,治疗师的个性,治疗师的经验,临床环境和客户需求可以使我们在任何给定时间处于连续状态。那里’对连续性概念的流动性对我来说很有吸引力,因为它允许音乐治疗师根据自己在任何给定时刻的需要灵活地进行练习。

但是后来我陷入了对“working in” music, which 约翰写道与 美学的关系的 元素 of the therapeutic music experience. If we continue with the continuum concept, it follows that there may be times when there is not an 美学的 or 关系的 component. But as a master musician, 怎么样 can you create music that isn’t 美学的ally 赏心悦目—isn’t that a large part of our clinical musicianship training? To be able to create music in such a way that is functional, but also 美学的ally 赏心悦目? And what about the 关系的 component—even when you are “using”音乐有一种人为因素参与体验。它可能会或可能不会直接与音乐体验的结构有关,但是治疗体验可能具有相关性。

那那把我们留在哪里呢?不幸的是,没有任何答案……但是我现在正在考虑的也许是“working in”音乐始终是音乐疗法实践的一部分。它’总是在那里 怎么样 we are 加工 in music. To provide a visual, envision “working in”音乐为圆。也许在圈子里有一个连续的“using”音乐。一方面是刺激反应模型,另一方面是……’m not really sure what to call that, yet, but perhaps it has to do with music creation (e.g. improvisation or music making). The stimulus response end implies that the client is a passive experiencer of the music experience, whereas the music creation end implies active engagement in 和, yes, 加工 in music. But what surrounds the continuum, what envelops it  is the circle, the 美学的 和 关系的 元素 of the music therapy process. You can’无论音乐疗法的结构和体验如何,都不要带走那些人。

有什么想法吗?

{ 8 评论… read them below or 加一 }

布赖恩Abrams 2014年3月6日,下午4:12

感谢金伯利(Kimberly)对约翰的令人发指的回应’在另一个博客上发人深省的帖子!我很喜欢这些博客之间的对话(博客版本?)。

我对“working in”音乐与互动性息息相关。据我了解,这意味着作品中有一个不可分割的整体,不能理解为“X” 原因s “Y,”而是共同体验“A” 和 co-creation of “B.”那是否是一个“dichotomy”尚待辩论,但两者肯定有很大不同。而且,什么是“临床上适当的”可能属于或不属于MT’独特的专业知识。我可能会找到“临床上适当的”做很多事情,而我的培训并没有为我做准备。

但是,我想知道:MT如何“use”正如您所说,“manipulate” a client’s responses? That strikes me as somewhat unusual with respect to art which (as I understand it) is a co-participatory process, not something that 操作s another person. There is certainly much fluidity 和 many continua in a therapist’s work–and never 上 ly 上 e way of 加工. However, I would question whether it can ever be meaningful for any part of that continuum to involve manipulation of the client 通过 使用 sound stimuli (which, in that context, isn’t even really music, any more than a small sculpture being 采用d for its incidental properties as a paperweight is still being engaged as a sculpture).

而且据我了解,“aesthetic”意味着比行为更多“pleasing”(即hedonia)。它涉及艺术参与,共建,整体整合等的整个范围,其中大部分只是“pleasing.”我自己作为音乐家的培训从来没有“pleasing”任何人。尽管在我受过培训的地方,音乐家的水准很高,但这是关于掌握音乐媒体的某些组成部分,以便我可以听到和分享音乐,作为参与艺术体验的机会–并且在音乐疗法方面–有临床经验。如果是关于“pleasing”(即严格意义上的享乐提示或强化),它将消除可能在音乐的艺术经验中围绕困难,挑战,奋斗等进行的可能工作的整个领域,并且可能不允许治疗师进行“meet”她/他实际所在的客户(可能不在“pleasing”地点)。此外,如果我们附加“pleasing”关于“manipulation,”我认为我们然后会像临床医生一样处于一个特别陌生的地方。

关于人际关系因素:在干预过程中一个人在那里存在着很大的差异“deliver”技术熟练,并且该人本身就是干预的一部分。随机对照试验的重点是隔离技术干预措施,以使其不受干预。“confounds,”例如人际关系。这个想法是,关系的技术干预是独立的“works.” That is certainly appropriate within certain clinical disciplines wherein the point is to 交付 a technically effective stimulus or other set of conditions that “work.”但是在那些情况下,对刺激进行熟练,技术性操作的事实并不意味着关系维度是“working”本身……它只是偶然出现,无论如何“nice” the 上 e 交付ing the stimuli happens to be. That is different from “working in”与治疗师,其中治疗师与实际是分不开的“workings”变化本身。

是的,我同意刺激反应模型的确暗示客户是音乐体验的被动体验者。但是我不’认为与音乐体验的接受(聆听)与生产(再创造/创作/即兴)形式有关。例如,当我做GIM时,客户肯定不是被动的体验者。客户正在积极地利用录制的音乐做某事。而且我当然不是在操纵客户 ’作为GIM治疗师的回应。我正在提供机会,其结果可能无法预测(由我或任何统计模型预测)。播放音乐时,有1000个客户可以拥有相似的图像–但这并不能使第1001个客户拥有相同的经历。关于音乐作为艺术(相对于声音刺激),每个客户在处理音乐方面保留自己的代理权,实际上与预测客户反应的模型不一致基于任何具体的技术干预。
我了解您在说MT可以同时成为技术操纵者和机会提供者。但是,在某个时候,我们必须问自己在处理音乐的人的看法时所处的立场:与代理人一起确定她/他如何体验音乐(以及他们可能会做什么或响应该音乐不做);或作为对音乐具有可预测响应的复杂有机物体,可以理解为声音刺激(当我们考虑音乐的某些维度(例如其无声的表现时,我们会遇到一些额外的理论麻烦))。

凯西·墨菲 2014年3月7日,下午5:42

你好
像布莱恩一样,我要感谢您对约翰·卡彭特的发人深省的回应’在另一个博客上的帖子。当我读到您的帖子时,以下声明震惊了我:“it follows that there may be times when there is not an 美学的 or 关系的 component.” I can’t ever imagine a time when this would be true. 我对美学的 in music therapy is based 上 the notions presented 通过 Ken Bruscia in Defining 音乐疗法. As he states, “博物馆之美在于其表面和结构之外,还源于灵魂。” In my opinion, there is an 美学的 beauty to all music that is co-created within the context of a therapeutic relationship. I have listened to several excerpts from Nordoff-Robbins, where perhaps the trained ear, or master musician as you state is not able to find an 美学的 component. As a 音乐治疗师, I would hope we would see the beauty or 美学的 in the process not necessarily the product.

从我对音乐疗法的理解来看,它是一种关系疗法,音乐疗法涉及客户,音乐和治疗师之间的关系。有时,客户与音乐的关系可能是主要的,有时,客户与治疗师的关系可能是主要的,但是对于关系组件来说,它不是音乐疗法。

金伯利 2014年3月8日,下午2:09

Kathy, I completely agree! Thank you for validating 和 expanding upon my point that you cannot remove the 关系的 or 美学的 component from the music therapy experience. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts 和 opinions here. ~Kimberly

布赖恩Abrams 2014年3月8日,下午2:36

I’我很高兴看到MT对美学和关系的不可分割性达成了共识。但是,我在几点上仍不清楚。如果“aesthetic”不仅意味着“pleasing”享乐激励或奖赏,并且是一个关系,共同建设的过程(不一定“pretty”),如何在刺激反应范式中进行协调?而且,如果关系不能与音乐疗法分开,那么关系在刺激和反应之间的技术联系中的作用在哪里?同样,如果刺激“works,” shouldn’在有或没有任何无关紧要的因素(例如人际关系因素)下是否有效?如果关系不是’实际上不是MT实际工作的一部分,那么’它类似于关系在帮助患者进行MRI检查中的作用吗?当然,人类可能需要帮助患者进行MRI检查,但这种关系与实际上与生物粒子的磁性相互作用无关“works.”它可能起着外围作用,但不是对实际现象本身的解释的一部分。感谢您对此做进一步的澄清。

凯西·墨菲 2014年3月8日,下午2:42

Kim thanks for your response, though I am confused. In your origina post you suggest that there may be times when there is not an 美学的 or 关系的 component. Yet you are agreeing with my post in which I refute that 要求。 I cannot concieve of an instance in music therapy where there is not an 美学的 or 关系的 component. so I am wondering where exactly are you postioning yourself with music therapy?

金伯利 2014年3月8日,下午2:54

凯西,我想您可能看错了我的帖子?还是我不清楚-如果是后者,则道歉。与您有关的句子之后的接下来的两句话“claim.”他们描述了一个思路,说明了为什么连续体概念没有’t work for exactly the reason you 和 I both believe—you cannot NOT have an 美学的 or 关系的 element to the music therapy. The remainder of the post offers an alternative to the continuum concept. Does that make sense? ~Kimberly

布赖恩Abrams 2014年3月8日,下午3:01

金伯利

首先,感谢您补充我的名字,“Brain”(我认为这是对我的才智的肯定,而不是对我的出现的评论,如果您不是一个善良的人,那将是完全合理的!)。

感谢您在这里对您的职位的澄清。我很乐意随时随地讨论这个问题。但是,由于您花了一些时间“import” 约翰·卡彭特’我的博客文章是您自己撰写的,大概是为了促进此处的公开讨论,我正在跟进。

感谢您的改写,“But as a master musician, 怎么样 can you create music that isn’t an 美学的 experience—isn’t that a large part of our clinical musicianship training? To be able to create music in such a way that is functional, but also artistic?”我认为我们同意不存在非审美音乐疗法(换句话说,如果是非审美音乐,它将不再是音乐疗法)。

我仍然感到困惑的地方是配置中客户端的位置。您写道,在神经康复性MT的背景下,“My unique expertise as a 音乐治疗师 in this context is being able to structure the music stimulus to enhance the entrainment 和 to change the stimulus to 遇到 the client’s needs in that moment (e.g. change the tempo, dynamics, harmonies, etc.).”那么,我的问题是:如果这是真正的关系,那么客户到底在哪里?客户是仅以可预测的方式对技术干预做出反应的反应生物吗?或者,客户是在做决定/选择(无论是以有意识,认知的方式,还是我们仍然认为是客户的其他方式)’自己的代理机构)?您是否提供刺激“cause”客户的反应,或者您是否在提供适合临床的机会,使客户可以通过多种方式体验和运用?

再次感谢您抽出宝贵的时间来答复。
布赖恩“the brain” Abrams

约翰·卡彭特 2014年3月10日,晚上10:52

嗨,金伯利,布莱恩和凯西,
I’m sorry that I’ve joined the group a bit late. Thank you all for taking an interest in this topic 和 sharing your thoughts 和 perspectives. I feel that this topic, although not new, is an ETREMELY 进口ant conversion!

为了不重复你们三个人已经说过的话,我将尝试回答和/或增加金伯利最初提出的一些问题。
My intention was not to imply that 音乐治疗师s shouldn’t or should “use” music in their practice. My intent was simply an attempt to define or identify two ways in which music is located (used or worked-in). For me, I feel that ne cancels the other 和 that 上 e can not “work-in” 和 “use” music. That being said, I find it difficult to differentiate an MT 使用 music from other disciplines that “use” music. The way I understand it, is that I do not see a difference between an MT 使用 music for speech-based goal 和 a speech therapist doing the same thing. In fact, I would even say that the SLP is more qualified to “use” music for a speech-base goal then the MT because it’s (the response/outcome) within their scope of practice. Music for them is viewed solely as a stimulus. Thus, the 美学的 or 关系的 experience is not 进口ant. What’ is 进口ant, as I see it, is that the stimulus targets a specific behavior. Therefore, the client is conceptualized as his/her behavior. The music can be anything. In other words, the music can be replaced with any external reward.

I feel, when 加工-in music, that there is always a 关系的 和 美学的 experience within the music event, regardless of the method (ie. Improvisation, pre-composed, songwriting, receptive). The 美学的 和 关系的 experiences, or components, are intertwined within the music experience 和 are continuously informing 上 e another throughout the musical-clinical process. This becomes a dynamic process that involves client 和 therapist. When “using” music, in my opinion, 怎么样ever, the process is not about music, relationship, or 美学的. It’s not even about a process. It’s solely about the product (response/end result). Thus, the experience of 加工-in music, as well as the moment-to-moment interactions, are not valued as being therapeutic components. In other words, the journey 和 the experiences that accompany the “working-in” experience are not the clinical focus.

I agree with 金伯利 that this conversion would be so much easier in person then via typing! So until we 遇到 in Kentucky, thanks for the exchanges!
祝一切顺利,
约翰

上一篇:

下一篇: