Fix the space

[Corrie van Wijk]

Steve Saunders: "Clean Space navigates the body to touch the locations of the objectified children, thus connecting through moving in a fixed spatial structure. Hence fix the space first then move."

How would you be able to establish the space without exploring it by moving around first?

[Steve Saunders]

Notice the direction of focus and enquire of the direction its knowledge.

But why not navigate anyway?

[Corrie van Wijk]

The problem with noticing the direction of attention is that you ask that of the person at A. The axioma is that the person at A cannot know, so you have to invite him or her to find a space that wants him or her to go to, so you get the knowledge of space of B or space of C.

Asking the direction is a good alternative if the person cannot find a space, but still in that case you ask it from the perspective of A.

Steve: "But why not navigate anyway?" I'm not sure what you mean by this. Navigate by f?
What clean question would apply?

[Steve Saunders]

A might not know, but the direction of staring is not A information, it' B's - IMO.

All answers come through the body/mouth/feelings called A.

Bringing in adjacency, its always adjacent to A that questions should be posed IMO because that smoothly steps the person from A to B. It's why I was looking in the space between A and B, and why I've been playing with:

And what kind of space could be between [us, you and that, you and me, you and it, ...]?
&WKOS could be beyond that? (*6)
&WDYKN?

This then allows A to travel to B smoothly and then for B answers to emerge without the process traumatising A.

Steven
(PS this might have to be moved into EK developments ...)

[Corrie van Wijk]

Steve: "A might not know, but the direction of staring is not A information, it' B's - IMO

I think you're right it is not A information, (I'd rather say knowledge, because A's is conscious information right here right now), but I think as a facilitator you should treat it as a non-verbal expression. Developing it through clean questions, e.g. ask about the staring, would be appropriate I think.

I'm not sure if it would be B information, depends on the client I guess: if he or she posted his or her B in that direction, that might be the case.

I'd treat it as C information, like you do: "This then allows A to travel to B smoothly and then for B answers to emerge without the process traumatising A."

However, going from A to B might just be what traumatises A, even go there smoothly might backfire. You need space of D to avoid it.

[Steve Saunders]

So here are some deeper F intrusions:

Fixing A or B
Choosing C or D
Choosing adjacent or further
Oscillating space
Algorithms
space or moving or metaphor or EK or E

Where does the F's decision on direction come from?
How can the client be enabled to make such decisions themselves, adjacently?

If clean is to be clean then what is F's role? Witness? Catalyst? Navigator? Asker of Q's? Instructor? (move there ...), Coach?

Hesienberg rules: the observer affects the experiment. The question is how to effect it most beneficially from the points of view of the client system.

I ran two tests on this: a series of workshops where I expected the clients to make the first move - and they duly did; and then I ran two workshops where I decided beforehand on the theme - "the story of my life". At these workshops I waited and there were no initial signals, just the waiting for me to intrude " the story" task.

How did the clients know? What are the starting conditions that are most conducive to the client's system's ...?

[Corrie van Wijk]

Corrie: "How would you be able to establish the space without exploring it by moving around first?"

Steve: "How can the client be enabled to make such decisions themselves?"

You just invite them!

The rule is you establish A and f first, then ask to think of a statement B, then invite them to write that down or represent it by drawing a symbol or find an object that symbolizes it. Then you invite them to find a space for B, get the right distance, right height and right angle.

So now you have set up A, B and f, which implies that you have C as well (space between A and B), which by this time is usually already psycho-active. If f is in space of C, move out.

From the information you get from this process, f can choose to ask A, space of A, B, space of B, C or space of C.

A clean invitation would be: find a space that wants you to go to.

Then you ask: "What do you know from that space there?" or "What does that space know?"

Steve: "The question is how to effect it most beneficially from the points of view of the client system."

Just don't, have them move around, perhaps a spin, and the spaces will connect. Trust the system!

[Steve Saunders]

So you just preselect space ... its still an intrusion. I prefer to wait for an initial communication and have them write or draw or represent that ... its still an intrusion but allows moving in space writing drawing or sculpting or combinations thereof. The suggestions are implied by the environment. I guess ultimately a client has selected an F because of the way that F is; and so then the F has to be just themselves as cleanly as possible.

Does a space need to be established or might it self-evolve?

Space is of no use for stuck gestures so at times a spatial start can be a problem IMO.


Every start and form of F has a potential allergic response - I wait I get a client who waits ... I give paper a client abreacts - I've even had a person abreact to the word "space" and also to recursive questions (David did too with a person at Glasto).

So an F must have more than one start ... or not?

[Corrie van Wijk]

Steve: "So you just preselect space ... ".

No, the client does: he or she chooses to be at A (that's always the first invitation: "Find a space that represents you right here right now."), then f ("Where do you want me to be?"), then find a space for B (they come to you for a reason: WWYLTHH?), etc... no intrusion.

Steve: "to wait for an initial communication".

That can be anything, and it might be a right cue, but usually that is a problem space, whereas if you ask "What would you like to have happen?" you invite the brain to come up with some sort of goal, mission or the like. The emotional brain can only think in positive statements, it's too primitive to come up with abstract formulations, like a don't want. So if the client does write something like that, you know it is a thinking statement and not a 'like to'.

Steve: "Does a space need to be established or might it self-evolve?"

The client establishes the space and from there a psycho-active space evolves.

Steve: "Space is of no use for stuck gestures so at times a spatial start can be a problem."

You can go inside.

"Every start and form of F has a potential allergic response."

If it does, it is not a clean start. Mind your non-verbals.

[Steve Saunders]

I disagree Corrie. My point is that any fixed strategy (space, metaphor, motion, nlp) has people for whom it works and people for whom it does not.

It requires awareness and choice to follow a client cue, and the practitioner always has nonverbals ...