Jane Edwards made an interesting reference to the story of Pamuk and music therapy in her column, "Meaning What Exactly?" Often, in music, art, literature, poetry, and even music therapy, more emphasis is put on what something represents and not on what it truly means. In interpreting an improvisation with a client, the task of separating representation from meaning is especially hard.
It is sometimes easy to attach a meaning to the music that is outside of the music. But that is not always the most important part. Once music has been established as a mode of communication, a pseudo-language can develop between the therapist and the client, one that is easily interpreted only by someone involved in the whole process. It is then the therapist's duty to translate the musical elements, with the help of the client, back into something that can be discussed or documented. In this task of interpretation, balancing the client's suggestions with what can be seen by the therapist is especially hard. But, to do both of those things, the therapist has to, above all, listen.
Being a student in the process of becoming a music therapist, I have found that this is one of the harder things to learn. The situations where meaning and associations cannot be discussed with the client are the most challenging. How does one go about 'translating' a musical improvisation with someone who does not speak English, or may not speak at all? This understanding can usually only come out of learning the 'language' developed between the therapist and the client after having played together for many sessions.
I had an eye-opening experience at my practicum placement last summer with a nonverbal client. I had never worked with someone on such a low functioning level and did not know what to expect. It was amazing to watch the client's demeanor change during our musical experiences from what it was when he came into the room. There were many occasions that we connected through musical improvisation, something that we would not have been able to do through other media. I realized during those sessions that we had developed our own 'language.' One that was unique to us and that was shared by no one else. This was a very special realization for me. The most important thing I learned was to be open on all sides- to what develops through the music, to the client's input, and to one's own intuitions.
This brings me to the other portion of the article. I thought it was really great to hear of therapists broadening their views based on research and client response. I have not seen this as a problem, seeing that I am not in the professional world yet, but I am still glad that these things are practiced. I feel like no matter what ideas I have coming into a new clinical situation, that situation will change me in some way. I will hopefully learn new things about the client and about being a music therapist; I may rethink some of my own ideas of what should and shouldn't be done. These changes are important especially when the input is coming from the client. If they are inquisitive about certain aspects of the therapeutic process, it means those aspects are important to them, and therefore are important to us as therapists.
I hope I continue to see these kinds of developments throughout my journey of becoming a music therapist.