Literature Review

EXPERT'S CORNER

DUAL IDENTITY: ARTIST OR THERAPIST?

The literature (Bruss & Kopala, 1993 in Feen-Calligan, 2012) suggests the artists and art therapists identity is inextricably linked to one’s personal identity, incorporating our individual values, often guided by ones upbringing, professional development and mentorship. Yet it is the use of art in therapy, along with the art therapist’s own art practice, that distinguishes ‘art therapists’ from ‘therapists who use art’ (Brown, 2008; Moon, 2002).

The literature however proposes the dual identity of artist and therapist is both an asset and liability. For example, an art therapist’s rich understanding of art materials and processes can promote empathy and allows therapists to help clients achieve mastery, in turn, building self-confidence (Moon, 2010). Yet, complications arise from the integration of artist and art therapist’s often-opposing identities (Moon, 2002; Orkibi, 2010), with the literature suggesting that the dual identity can be difficult to reconcile as each role invites distinct values, boundary management and ethical considerations (Kalmanowitz & Potash, 2010; Levick, 1995). Notably, clients may be intimidated and/or inspired by the therapist’s artist identity, yet this has potential ramifications for the therapeutic alliance especially when art-making during sessions occurs (Dominik Havsteen-Franklin, 2014; Marshall-Tierney, 2014, Moon, 2002).

​

Additionally, whilst the literature (Case & Dalley, 2014; DeCamp, Koenig & Chisolm, 2013; Junge, 2014; Moon, 2002; Orkibi, 2010) agrees the blurring of personal and professional identity is a common dilemma faced by helping art therapists, there is little consensus regarding how an individual practitioner could reconcile these identities. Furthermore, the literature (Feen-Callighan, 2012) also addresses the need for identity to be systematically addressed in the arts therapy curriculum to prepare students for the employment realities upon graduation.

ROLE AMBIGUITY AND PROFESSIONAL SELF-ESTEEM

Art therapy, a form of psychotherapy utilising creative modalities within a therapeutic relationship to improve and inform physical, mental and emotional well-being (ANZATA, 2017), as an industry is often marred by role confusion and public misconceptions about how art therapy works (Feen-Calligan, 2012; Moon, 2002; Van Lith & Fenner, 2011). Whilst historically, some advocate that art therapy needs to professionalise and create a consistent, homogenous identity in order to flourish (Johnson, 1984), this defies postmodern concepts of identity formation (Moon, 1997) in which identity is forever changing (Kaur, 2012).

From the Eriksonian psychosocial understandings of identity formation, this is particularly troubling as Erikson theorises that when identity development denies the assured wholeness of traditional identity, a specific rage can be triggered (Erikson, 1970). In contrast, Moon (1997) proposes a postmodern perspective where the art therapists identity is forever changing. This lack of clarity surrounding the art therapist’s role is cause for concern as role ambiguity, stemming from unclear job responsibilities, inconsistent expectations and an environment of uncertainty, is linked to common symptoms of ‘burnout’, such as depression, anger, feelings of failure, fatigue and suppressed creativity (Cashell & Miner, 1983).

Worryingly, the literature points to a grim future for art therapy as a profession with limited employment opportunities (Westwood & Linnell, 2011, Johnson, 1999). Given that, it is unsurprising that the literature reveals low professional self-esteem of its therapists, contributing to professional shame (Johnson, 1999), producing defensive attitudes, power struggles, and feelings of professional envy toward other, well established professions (Bouchard, 1998, p.162 in Orkibi, 2010). In an effort to mitigate these issues, Stoll (2005) advocates for an international art therapy association to create a universal definition of art therapy, averting issues relating to role ambiguity, however, as yet, this has not been successful.

Furthermore, the literature links low professional self-esteem to increased clinification, resulting in a decline of art making during therapy, privileging increased verbalisation (Allen, 1992), which further undermines the practice and erodes the very thing that makes art therapy unique.