| Abstract | From a sociological standpoint of view, memory, history and myths play a great role in group formation and the problem of identification of the subject. But for the analysis of today's multicultural and multi-ethnical society, we also need comparative sociological studies of the formation of collective memory. This study investigates the ethno-psychotherapeutic clinical practice of Tobie Nathan in France and discusses the structural difference between ethno-psychotherapy and European psychotherapy, particularly the manipulation of the mythic and historical materials of the subject. This paper explains the nature of memory in ethno-therapeutic practice as generative memory, which is regenerated and maintained by continual practice in a group. The psychological disorders of group members are cured through a total regeneration of social myths themselves. On the other hand, from a psychoanalytical point of view, the modern subject is structured by scission from the "Other" as the place where collective generative memory is developed. To compensate for this scission, the modern subject changes the collective generation of memory by repeating its own myth. By this argument, the author concludes that these two types of clinical practice reveal historical and environmental transformation of the subjective dispositif With this argument, we can better appreciate clinical psychotherapeutic practices in other cultures.
|
