First Posted on April 5, 2013 by alisonball with thanks to Ronit Bichler

Various theories grapple with and try to come to an understanding of the notion of Self. The grappling leads to a myriad of questions to which client and therapist need to find answers. What is this Self, where can we find it in the body, what relationship do we have with this entity. Is it a cohesive entity, a one piece entity, has it got parts and are there relationships with the parts if there are parts.

While some orientations call it aspects of the Self and some liken it to a diamond that has many facets, others seem to reject altogether the notion of parts of the Self. For me though, I have found that my work with clients forces me to consider the possibilities of both the Self and its parts.

Being a visual person, I have different images in my mind when I am thinking of the Self and its parts, depending on what emerges at various times when I am grappling with the experiences of the Self that different clients bring into the work.

At times I have a picture of islands in a vast ocean. Sometimes some of them are connected to each other and sometimes they exist in isolation from each other. At another time I can see a piece of Swiss cheese full of holes.

In these two examples I ask myself are the holes and the islands the bits of the self or are they the bits that were carved out of the Self. And what about the sea and the cheese themselves- are they representing the Self in its somewhat damaged state? Do they offer enough of a connective tissue between the parts?

At still other times I have a mental picture of a war zone where there are clearly two warring camps one to the right and one to the left, each trying to destroy, outdo, or win over the other. Another image is of the Russian dolls, Babushka dolls, which are a series of dolls in receding sizes that fit into each other.

In this gallery of mental images, the client and I have to work at understanding the relationships between these parts and the part that everyone calls I. The known part called I has or has not developed relationships with its parts. Is there a dialogue between the I and the parts; is there a dialogue between the parts themselves. And what kind of relationships are there between all the parts. Are the relationships marked by hostility, friendliness, acceptance, hate, envy, encouragement and so on?

Some therapeutic methods such as Transactional Analysis, Gestalt Therapy, Voice Dialogue and Psychodrama are based substantially on ways of working with these parts of the Self. For me, however, I came to such work- that I simply call “Part Work”- from my own experience and find that it is a very useful addition to my Psychotherapeutic skills when I feel it will benefit particular clients.

The conservative psychoanalytic practitioner would not endorse my practice of Part Work as it is considered an enactment of issues versus thinking about them. On the other hand those influenced by psychodrama, know such direct talk can be a powerful way of bringing what is often only a “talk about something” very much alive in the present moment.

I think that sometimes there are blockages that prevent the thinking about issues and may prolong the suffering of the client; therefore some enactments can unearth issues that are then available to be thought about and worked through.

In my Part Work, the client starts a conversation with the parts, giving a voice to the different parts and often discovering relationships within the parts of the Self that were unbeknown to the client up to this point and that are often not conducive to the well being of that client.

Part Work is not necessarily suitable or desired by every client. Some people may feel awkward and say they feel silly talking with their parts, and other people do not seem to be able to connect with their parts. For these people there is no point in participating with this kind of work.

However, when the client can connect with his or her parts and give them voice, it can have a profound effect.