Several years ago I read a blog post titled Our Obsession with Releasing is Hurting Us. At the time it didn’t register deeply, as my interest was not in the arena of trauma work. Since then I have expanded the lens through which I view our “work” in Trager, and a re-reading of the blog post is connecting a few more dots. I can now relate the blog to several modules within Tragerology.
The first is neuroception. The premise of the author is that tension, in people who have survived trauma, is serving a purpose. If we facilitate letting go, we will contribute to collapse, immobility and helplessness. In the context of trauma, this would be consistent with the freeze state, which is not where we want to lead our clients. To quote the author “When we find more creative resources, tools for self-soothing that help us feel emotionally and physically regulated, such as movement that makes us feel joyful and playful … our out-moded survival resources slip away on their own.” Ah, this relates to another Tragerology module, play.
We could also look at her content through the lens of nociception. If a client associates letting go with the autonomic response of “freeze” as a coping mechanism while under threat, further letting go could be interpreted by the brain as threatening, with the subsequent production of pain. Not exactly something we to want cultivate in Trager.
Biotensegrity is yet another lens, and the author actually touches on our biotensegral nature. “We need tension to keep us moving through the world” says this blogger. I couldn’t agree more! Another sentence that resonated with me is “For many people with a history of trauma, feeling contained and able to mobilize the body is the path to recovery and a state of inner calm and safety.”
If you are interested in reading the blog to which I’ve been referring, here’s the link.