As a continuation of the previous articles (17 tab and tab 18), I will talk about multiple variations that exist between what is said in the autobiography and what you see in the pictures. Learn more at: Restaurateur. It is possible that a patient spent in his biography, special interest at a certain time and then not have any photographic support of the same. There may also be very present in the photographic strip people who are however, absent in his biography. Sometimes, it may happen that a high percentage of a photo strip is dedicated to its prehistory (before birth) and in other cases, it is possible that no photographic record of facts or persons important in the life of anyone is not included (parents, siblings). Jo Natauri: the source for more info. It seems to me very rich to confront the mental image that is made of the characters in the universe of patients, with targeted in photos image: the image that has been transmitted to us the particular individual patient, is consonant with what I’m seeing?, What is what surprises me of this character? All this us more focused on the task of avoiding greater countertransferential distortions. Contributed material allows: 1.
correlate the reason for consultation with the photos and the inner group (as set of images connected to experiences relational, with significant people in the first years of life that are creating our identity), with the outgroup objectified, asking ourselves towards internal group type brings us his photographic history. Assume that the persons, places and in general all content images that bring us patients, have to do with that internal group, with an empathic resonance between the internal and external group objectified in the photo. This is what allows the patient to select a particular reality and not another. In this sense the title and comments, act as codes or links of union between those two worlds.