From verbal to bodily thinking. Commentary on ‘From functional dissociation to creativity in groups: The effects of a pandemic on a dance company’ by Clarisse Vollon and Guy Gimenez

Most of the articles published in our Journal stem from the Foulkesian British group-analytic tradition, although some of us have striven to introduce the Latin American tradition initiated by Enrique PichonRivière (Tubert-Oklander and Hernández de Tubert, 2004). This is quite understandable, since Group Analysis is an organ of the GroupAnalytic Society International, but until quite recently there has been a paucity of contributions from the work and thought of our French colleagues, with the notable exception of the present writers. Communication between the various traditions of analytic work with groups is much needed for all of us, but it is also a quite difficult enterprise on account of our different national and institutional traditions, perspectives, languages, theories, and practices. Vollon and Gimenez (2022) have already striven to build bridges between our respective theoretical concepts (Tubert-Oklander, 2022). The present text not only deepens their effort, but it also provides us with a novel and thought-provoking experience and research. This is an excellent article, well written and highly interesting. Its theoretical perspective is clearly more psychoanalytical than groupanalytical, in accordance with Didier Anzieu’s and René Kaës’s conception of the ‘psychoanalytic work with groups’. However the 1143970 GAQ0010.1177/05333164221143970Group Analysis 55(4)Tubert-Oklander: Response to Vollon and Gimenez article-commentary2022