Operacija D: Brez besed ali s preveč (operacije 15, odnos 4)

Četudi je namen te operacije delo, nekaj narediti, ustvariti, pa zgleda, kot da vsebuje veliko govorjenja. Ne le da so besede, govor in jezik pomemben, celo bistven del človeškega bivanja[1], izredno pomembne so pri vzpostavljanju stikov, medsebojnem spoznavanju, oblikovanju ciljev, načrtovanju, spremljanju, vrednotenju in oziru na delo.

Delati brez besed

Med uporabniki socialnega so ljudje, ki nimajo povsem nobene zmožnosti jezika. Pri tem ne mislimo na tiste, ki govorijo drug jezik, ali na ljudi, ki ne slišijo ali ne vokalizirajo besed, ampak na tiste, ki ne razumejo besed v nobenem jeziku, ki nimajo te umske sposobnosti. V takih situacijah lahko ustvarimo stik na ravni telesa, giba, zaznave, spoznavamo se lahko tako, da smo skupaj z njimi, da opazujemo kaj delajo, kako se počutijo in tako, da preskušamo stvari v akciji, da se učimo z delovanjem. Seveda lahko začutimo njihove želje in njihovo voljo. Lahko vstopimo v njihov življenjski svet, ga začutimo in ga celo odražamo, reflektiramo -  v skupnem plesu (ples je tudi pogovor). Lahko jih podpiramo v svetu, v katerem živijo brez besed.

Izostanek besed je ključen v premoščanju sveta ljudi brez besed z drugimi svetovi, še posebej pri premoščanju njihovega življenjskega sveta z institucionalnimi – pri izrekanju upravičenosti, načrtov, ciljev, ureditev in razmerij. Te besede imajo materialno moč delovanja. Vloga socialnega delavca ali delavke je podobna prevajalcu ali zvočniku, posredovati občutene želje občinstvu, ki nima zmožnosti neposredne navzočnosti, ki je nujna za tovrstne izraze oz. izjave. To pomeni preoblikovanje ali prestavitev občutkov in materialnih vidikov situacije v besed z uporabo logičnega, deduktivnega in induktivnega, sklepanja, ki mora temeljiti na skupni izkušnji, vživljanju (empatiji) ali celo s tem, da postanemo drugi (glej spodaj) oziroma s poznavanjem situacije in človeka kot praksisa.

Kar smo pravkar zapisali, ne velja le za situacije brez besed; tako spoznavanje in skupno bivanje je splošni proces, ki je podlaga socialnega dela v tej in v drugih operacijah. V socialnem delu, celo v fazi spoznavanja, ne gre zgolj za besede in jezik, ampak tudi za to, da »smo tam«, gre za opazovanje in eksperimentiranje – poskušanje. Na drugi strani pa vedno obstaja potreba po prevajanju takega nebesedno pridobljenega znanja in uvida v performativne besede, v jezik upravičenosti in druge formalne jezike, ki prevladujejo v (skrbniških) poklicih pomoči in njihovem delovanju.

Fetišizem besed in odnosov

Glede na pomen besed nasploh, v operaciji vzpostavljanja delovnega odnosa pa še posebej, obstaja velika možnost, da se ujamemo v prazne besede – v besede, ki nimajo nobenega praktičnega pomena, besede, iz katerih ne izhajajo dejanja, ki, vsaj neposredno, nimajo performativne lastnosti. Prazne besede so tudi tiste, ki so preveč abstraktne, da bi imele operativni pomen. Še bolj pogubne pa so besede, oz. besedna dejanja, ki jih imamo za resnična in dejanska dejanja – ki enačijo nekaj, kar smo rekli, z nečim, kar smo zares naredili.

Če socialne delavke in delavce vprašamo, katera spretnost je najpomembnejša med temeljnimi spretnostmi socialnega dela, bodo najpogosteje odgovorile, da je to spretnost pogovarjanja. Uporabniki, na drugi strani pa bodo odgovorili drugače – od socialnih delavk ali delavcev pričakujejo, da bodo jih pomagali kaj urediti, da jim bodo omogočili dostop do sredstev, ki jih potrebujejo, »da mi bo zrihtala stanovanje, službo … Morda je ta razcep posledica velika vpliva, ki sta ga imeli psihologija in psihoterapija na socialno delo, zgodovinska okoliščina, da so v obdobju akademizacije socialnega dela, psihologi, ki so v velikem številu prihajali učit socialno delo, učili predvsem metodiko socialnega dela, ki se je potem usmerila predvsem v svetovanje. Morda zaradi tega, ker na najmanjši stopnji posega v življenjski svet, pri svetovanju, ostanemo zgolj na ravni besed, morda tudi zato, ker je virtualni svet besed varnejši od sveta dejanj in dogodkov, ali pa zaradi tega, ker je pravzaprav ideološka, indoktrinacijska funkcija socialnega dela za delavce bolj pomembna kot pa operativna, akcijska. Vsekakor pa zaradi tega, ker besede omogočijo, da dejanja in dogodke ujamemo[2], kar je bolj pomembno iz vidika strokovnjaka kot pa uporabnika. Predvsem iz nadzornega in oblastnega vidika socialnega dela. Tudi zaradi tega je pomembno »prepustiti besedo« uporabnikom in uporabnicam in jih skupaj dekodirati v dejanja in tudi pri njihovem zapisu ohraniti ta akcijski naboj, ki izhaja prav iz njihovih življenjskih situacij.

Biti »realističen«

Ko uporabniki izražajo svoje želje oz. zastavljajo svoje cilje, pogosto od strokovnjakov slišimo bojazen, da ti cilji ne bodo preveč »nerealni« (kot da bi bili strokovnjaki »Čuvarji realnosti«). Gre pa za oblastno neumnost. Cilji in želje so po definiciji nerealni, saj jih, ko jih uresničimo, ni več. Pri njih gre vedno za nekaj, kar realno, v resnici še ne obstaja oz. kar bo šele nastalo. Realno gledano se stvarnosti lotimo šele z dejanji. Če stvarnost s pojmi ujamemo v misli, se ji šele z dejanji približamo in z njimi preskušamo stvarnost. Delo in dejanja so opna, vmesnik (interface) med tem, kar si mislimo in med stvarmi. V njih se realiziramo, uresničujemo (med tem ko nas nekatere besede postvarijo – iz nas naredijo reči, s katerimi lahko drugi delajo). Stvarnost je zelo močna, vsekakor pa dovolj močna, da ne potrebuje zagovornika, zagovornika, oporo potrebuje tisti, ki se z njo spopada.

Konkretno v socialnem delu, denimo pri osebnem načrtovanju, ta zaplet rešujemo z »metodo prvih korakov«. Ni pomembno, koliko se nam nek cilj zdi uresničljiv ali pa ne, pomembno je, da vemo, kaj bo prvi korak v uresničevanju cilja. S koraki, ki jih delamo do cilja, preskušamo stvarnost. V akcijskem smislu, nam želje in cilji dajo smer in energijo (motivacijo), resnično delo pa je vrsta dejanj, ki ji dejansko storimo in s katerimi preoblikujemo stvarnost. Geslo iz uporov konec šestdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja: »Bodimo realistični in zahtevajmo nemogoče« ima v socialnem delu še vedno svoj pomen.

---

[1] V tej razpravi je pomembno opozoriti, da nekateri misleci postavijo delo, nekateri pa jezik, za bistveno razlikovalno značilnost človeškosti.

[2] Etimologija korena besed “pojem in koncept ne izhaja iz »po-imenovanja« nečesa, temveč iz »jeti, jemati« oz. »capere« - »vzeti, ujeti«.

Operation D: Words - From none to too many (operations 14, relationship 4)

Although the finality of this operation is working, doing, it may seem to involve much of talking. Not only are the words, talking and language significant, even essential^[1] part of human existence, it is also of virtual importance in establishing the contact, getting to know each other, formulating goals and planning, in monitoring and evaluating, reflecting the work, etc.

Working with no words

There are people among the users of social work that have no faculty of language. We are not referring to people who speak other language or people who cannot hear or vocalise the words, but about the people who do not understand the words in any language, who do not have this mental capacity. In such situations it is possible to have contact on body, movement, perception level, it is possible to get to know them by being together, by observing what they do and how they feel, by trying things out in action, learning by doing. It is possible to sense their desires and their will. It is possible to enter their Life-World, to sense it, and even reflect it – in a dance-like fashion. It is even possible to provide support in the world they live in without the words.

The absence of words and language is crucial in bridging their Life-World with others, and especially while bridging their Life-World to the institutional worlds – in making pronouncements about entitlements, plans, goals, arrangements and relationships. In these words there is a material power of action. Role of a social worker is similar to a translator or a loudspeaker, to convey the sensed desires to the audience that has no faculty of immediate presence, which is needed to understand such an utterance. This involves transforming or transposing the deeds, the feelings and material aspects of situation in the words by the means of logical deduction and induction, which has to be based on the common experience, empathy or even becoming the other (see above), of knowing the situation and the person in a way of praxis.

What has just been noted does not apply only to the situation with no words; it is the basic and generic underlying process of social work in this, and also other operations. The social work, even in the reconnaissance phase, is not only about the words and language but also about “being there”, observation and experimenting – trying out. On the other hand, there is always necessity of translation of such a-verbally gained knowledge and insight into the performative words of language of the entitlements and other formal languages that dominate the caring and helping (guardian) professions and their action.

Fetishism of words

Talking and words having such an importance generally and in the operation of establishing a work relationship especially there is a considerable possibility to get stuck in empty words – the words that have no practical meaning the words that do not yield any action, that bear no, at least indirectly, performative property. Empty words are the ones that are too abstract to have a operable meaning, but even more perilous are the speech acts that are taken as acts in the reality – that equate something said with something actually being done.

If we as social workers, practitioners, students or academics, which skills is most important in social work, they are likely to respond that it is the skill of talking, interviewing. Users, on other hand are more likely to respond differently. They are expecting form social workers to “sort out” something, to provide an access to resources needed, to help them to get a job, a flat etc. This divergence between value of deeds and things for users and of words for professionals, could be a consequence of a strong influence of the psychology and psychotherapy on the profession. Moreover, of a historical contingency that in the process of academisation of social work, psychologists who came to teach social work, often taught methods of social work, consequently turning them mainly towards counselling. The divergence can be attributed, perhaps, to the fact that just talking is the least intensive intervention into the Life-World. In this intensity, we remain on the level of representation of words. The virtual world of words is a safer place than the world of action and events. Or maybe because the ideological, indoctrinating function of social work is more important than the operative, functional. Certainly then because the words make it possible to “catch” the deeds and happenings^[2] - an important issue both for the professional and the user – especially from the control aspect of social  work. This is also, why it is important to “give the word”, to “let the users speak” and decode the utterances into a common action, why in recording them preserve their action charge, that stalks from their life situations.

“To be realistic”

When users express their desires or goals, professional are often concerned that these would not be too “unrealistic” (as if the professionals were the “Guardians of the reality”). The stupid worry of the powerful. Goals and desires are unreal by definition, when they get realised they cease to be. Their essential property is that they are about something that there is not yet, something to become. Realistically speaking, the reality is approached only when we act. If the concepts catch it in the thought, we touch it only with acts – by which we test the reality. Work and deeds are the membrane, the interface between what we think and the things. In them we realise ourselves, (while words can reify us – make things out of us amenable to action of others). The reality is powerful in its own right, it does not need an advocate – an advocate, a support is needed by the one who confronts the reality.

Specifically in social work, for instance in personal planning, we resolve this complication with the “method of first steps”. It is not important how unattainable a goals seems or not, important is to know what will be the first step in attaining it. With the steps that we make to approach the goal, we test the reality.  In terms of action, the desires and goals, provide the direction and the energy (motivation), real work is a series of deeds, actually performed – by which we transform the reality. The slogan of the sixties: “Be realistic and demand the impossible” has retained its special meaning in social work.

---

[1] In the context of this discussion it is important to note that some thinkers put the work and some the language as a basic distinctive feature of humanity.

[2] Etymological root of word “concept” stems from Latin “capere” – “to take”, “to catch”.