{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030333167578319244, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007956240676280457, 'mean_word_length': 4.715909090909091, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Turning over ‘the relational’

I am delighted and honoured to have been asked to write a commentary on this special issue which offers some critical perspectives on the ‘relational turn’ in psychotherapy – whether supposed, a Shadow, challenging, obvious, or to be negotiated. I particularly appreciated the editor’s invitation as I myself was unable to attend or present at the conference in 2009 at which some of these papers were originally presented. To write a commentary is a privilege, as I get to read all the contributions and to comment on them before publication. Moreover, mine is the last word! – although, as Tom Strong points out in his contribution to this issue, in any genuine dialogue there is no final word. In this case, the dialogue continues with the reader. With privilege also comes responsibility: a commentary is not – or should not be – simply another contribution. Its – and my – purpose is to offer some treatise on the text: an exposition of principles or a drawing out and summary of themes, commonalities and differences; and, in the context of the theme of this special issue, to write a relational commentary. My first thought on receiving the articles and reading them through for the first time was about the order in which they were to appear. On reflection, I think this was the beginning of my relationship with the issue as a whole, rather than with each individual article. There are many of ways of organising different component parts, elements, or aspects of a whole (in this case, 120 ways of ordering five articles), whether the subject is a person or a journal, and as many ways of conceptualising such organisation. In addition to subject and organisation, there is context, and part of the context of this issue is a previous special issue of this journal on ‘Relational psychology in Europe’, edited by Hargaden and Schwartz (2007b). In the editorial of that issue, Hargaden and Schwartz (2007a) identified five key elements of relational psychotherapy (p. 4):