I feel a sense of being a little out of my depth here but never the less I will reply to the last thread. From a student perspective I feel I still struggle to put into words the Gestalt approach but any way I feel that my intention is good so I will continue to have a go! I read your comments about symbols and read it in this way, objectively conversing about a theme can take away potentially from the actual, moment to moment contact. Rather than talk 'about', from a fantasy perspective the so called theme would only have creadability through the veichle of experiment. A theme is akin to a theory, they can well be formed from patterns of experience or insight but unless it is truely lived then it remains a fiction. Yes the theory or theme can say more about the owner than the subject. I will when working with another potentially have times when I move into an 'I-it' way of relating. If as a result I form a fantasy about a theme or theory on what could be occuring for a client, this I would bracket if the moment to moment dialogue did not seem to lend its self to the fantasy. However, I never the less would not ignor the aspect of myself that will form ideas on a fantasy level. To do so I feel would ignor the need to step back from contact 'I-Thou' and explore objectivly for example themes of depressive illness. Of course I will always do my best to honour first and foremost the unique moment to moment contact. The opposite I guess is reducing meeting to having pre-conceptions about the meeting and making the other fit those pre-conceptions, hence a fixed relating style. I would invite further comment to gauge if I have made myself understood this time.