Abstract

This article opens with a discussion of Frank and Barbara Staemmler's (2009) critique of Fritz Perls's understanding of anger. It repeats the most important conclusions of that critique before elaborating upon it and disagreeing with Staemmler and Staemmler's understanding of anger as being mainly destructive. The healing potential of conscious anger mainly in relation to boundary marking is emphasized, together with the understanding of anger as an important factor in psychological development. Finally, the article offers a broad theoretical discussion of anger, a consideration of therapeutic practice, and a literary description of anger and of relational practice in general.

The text of this article is only available as a PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.