The book is 91 or 92 years old, but it just came out now. Gordon Ulier, a very theoretically literate person, undertook to revise some aspects of the theory of Gestalt therapy. He started with Gestalt psychology, Kurt Lewin and Kurt Goldstein. What came to us from there, what didn’t. Then I moved on to Gestalt therapy itself. Here he identifies three theoretical models: the Perls model, the Goodman-Perls model and the Cleveland model. All models were mercilessly criticized. Especially Perls. Wheeler generally describes Perls as an illiterate fool. At first this caused me a little irritation, then I thought that Perls revised Freud’s model in much the same way, with a lot of malice and sarcasm. What was Wheeler dissatisfied with in the old theoretical models? A lot of it is in the details, and if on a large scale, then the fact that they do not pay enough attention to the background (stable structures of the background, how they determine the formation of figures) and not enough attention is paid to the interdependence, sociality, and connectedness of people. He also somehow addresses this drags in (or rather, connects with this) the theory of resistance (interruptions). Wheeler's main idea about resistance is that each resistance (projection, fusion, retroflection, introjection, deflection, egotism) is, firstly, a form of contact, and secondly, it has its own polarity. And good contact is possible with harmonious balancing of these polar methods of contact. And if one of them is exaggerated, then the contact will be less harmonious. He presented the resistance in great detail and clearly (for me). But he did not present the very important idea about attention to stable background structures very clearly (for me). You’ll have to strain yourself and re-read the relevant parts. Although I don’t like Wheeler very much, it’s still a pity that we don’t have many books published at such a high theoretical level.