Loading...
Primo Levi (2009), in his book If This Is a Man, speaking about the Holocaust, writes:
“Then, for the first time, we realized that our language does not have the words to express this outrage, the annihilation of humanity.”
Much has been written on the insufficiency of language as a construct to describe human reality. Lacan (2013), in Psychoses, describes humans as subjects trapped and tortured by language, the structured system of signs that operates on a different level from lived experience, unable to fully reflect upon or express it in words, yet structuring the person who uses it. Meaning does not reside solely in language, but it is difficult to resist it or invent something new (Hildenbrand, 1990).
Watzlawick’s fourth axiom of human communication distinguishes between digital and analog communication (O’Connell, 2013). In digital communication, a word corresponds to an object, i.e., a signifier corresponds to a signified, while in analog communication, we refer to nonverbal forms such as body language, gestures, facial expressions, tone of voice, and other signals not using verbal structures. These are independent wholes and parallel functions. Anything outside language, centered on the body and its functions, provides information that linguistic conventions cannot convey at a given moment. In therapy, the body—as analog communication—“speaks” more about the relationships between participants, both at the moment of narration and retrospectively about the narrative itself.
For instance, a year ago a client came to me for grief and anxiety symptoms. In our initial sessions, she spoke rapidly, expressing the urgent need to share and “empty” all the weight she carried, her voice high-pitched and tense. A few sessions later, when I asked about her grief on a day she felt more comfortable, her speed slowed, she began pausing, and her voice deepened and softened as she spoke about what she needed, a change that persisted throughout therapy.
Another client, dealing with suicidal thoughts and self-inflicted scarring, preferred to keep clothing covering her body—jackets, hats, scarves—even when unnecessary. Having been a victim of torture and sexual abuse in an African country, her body bore burn marks from those experiences. She used the scars to feel control and self-confidence. The symptom allowed her to express what she was beginning to put into words, even at apparent risk. Her posture, protective clothing, and maintenance of body temperature communicated her needs before language could, giving her freedom of expression that words could not achieve.
The skin often serves as a conduit of information about human needs, creating possibilities for freedom. People habitually manipulate their skin or hair, bite nails, or repeat behaviorsthat provide relief, reassurance, or control not otherwise articulated. Symptoms serve as both communication tools and pragmatic solutions—simultaneously increasing complexity and offering a present, economical solution. The body thus functions as an instrument of freedom outside linguistic structures.
Our anatomy teaches that a body with a weak base tends to collapse knees inward during movement; weakness in one area causes tension in another. Breathing becomes shallow under stress, and facial expressions transmit needs often incongruent with verbal statements, sending double messages. Evolutionarily, the brain prioritizes energy conservation to ensure survival, food acquisition, mate seeking, and threat avoidance (Sexton, 2018). Since the brain learns bodily communication before linguistic communication, it interprets the former more readily as evolutionarily familiar and energetically efficient, as noted by Watzlawick, Beavin, and Jackson (1967).
In high-context societies, where communication relies more on nonverbal cues and relationships than explicit verbal data, analog signals are easier to process, faster, and more efficient. Low-context, literal, and logical societies are less effective at transmitting messages via nonverbal cues (O’Connell, 2013). According to The Brain Forgets in Order to Conserve Energy (Lund University, 2015), the brain favors well-established neural connections over newer, less energy-efficient ones. Thus, when verbal and nonverbal messages conflict, receivers often process the analog message as the felt sense, with the communication context determining the message.
Psychosomatic symptoms are particularly valuable therapeutically, representing the meeting point of verbal and nonverbal systems through bodily translations of language. Clients with neck, back, or spinal pain often use language linked to weight, burden, or bending downward, signaling exhaustion from assuming responsibilities not theirs. Skin problems frequently correspond with phrases such as “I felt it on my skin” or “It drives me out of my clothes,” expressing anger, desire for boundaries, and protection. One anxious client described shallow breathing during painful situations, followed by sudden deep gasps, stating: “I have no air, they steal my breaths.” Her difficulty was claiming space, setting boundaries, and saying no. The body, previously a tool of freedom, stopped communicating these needs once she could verbalize them in therapy.
Thus, the body can operate as an instrument of freedom for the subject within double, often ambiguous communication. As poet Yannis Kontos writes:
“These days, to visit yourself, you need a passport” (2013: 16).
References
Hildenbrand, B. (1990). The Microanalysis of Language as a Tool for Shaping Assumptions.Trans. Zisis, T.
Kontos, Y. (2013). The Poems (1970–2010). Athens: Topos.
Lacan, J. (2013). Psychoses: Seminar Three 1955–1956. Athens: Psychogios.
Levi, P. (2009). If This Is a Man. Athens: Agra.
Lund University. (2015). The Brain Forgets in Order to Conserve Energy. Retrieved January 3, 2021, from [website]
O’Connell, M. R. (2013). High and Low Context Communication. Retrieved January 7, 2021, from [website]
O’Connell, M. R. (2013). Watzlawick’s Axioms and Conflict Resolution [Part 2]. Retrieved January 7, 2021, from [website]
Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J., & Jackson, D. (1967). Pragmatics of Human Communication.New York: W.W. Norton & Company.