Re-examining the “Hero’s Journey”: A critical reflection on literature selection for affective bibliotherapy programs on resilience

Affective bibliotherapy is a practice which “uses fiction to help the reader connect to emotional experiences and human situations through the process of identifica-tion” (Shechtman 2009, 21). Readers identify with the emotions and experiences of characters, following them on their journey to overcome obstacles and challenges. The author of this article works within a third sector organization that uses affective bibliotherapy in schools as a preventative measure for young people to learn resilience coping mechanisms and skills in order to help them navigate difficult developmental transitions and life experiences. This paper addresses the challenges of selecting literature for such programs. This type of resilience literature often refers to “a heterogenous set of creations”; for example, the fairy tales of Charles Perrault and the Brothers Grimm (Reyzábal 2014, 121). Such literature foregrounds the “Hero’s Journey” trajectory that moves through a predictable, developmental arc: an exposition (resting position), which is then interrupted by an obstacle to be overcome, followed by the highest point of tension in which one must act in the face of adversity (the climax), before finding resolution when transformation or healing is successfully achieved. This arc can prove extremely useful for bibliotherapy in that it views resilience as a replicable process and ensures that participants gain a transferrable resilience toolkit, e.g. problem-solving techniques, critical thinking, and assertive communication. Yet, a simplistic linear model that achieves a predictable outcome is inadequate on its own for understanding the complexities of real lives. Whilst the aforementioned arc is apolitical and privileges an image of resilience in which “an essential, relatively stable and evolving self develops a chronologically appropriate and coherent biography”, there is a need to utilize literature that exposes how these types of stories repress and exclude difference (Aranda et al. 2012, 551