been helpful, the one exercise that stood out above the rest was the discussion we had around the tree about its resiliencies. Our discussion was not linear: certain responses triggered reactions that veered the discussion in other directions or connected to previous discussions, after which we would come back to the original question—and so the process went. For instance, in answering the above question, participants started off talking about what had been helpful to them, but before all could contribute to the question, the conversation moved to how the TOL could be used to help the rest of their members. During that discussion a debate arose about whether it was possible to correct the past, leading to another detour about what exactly could be changed or corrected about history, before the conversation turned back again to the initial discussion regarding the Tree of Life, to which we turn below. Away from a Need for Revenge: Change in Tone of Language and Attitude During the dialogue sessions and before the TOL workshop, there seemed to have been a general consensus among the participants about the need for revenge. This issue specifically, as well as other similar sentiments, was discussed robustly. Several of the participants appeared to favor the exaction of vengeance in one form or another, if given an opportunity. They could not see any other way of dealing with the situation besides getting their own back. “T” succinctly summed up the hopelessness of the situation as he perceived it: “I can’t see the way through. The only way through is the way in. The way we got in is the way we will come out” (italics added). At the workshop review, this tone of language and attitude had changed significantly and the focus had shifted to healthier ways of dealing with the hurts. The discussion indicated that there had been a notably diminished desire for revenge by most participants. As noted by “T:” I for one had that mind that if one day, if I’m given that chance, I would do it. But looking at this workshop, the way things were laid out, I had or maybe I gained a positive attitude...I noticed that after this I just had a positive mind... He further indicated that, whereas previously he saw nothing good in the offender, which is a step away from the dehumanization of the offender (see Oelosfen, 2009), he now tried to rehumanize or, as he put it, “view the person with a positive mind.” “T” added: “...I think it’s what I said before, that the violent manner has left, and in the end I also realized that for this thing to end I should not solve it violently...” Several participants expressed similar views. While a few had specific individuals in mind when it came to the question about to whom the vengeance would be meted out, by and large the indication was that vengeance would be targeted at ordinary members of the ���offending” ethnic group. In my past, I had encountered this attitude among countless survivors and Ndebele activists over the years, so I