Understanding the Primary Directions: Which way is up?

upThe primary directions, or preventative orders as Alexander sometimes called them, are deceptively simple and can be painfully misleading at times. For years I would think to myself something like, “Allow the neck to be free to let the head go forward and up to allow the back to lengthen and widen to let the knees go forward and away” without any idea what those words meant. My AT teachers told me to “think” the directions, so I repeated those words to myself with little effect to the point where I wondered if there was any value in thinking the directions. Eventually I started to actively investigate for myself what those words meant and what I was actually doing when I was “thinking the directions.”

What does it mean to direct?

Directing in this context is having an intention for some physical act while simultaneously inhibiting any immediate habitual response(s) to the idea of the activity.  If this goes well it essentially forces us to learn a new way of doing whatever task we are intending to do, forging a new neural pathway. This creates an opportunity for changing habits.

Most methods typically focus on sets of strengthening exercises for specific parts of the body and inadvertently strengthen habits that we already have. Directing is predominantly a mental activity, just as a conductor doesn’t leave the podium, pick up a specific instrument and play when he wants a part of the orchestra to follow his direction; we don’t need to lose our awareness of the whole self to give a cue to a part of the body we want to direct.

The primary focus of directing is maintaining global awareness and allowing for improvisation in the initiation of movement. An example illustrating the difference might be straightening the finger by intending the tips of the finger to move away from the wrist and elbow then waiting for what happens; or instead not thinking and doing your habit of straightening the finger. Any movement we can conjure up on the fly is one that has been learned and ingrained. The former is experimenting with something new, the later is conditioning. Bring an awareness of this distinction as you read on.

Allow the neck to be freegrays-anatomy-image

This direction is about “undoing” of holding, pushing, and pulling on the neck by the various neck muscles. You can’t do an undoing, so to allow the neck to be free you must gently asking the muscles of the neck, especially those under the back of the skull, to release into length.

Notice any pulling of the crown of your head into your upper back. Notice if you are pulling on the skull with the muscles of the sides of the neck or holding the jaw still. If you can perceive either of these or anything else that seems to be pulling the head off it’s balancing point (located roughly between your ears and behind your eyes), gently ask whatever it is to do less.

If you can’t do less, do more temporarily then let that go to get the feeling of letting go of the excess holding of tension.

To put [allow, wish, etc.] the head to go forward and up

forward and upThis is perhaps the most confusing of the directions, as the word “put” seems to imply that “head forward and up” is a position of the head. Adding “in relation to the neck” (Head forward and up in relation to the neck), brings some clarity but still can be misleading because of the temptation to hold the head in a place one has deemed forward and up in relation to the neck.

Forward is also misleading, primarily what is meant by “forward” is an unlocking of the head from the top of the spine by not bracing or tractioning the space between the skull and C1 (the atlanto-occipital joint). Reducing tone in the muscles around the top vertebra of the spine typically causes the neck to slightly elongate and move back in space relieving pressure on cervical spine. The reduced effort in balancing the skull on the spine generally has a cascading effect in modulating tone in a positive way throughout the whole body.

jetstream12“What’s up?” you might ask. The deep muscles that run along the spine provide a natural upward flow that opposes gravity. These deep muscles are made up of special fibers that are much more resilient in the face of the constant force of gravity than our superficial musculature. The skull was designed to be poised atop the upward flow of the spine. Balancing the head on top of the spine is similar to balancing a ball on top of a column of air. The major difference being that the head can’t completely fall off because we’ve got muscles and ligaments keeping it attached.

When the head leaves the upward flow of the spine two things can happen. The more superficial muscles that are not designed to do the work of the deep spinal muscles kick in to catch and hold the falling skull and/or the weight of the skull pulls on our ligaments and muscles in unnatural ways; either option can seriously bend us out of shape and cause lasting side effects.

Because the natural tendency for the body to organize in opposition to gravity and for the head to move forward and up in relation to the spine, the thing to “do” is to stop pulling the head in directions that take it away from the top of the spine (most often back and down in relation to the spine).

To allow the back to lengthen and widen

What are we talking about when we say back? Is it our superficial back (skin, back of the ribs, spinous processes) or is it deeper and fuller? Clearly defining what we are looking at is very helpful in understanding this direction.

laminectomyLengthening comes from allowing the force of gravity to move through the bodies of the vertebra (front of the spine) so the deep spinal muscles, which are not under conscious control, can react in kind. When we interfere by holding ourselves upright (most people’s conception of sitting or standing up straight) we are shifting the workload from muscles that were designed to support the skeleton for long periods in gravity to muscles that were designed to lift heavy objects or strike a death blow to an animal (activities that require short bursts of great power).

The two most common postural patterns that interfere with the natural up flow of the spine are the slumped and overextended patterns (or some combination of the two). Slumped being (not exclusively) a downward and inward pull on the chest in the front of the torso. Overextended (again not exclusively) being a pushing forward and up through the mid-back. Both habits disrupt the central axis of the body causing alarm signals to be sent throughout the nervous system that bracing is needed to keep one from falling.

The direction [allow the back to lengthen and widen] is meant to undo bracing the ribs and contorting of the spine. Finding gravity can help stop the bracing in the torso. Place a hand firmly on the top of your head, applying gentle downward pressure. Without collapsing in the neck or torso, let that pressure move through the bodies of the vertebra of your spine all of the way through your spine down to your tail. This tells your spine which way is up. Now, without removing your hand, let your ribs move freely with the breath. You are lengthening and widening.

To let the knees go forward and away

Any effective use of the direction [let the knees go forward and away] doesn’t come from pushing the knees forward in space by conscious muscular effort. It’s very helpful to ask, “knees away from what?” The quick answer being: away from the pelvis which is the base of the spine and torso.

Human vs Gorilla legIt is important to understand that our limbs come out of our backs. It’s easier to see in our similar the gorilla (right), but we still have the same basic set-up. Thinking of our gluteus maximus (glutes as they are commonly known) originating from the sides of the sacrum (roughly under the buttocks) and then out from the sacrum and lengthening down the backs and sides of the legs is essential to sending the knees forward and away from the pelvis. Another way of saying knees forward and away is: knees not pulled backward and up into the hip joints.

Opposition & Secondary Directions

The knees are also moving forward and away from the heels. Notice that there is always a two way street with the directions. Head forward/back back, knees forward and away/heels back and down. Without thinking oppositionally there is a tendency for one part to drag another along with a movement.

When you think knees forward and away from heels directed back and down away from your lengthening and widening torso that is directed back and up in relation to the head that’s directed forward and up; you’ve got the whole thing and could go round starting anywhere. Because of the limitations of language, we can’t say or verbally think all of that at once, but we can think the kinesthetic meaning of those words all at once when we have some idea of what they mean. Alexander would often say, “All together and one at a time.”

Surprisingly absent in the primary directions is anything about the arms. Thinking of the arms coming off the back, elbows going away from the back and away from the wrists similarly to the knees away direction for the legs is a good first step. Alexander gave us the directions: fingers lengthening, wrists in, elbows apart to add on to the primary directions when using the hands. It can be helpful to think: shoulders widening and elbows dropping in addition to these.

You can always get more and more subtle, creative, and clear with your directions. You can direct your little toes to lengthen away from the ankle, or your eyelids to soften for example. You can widen the lenses and become more global by thinking: I’ve got time, Do less, I’m going up and letting down. Once you’ve sent a direction let it go. If nothing happens, send another. You wouldn’t hold onto a letter and expect it to get to it’s addressee. Lastly, have fun! The more imaginative, lighthearted, and curious you are in the attitude you bring to the game, the more effective the results will be.

Allow the neck to be free; for the head to go forward and up; for the torso to lengthen and widen; for the knees to go forward and away

Literature Review: Movement-based Embodied Cognitive Practices and Belief-systems

Introduction

Mindfulness is a widely practiced technique with innumerous variations that has its origins in various major belief systems around the world. While attention to bodily sensations has been mainly studied in seated meditation and mindfulness practices within contemplative science, Movement-based Embodied Cognitive Practices (MECPs) like Yoga, Qigong, and Tai Chi also emphasize interoceptive, proprioceptive, and kinesthetic awareness. These awareness practices are also essential to the effectiveness of modern somatic education/therapeutic techniques like the Alexander Technique and Feldenkrais Method (Posadzki, 2009; Schmalzl et al., 2014).

Almost all cultures around the globe have their own versions of contemplative movement systems. These systems include shamanistic dances, Christian liturgical gestures, Eastern spiritual practices, and modern Western somatic practices. However, the first hurdle in studying these systems is creating a classification system that accurately reflects the systems and is suitable for scientific investigation. Yoga, Qi gong, and Tai Chi are forms of mindfulness embedded with a rich history of traditional belief systems. Studying these practices can present challenges for Western scientists due to their non-dualistic view of the mind and body (Schmalzl et al., 2014).

It is not necessary to follow any religion or philosophy to practice mindfulness, especially modern derivatives which are mostly devoid of overt metaphysical assumptions. At the same time, mindfulness and its variants seem to have the ability to alter your perceptions and assessment of reality, at least in relation to one’s “self” and therefore might influence/reveal basic metaphysical assumptions about the nature of being. The potential for this to occur not as a result of acceptance of a new ideology, but merely from interoceptive, proprioceptive, and kinesthetic awareness (paying attention to one’s self), is fascinating.

Research

In recent years, cognitive neuroscience has shifted its focus from viewing the mind as separate from the body and solely computational, to a more embodied and situated view of the mind. This new perspective, which aligns closely with traditional belief systems associated with mindfulness, suggests that mental functions cannot be fully understood without considering the physical body and environment in which they occur. MECPs are rooted in concepts of embodiment, movement, and contemplation, primarily through the enactive approach to cognition. Consciously initiated movement, as opposed to externally evoked or purely passively imposed motion, is intrinsic to the sense of agency and aids in the development of the sense of self. MECPs are typically described as ‘holistic’ and have an intrinsic worldview that is non-deterministic and often non-dualistic. In MECPs, conscious volition is presupposed, and the mind-body is seen as one (Schmalzl et al., 2014).

The false dichotomy of physical and nonphysical, mind and body, pervades medicine and causes many problems in conceptualization of disease, particularly with regards to so-called ‘mental illness’ (Mehta, 2011). Psychological disorders are associated with a wide variety of distortions of time perception, the practice of mindfulness may be effective by virtue of its effect on our relationship with time (Adshead, 2013). Multiple randomized trials have been conducted on mindfulness-based interventions for psychosis. Additionally, there have been various trials on interventions that include mindfulness exercises such as acceptance and commitment therapy and compassion-focused therapy (Böge, 2021).

Today MECPs are often practiced exclusively as part of exercise and general health remines. Remarkably, these variations of mindfulness have the potential to make a significant impact on people’s lives by decreasing stress, pain, anxiety, depression, blood pressure, and cortisol levels, as well as increased energy, sleep quality, immune function, awareness, clarity, calmness, and happiness (Martin, 2018).

The Alexander Technique (AT) is a secular MECP that teaches individuals to identify, understand, and modify habits that affect their movement and posture. AT can also be described as a phenomenological study of the interaction between one’s biology and psychology. AT practice observes and modulates the relationship between volitional cognitive behavior, somatosensory awareness, and regulation of muscle activity in postural support and movement. It is typically taught in one-on-one sessions, where the teacher uses gentle physical touch and verbal instruction to convey the principles and skills of the technique. The AT takes a holistic approach, considering the mind and body as indivisible (Kinsey et al., 2021).

Research on the AT generally has focused on three main areas: biomechanical changes associated with learning the technique, its effects on musicians’ performance quality and anxiety, and health outcomes related to specific conditions such as chronic pain and Parkinson’s symptoms. While most studies have focused on physical outcomes such as pain reduction, balance improvement, and changes in gait and posture, some have also reported psychological benefits such as increased relaxation and confidence (Kinsey et al., 2021).

Kinsey et al. (2021) reviewed the literature for psychological benefits and found that, “AT lessons may provide a significant way to improve mental wellbeing and increase agency,” adding, “Further work should seek to widen its application beyond the traditionally perceived areas of movement, posture, and pain.” The authors cited effects such as changes in mood, sense of self, cognitive processes, confidence, and emotion and explored how these outcomes are generated. While acknowledging the interconnectedness of physical and psychological processes, the review adopted a dualist approach to distinguish between physical and non-physical outcomes pointing to the inherent difficulties in studying mind-body practices (Kinsey et al., 2021).

According to Tarr (2008), looking at the Alexander Technique from an ethnographic perspective is fascinating because it is a bodily practice that is difficult to put into words. Although words may be used during Alexander lessons, they refer to bodily movements and sensations, making it a form of embodied knowledge. Ethnographers have only recently started to focus on the physical aspects of their subjects in their writing. Dance ethnographers have struggled with representing body movements and have used movement notation systems like Rudolph von Laban’s, which require specialized knowledge to read and decode. There are also concerns about the accuracy of such representations in capturing the sense of movement. Additionally, it is crucial to consider the meaning of movement for those involved in it, which movement notation systems cannot provide (Tarr, 2008).

Tarr (2008) adapts some of Csordas’s ideas of cultural phenomenology, namely somatic modes of attention, to various concepts in the Alexander Technique. Csordas argued that somatic modes of attention are not innate or biological but are shaped by cultural factors. These modes of attention involve practices such as mental rehearsal of athletic movements, health consciousness and dietary practices, and dance. Identifying and understanding these modes can provide new insights into embodiment and interpersonal relationships. Alexander Technique lessons fit within this framework as a method of attending to and with bodies in the presence of a teacher and can be seen as an example of a culturally constituted somatic mode of attention. Tarr (2008) also discusses Bourdieu’s theory of “habitus” and how studying the Alexander Technique ethnographically can shed light on the processes of “understanding with the body.”

There have been multiple studies led by Dr. Rajal Cohen of the University of Idaho that quantitatively measured differences in axial tone, postural sway, postural uprightness, and step initiation; before and after verbal AT instruction among PD sufferers and healthy individuals (Cohen et al., 2015; Cohen et al., 2020). These findings support other evidence that ‘thinking’ (conscious autosuggestion, etc.) has distinct, measurable psychophysical outcomes. Changes in tone from AT-based instructions suggest that executive function can influence tone and body schema (Cohen et al., 2015; Cohen et al., 2020). This process may be related to what movement scientists call kinesthetic motor imagery, although such studies mostly examine the mental representation of overt movement rather than mental representations of desired postural states.

Further evidence of potential perceptual/belief effects of cultivating interoceptive and proprioceptive awareness comes from a systematic review of available literature on the AT and musicians by Klein et al. (2014). In most of these studies, AT was found to be effective in reducing performance anxiety. It is worth noting that other MECPs, such as yoga, have also been shown to positively influence performance anxiety in musicians (Klein et al., 2014; Schlinger, 2006). Additionally, a study of people with chronic lower back pain found significant differences before and after AT lessons in their constructs of intention, perceived risk, direct attitude, and behavioral beliefs providing more evidence of non-physical outcomes from AT lessons (Kamalikhah et al., 2016).

What is Free Will?

Free Will has been defined in multiple, conflicting ways. According to Baumeister et al. (2010) it can be defined as a psychological capacity subsuming self-control, effortful choice, planning, and initiative. These capabilities are useful for making human social life and culture possible, but they depend on a limited resource and therefore often fall short of optimal levels. Religion may be helpful to individuals and society in part because it supports both the exercise of free will and the belief in it (Baumeister et al., 2010). MECPs may serve a similar function.

Wisniewski et al. (2019) showed that people’s beliefs about free will are closely linked to their beliefs about dualism, with dualism being a stronger predictor of free will beliefs than other related concepts. In a study by Caspar (2017), fatalistic determinism was positively correlated with religiosity of participants; suggesting that the more people are engaged in religious practices, the more they believe in fatalistic determinism and the inevitability of their future. This is consistent with the widespread view that people engaged in religious practices believe that their destiny depends on God’s will. It is therefore possible that people can intuitively reconcile free will with scientific determinism, but not with fatalistic determinism (Caspar, 2017).

Genetic/scientific determinism can be described as the attribution of the formation of traits to genes, where genes are ascribed more causal power than what scientific consensus suggests. Belief in genetic determinism is an educational problem because it contradicts scientific knowledge and is a societal problem because it has the potential to foster intolerant attitudes such as racism and prejudice against sexual orientation (Gericke et al., 2017).

Discussion

There is an overarching theme in the relevant literature of mind-body unity (non-dualism) and the interconnectedness of physical and psychological processes. The focus on embodiment and the situated view of the mind is often discussed in the context of mindfulness practices and the AT. AT and MECPs generally emphasize the importance of conscious volition and the sense of agency that arises from it. Greater sense of agency after practice of MECPs is a theme in the literature that begs the question, “Does belief in free will arise from feelings of agency?”

Following from the first theme there is a theme of physical practices having effects on psychological state and vice versa. According to Sathyanarayana Rao (2009), “Perceptual shifts are the prerequisites for changing the belief and hence changing the biochemistry of our body favorably.” Ironically researchers inevitably adopt a dualistic approach to distinguishing between physical and non-physical outcomes, which is antithetical to the idea of mind-body unity as emphasized in MECPs in the first theme. Related to the prior theme is another prevalent one in the literature, namely the inadequacy of language to express the information/knowledge acquired by MECPs.

References

Adshead. (2013). The time of our lives: Psychological disorders, time perception and the practice of mindfulness. European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling, 15(2), 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642537.2013.795337

Baumeister, R., Bauer, I. M., & Lloyd, S. A. (2010). Choice, Free Will, and Religion. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 2(2), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018455

Böge, K., Thomas, N., & Jacobsen, P. (2021). Is mindfulness for psychosis harmful? Deconstructing a myth. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 218(2), 71-72. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2020.165

Carey, J. & Paulhus, D. L. (2013). Worldview Implications of Believing in Free Will and/or Determinism: Politics, Morality, and Punitiveness. Journal of Personality, 81(2), 130–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00799.x

Caspar, E. A., Verdin, O., Rigoni, D., Cleeremans, A., & Klein, O. (2017). What Do You Believe In? French Translation of the FAD-Plus to Assess Beliefs in Free Will and Determinism and Their Relationship with Religious Practices and Personality Traits. Psychologica Belgica, 57(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.32

Cohen R., Gurfinkel, V. S., Kwak, E., Warden, A. C., & Horak, F. B. (2015). Lighten Up: Specific Postural Instructions Affect Axial Rigidity and Step Initiation in Patients With Parkinson’s Disease. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 29(9), 878–888. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968315570323

Cohen, Baer, J. L., Ravichandra, R., Kral, D., McGowan, C., & Cacciatore, T. W. (2020). Lighten Up! Postural Instructions Affect Static and Dynamic Balance in Healthy Older Adults. Innovation in Aging, 4(2), igz056–igz056. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igz056

Gericke, N., Carver, R., Castéra, J., Evangelista, N., Marre, C., El-Hani, C., (2017) Exploring Relationships Among Belief in Genetic Determinism, Genetics Knowledge, and Social Factors. Sci & Educ 26, 1223–1259 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9950-y

Kamalikhah T., Morowatisharifabad M. Rezaei-Moghaddam F., Ghasemi M. Gholami-Fesharaki M. Goklani S. (2016) Alexander Technique Training Coupled With an Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction in Teachers With Low Back Pain Iran Red Crescent Medical Journal doi: 10.5812/ircmj.31218

Kinsey D., Glover L., Wadephul F., How does the Alexander Technique lead to psychological and non-physical outcomes? A realist review, European Journal of Integrative Medicine, Volume 46, 2021, ISSN 1876-3820, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2021.101371

Martin, A.C. (2018). An Introduction to Mindfulness through Yoga, Tai Chi, and Meditation. International Journal of Health, Wellness & Society, 8(3), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.18848/2156-8960/CGP/v08i03/11-20

Mavilidi, M., Pesce, C., Benzing, V., Schmidt, M., Paas, F., Okely, A. D., & Vazou, S. (2022). Meta-analysis of movement-based interventions to aid academic and behavioral outcomes: A taxonomy of relevance and integration. Educational Research Review, 37, 100478–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100478

Mehta. (2011). Mind-body Dualism: A critique from a Health Perspective. Mens Sana Monographs, 9(1), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1229.77436

Nadelhoffer, Shepard, J., Nahmias, E., Sripada, C., & Ross, L. T. (2014). The free will inventory: Measuring beliefs about agency and responsibility. Consciousness and Cognition, 25, 27–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2014.01.006

Posadzki P. (2009). Qi Gong exercises through the lens of the Alexander Technique: A conceptual congruence. European Journal of Integrative Medicine, 1(2), 87–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2009.04.001

Schlinger, Marcy (2006) Feldenkrais Method, Alexander Technique, and Yoga—Body Awareness Therapy in the Performing Arts Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Clinics V.17,4 P865-875

Tarr, J. (2008). Habit and conscious control: Ethnography and embodiment in the Alexander Technique. Ethnography, 9(4), 477–497. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24047911

Tarr, Jennifer (2011) Educating with the hands: working on the body/self in Alexander Technique Sociology of Health & Illness Vol. 33 No. 2 ISSN 0141–9889, pp. 252–265 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01283.x

Schmalzl, L., Crane-Godreau, M., & Payne, P. (2014). Movement-based embodied contemplative practices: Definitions and paradigms. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00205

Sathyanarayana Rao, T. S., Asha, M. R., Jagannatha Rao, K. S., & Vasudevaraju, P. (2009). The biochemistry of belief. Indian journal of psychiatry, 51(4), 239–241. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5545.58285

Wisniewski, D., Deutschländer, R., & Haynes, J.-D. (2019). Free will beliefs are better predicted by dualism than determinism beliefs across different cultures. PloS One, 14(9), e0221617–e0221617. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221617

Adventures in Flow

An interview published in Outside, “This is Your Brain on Adventure” by Florence Williams (2009) describes a group of BASE-jumpers in western Colorado and examines why some people are drawn to extreme sports and others are not. The author observes the group as they prepare to jump, noting the differences in their personalities and backgrounds; highlighting Ted Davenport, a champion extreme skier and BASE-jumper, as an example of someone who feels called to live on the edge.

Williams (2009) also touches on the science behind thrill-seeking behavior and the role genetics play in a person’s inclination towards risk-taking. The author interviews neuroscientist Russell Poldrack and observes Ted, as he undergoes an fMRI brain scan while playing a risk-tolerance-testing video game. The article discusses the three major emotional ingredients to risk-taking – desire for adventure, relative disregard for harm, and impulsivity – and how they relate to each other in determining the level of risk-taking behavior. The article also highlights the role of the ventral striatum, a part of the brain known to be one of the centers of the reward pathway, in providing a sense of novelty and pleasure to adventurers.

A similar group to BASE-jumpers are Mountaineers. Mountaineer adventure tourists experience a range of emotions, including contrasting emotions, flow, and peak experiences. Although mountaineering has become a popular form of adventure tourism, there is a lack of research on the participants. Pomfret (2006) contributed a theoretical framework of mountaineer adventure tourists by analyzing previous research on mountaineering, mountaineers, adventure, recreation, and tourism. The framework considers a range of factors, including push elements like risk and mastery, pull elements like the natural mountain environment and conditions, personality attributes such as sensation seeking, and lifestyle factors like previous mountaineering experience (Pomfret, 2006). 

Csikszentmihalyi defines happiness as a state of consciousness called “flow”, which occurs during structured activities that require a skill level slightly higher than one’s current abilities. This creates a challenge that motivates the person to focus their energy and attention on the task at hand, resulting in a seamless and empowering experience. The experience of flow is influenced by both objective conditions and the person’s interpretation of those conditions, including their awareness of challenges and their perception of their own skills. In addition to challenging activities, flow is also facilitated by clear goals and immediate feedback, which keep the person fully engaged in the present moment (Choi, 2018). 

However, human consciousness is constantly bombarded by external stimuli and can struggle to maintain order. To make flow experiences easier, Csikszentmihalyi suggests a psychic exercise or brooding of a personal trait, while Husserl proposes a radical method of reduction called transcendental-phenomenological reduction. Husserl’s method involves suspending one’s general judgment of the world and seeing it as a phenomenon derived from the consciousness of the self as the transcendental Ego. While originally designed for epistemological purposes, Husserl’s phenomenology can be aligned with positive psychology to explore happiness studies (Choi, 2018).

It is plausible that Husserl would not reject the idea of using transcendental phenomenology as a foundation for positive psychology and deep hermeneutics in happiness studies. In this sense, deep hermeneutics could be seen as a part of this type of reduction, allowing us to uncover hidden corners of the world through rich discoveries provided by empirical science. In his later phase, Husserl expanded the scope of intentional experiences to include not only the cognitive, but also the aesthetic and instinctual. Additionally, he made an ontological distinction between the transcendental sphere and the factual world, arguing that the former grounds or constitutes the latter and can also ground any sciences belonging to the latter. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that Husserl would agree that transcendental phenomenology can provide a foundation for positive psychology (Choi, 2018).

When seeking out adventurous opportunities, individuals might believe that they will gain a sense of accomplishment, or grow personally from new experiences. They may also believe that by taking risks and pushing their boundaries, they will become more confident and resilient. Ultimately, the benefits of risk-taking and adventure-seeking will vary from person to person, but can include increased happiness, satisfaction, and personal fulfillment.

References

Williams, F. (2009) This is Your Brain on Adventurelink Outside https://www.outsideonline.com/health/training-performance/your-brain-adventure/

Pomfret, G. (2006). Mountaineering adventure tourists: a conceptual framework for research. Tourism Management (1982), 27(1), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2004.08.003

Choi, K. (2018). Transcendental Phenomenology and the Way to Happiness: Husserl’s Reply to Csikszentmihalyi. JBSP. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, 49(2), 126–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2018.1431007

Suzuki Method Effects

The Suzuki Violin Method often claims it can improve memory, attention span, and cognitive development generally; leading to improved academic performance. It also claims to enhance creativity, self-discipline, and perseverance. It is important to note, however, that while these claims are often made, the research on the specific benefits of the Suzuki method is still limited. Additionally, the benefits of music education may vary depending on individual factors such as the child’s age, learning style, and level of commitment (Scott, 1992).

A study by Gouzouasis et al. (2007) found a consistent pattern over three years that showed strong and significant connections between participation in music and academic achievement. Interestingly, the study found a greater correlation between music participation and math and biology achievements than between music participation and English. These findings support previous research that links music-related skills with mathematical abilities and intellectual capacities in general. The study suggests that music participation can benefit students in ways that enhance their academic achievement, particularly in math and biology. While the study doesn’t make causal claims, it offers a plausible explanation for the relationship between achievement in music courses and academic success. The study also demonstrates that the relationship is specific to music, and not applicable to all fine arts. This suggests that non-music fine arts education may tap into different domains of our capacity, similar to Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory (Gouzouasis et al., 2007). 

Hallam (2010) provides a strong case for the benefits of active engagement with music throughout the lifespan. In early childhood there seems to be benefits for development of perceptual skills which affect language learning and subsequently impact on literacy. Opportunities to coordinate rhythmically and improve fine motor skill are presented by learning to play an instrument. Music also seems to improve spatial reasoning, one aspect of general intelligence which is related to some of the skills required in mathematics (Hallam, 2010). 

Motivation and endurance for problem solving depends on self-esteem, self-efficacy and aspirations. Engagement with music can enhance self-perceptions, but only if it provides positive learning experiences which are rewarding. This means that overall, the individual needs to experience success. This is not to say that there will never be setbacks but they must be balanced by future aspirations which seem achievable and self-belief in attaining them (Hallam, 2010).

In a study by Bolduc et al. (2021), music training in kindergarten improved the development of inhibition control compared to motor training and no special training groups. Additionally, although both the music and motor programmes targeted the development of phonological processing, children in the music programme scored higher on this ability (Bolduc et al., 2021).

Music and the arts should be valued for their intrinsic beauty and power. The fact that there is empirical evidence to support the benefits of music involvement for general academic achievement and desirable social and motivational personality characteristics is just icing on the cake.

References:

Bolduc, J., Gosselin, N., Chevrette, T., & Peretz, I. (2021). The impact of music training on inhibition control, phonological processing, and motor skills in kindergarteners: a randomized control trial. Early Child Development and Care, 191(12), 1886–1895. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2020.1781841

Hallam S. (2010). The power of music: Its impact on the intellectual, social and personal development of children and young people. International Journal of Music Education, 28(3), 269–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761410370658

Gouzouasis, P., Guhn, M., & Kishor, N. (2007). The predictive relationship between achievement and participation in music and achievement in core Grade 12 academic subjects. Music Education Research, 9(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613800601127569

Scott L. (1992). Attention and Perseverance Behaviors of Preschool Children Enrolled in Suzuki Violin Lessons and Other Activities. Journal of Research in Music Education, 40(3), 225–235. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345684

AT Resources

Zotero Library

https://www.zotero.org/groups/2389008/alexander_technique_studies/library

An independent open-source project to collect AT studies and provide open access to them.

Alexander Technique Science

www.alexandertechniquescience.com

This site is devoted to improving scientific understanding of the Alexander Technique (AT)—its principles, practices, reported and demonstrated benefits, and terminology. The content ranges from descriptions of direct experiments on the effects of AT lessons to focused explanations of relevant current science to rigorously researched history of the work. We reference recent peer-reviewed publications wherever possible.

As scientific methods, models, and cross-disciplinary research improve, science is becoming increasingly relevant to AT. Current science is quite exciting and has a lot to contribute to our understanding of AT. Scientists are also now studying AT directly. There is evidence supporting some of AT’s possible mechanisms and claimed benefits.

The Society of Teachers of the Alexander Technique

https://alexandertechnique.co.uk/

The Society of Teachers of the Alexander Technique (STAT) was founded in the UK in 1958 by teachers trained by FM Alexander. There are currently over 2500 teaching members of STAT and its Affiliated Societies world-wide.

The American Society for the Alexander Technique

https://www.amsatonline.org/aws/AMSAT/pt/sp/home_page

The American Society for the Alexander Technique (AmSAT) is the largest professional association of certified Alexander Technique teachers in the United States. AmSAT is an educational, nonsectarian, nondiscriminatory organization incorporated in New York as a general not-for-profit corporation. AmSAT’s mission is to establish the Alexander Technique as a basic and recognized resource for health, productivity, and well-being.

AmSAT maintains the nation’s highest standards for teacher training, certification and membership and maintains affiliation with similar credentialing bodies worldwide. Since its formation in 1987, over 1000 teachers have completed the rigorous training process to earn AmSAT certification.

The American Center for the Alexander Technique

www.acatnyc.org

Founded in 1964, The American Center for the Alexander Technique was a world-class institute built on the teachings of F.M. Alexander. From 1967 to 2018, ACAT ran the first and most prestigious teacher certification program in the United States, training over 300 individuals.

Alexander Technique International

https://www.alexandertechniqueinternational.com/

ATI Teachers are committed to ‘a high standard of teacher certification’ as well as continuing education. The certification process evaluates each teacher individually and emphasizes ‘quality of teaching over quantity’ of hours trained.

The Complete Guide to the Alexander Technique

alexandertechnique.com

The ‘Complete Guide to the Alexander Technique’ calls itself ‘the most comprehensive source’ for information about the Alexander Technique on the web.

Literature Review: Making Sense of the AT’s Effects in Light of Research

Introduction

The Alexander Technique (AT) is a holistic educational method that helps individuals change inefficient or faulty habits, reducing potentially harmful stress (allostatic load) & tension accumulation. This is accomplished by observing and altering how one conceptualizes responses to stimuli with the aid of an AT teacher.

The AT is known to affect postural tone and movement coordination (Cacciatore et al., 2011; Preece et al., 2016); however, the AT is not a passive treatment (Williams, 2018). While movement is a focus in learning the AT, it is generally taught as an educational system rather than movement therapy (Woods, 2020). AT can also be described as a phenomenological study of the interaction between one’s biology and psychology (Mindbody). AT practice observes and modulates the relationship between volitional cognitive behavior, somatosensory awareness, and regulation of muscle activity in postural support and movement.

The most recent systematic review of AT trials is Woodman & Moore (2011) which identified AT in the treatment of Parkinson’s Disease (PD) associated disability and chronic back pain as promising areas of research. According to the Mayo Clinic, “Back pain is a leading cause of disability worldwide and its origins are often unclear.” Education is universally recommended as first-line treatment for acute and persistent back pain but it attracts little attention; the vast majority of back pain episodes do not require surgery or long-term powerful analgesics (Moseley, 2019).

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a progressive neurological disease that includes a range of symptoms related to control of posture (Doherty et al., 2011). Medication sometimes alleviates some Parkinsonian motor symptoms, but it does not cure them and may make aspects of postural control worse (Contin et al., 1996). According to the National Health Service (UK), “lessons in the Alexander Technique may help one carry out everyday tasks more easily and improve feelings about Parkinson’s disability.” The primary symptoms of PD are muscular rigidity, slowness, tremor, and postural instability.

Studies of the AT on persons with PD disability and back pain illustrate the potential bio-psychological effects of cultivating interoceptive and proprioceptive awareness through AT lessons (Stallibrass et al., 2002; Little et al., 2008; Cohen et al., 2015). Further evidence comes from a systematic review of a number of trials that found AT lessons improve performance anxiety in musicians (Klein et al., 2014).

The main hypothesis here is that the mechanisms of action and effects of the AT can be, at least partially, explained by known biological/cognitive mechanisms. However, explaining phenomena like back pain and improvements in it from mind-body practices is, in itself, problematic. While clinical research advocates using the biopsychosocial model (BPS) to manage back pain, there is still no clear consensus on the meaning of this model in physiotherapy and how best to apply it. Biological, psychological, and social factors may be inadequate to address complexities of people with back pain, and a reworking of the model may be necessary (Mescouto et al., 2022). A phenomenological approach may be needed in addition to the BPS to make sense of the meaning of the experience of back pain and/or the treatments for it (Stilwell & Harman, 2021).

History

The AT has been used for over 125 years in a wide variety of educational and medical settings, however, a comprehensive neurophysiological model theory of biological mechanisms of action underlying the AT’s effects has only recently been proposed by Cacciatore, Johnson, & Cohen (2020). Current theories, including this paper, rest heavily on the work of Dr. Timothy Cacciatore’s and Dr. Rajal Cohen’s rigorous research and numerous peer-reviewed publications about or related to the AT. The prior vagueness in the definitions of the AT originated from the complexity of underlying systems and generally unsophisticated techniques in describing psycho-physical activity/behavior. Improvements in the ability to observe and record psychomotor and brain behavior generally have made such a model viable only recently relative to the age of the AT. The situation was similar for many of the early psychotropic drugs that were discovered somewhat serendipitously with no clear explanation for their purported mechanisms of action (Carey et al., 2020).

Dr. David Garlick, a physiologist and medical research scientist at the University of New South Wales, laid the groundwork for current theories of AT mechanisms in the 1980s. He stressed that the awareness of inter-relationship of muscle and mental states (body schema) as one of the most important effects of the AT. Garlick’s research included various types of postural analysis, the majority of which were published in The Lost Sixth Sense (1990). The “sixth sense” in this context refers to underdevelopment and/or malfunctioning of kinesthetic and proprioceptive senses. Garlick postulated that the AT mainly operates on these senses and the brain mechanisms related to those senses. He lists sensory nerve inputs from neck muscle spindles, Golgi tendon organs, skin and joint receptors, and differences in types of muscle fibers as physiological factors relevant to the transmission and reception of psychomotor information used in dyadic AT practice (Garlick, 1990).

More information on early AT research can be found here.

The Mind-body Problem

The false dichotomy of physical and nonphysical, mind and body, pervades medicine and causes many problems in conceptualization of disease, particularly with regards to so-called ‘mental illness’ (Mehta, 2011). The reality that the mind has no existence other than as an abstract cultural relational tool escapes the majority of people to this day. This is hard to accept for followers (and cultural descendants) of Abrahamic religions that long equated mind (personality/psyche/ego) with atomistic souls living in the ether or spiritual realm and merely interacting with the physical body. Mind-body dualism is so pervasive culturally that atheists are not immune; most people subconsciously separate mind and body to some degree because of cultural conditioning.

Reductionism by contrast, in the strict sense envisioned by its creators in the 1930s, is largely impractical in biology and was effectively abandoned by the early 1970s. Classical holism was a stillborn theory (from Vitalism) of the 1920s and the term has survived in several fields as a loose umbrella designation for various kinds of anti-reductionism (Gatherer, 2010). The AT is one such anti-reductionist holistic practice.

Of course one’s ‘mind’ is ultimately physical, even as an abstract idea it must exist as some arrangement of neuronal pathways. Therefore, treatments such as talk therapy are not purely ‘non-physical’ as this would be ignoring the reality of what’s happening in the brain during such ‘non-physical’ treatments. There is some debate as to if talk therapy constitutes a medical treatment, but this sentiment itself likely stems from the problematic separating of physical and non-physical (‘mental’) outcomes and treatments as if they acted on seperate systems. Problems of interaction that arise from these categorizations seem to suggest a fundamental error in conception of the underlying systems.

Alexander Technique Method

AT teachers use skilled manual contact to observe and assess changes in activity, balance, and coordination. The teacher then highlights this behavior for the student while simultaneously giving verbal suggestions or directing the student’s use of volitional cognitive behavior (‘direction’ or conscious autosuggestion). With manual and verbal direction from the teacher, pupils learn to recognize and adopt better behavioral strategies. AT is particularly relevant in the interplay of cognition, behavior, and the initiation of movement (Stallibrass et al., 2002).

A core aspect of AT is a volitional cognitive behavior process called ‘directing,’ which involves applying specific intentions to postural tone, body schema, and spatial awareness. The practice of ‘directing’ attention to postural tone and body schema also involves monitoring departures from postural intentions and applying inhibitory control to motor planning to prevent automatic patterns of muscle activation, i.e. habits (Cacciatore et al., 2020).

‘Inhibiting,’ another core volitional cognitive behavior process in AT, may refer to the ‘undoing’ or prevention of unnecessary muscular activity, whether at rest, in anticipation, or in action. In an AT lesson, inhibition may also refer to prevention of motor planning while performing an action. The AT process of inhibiting may also refer to a more general intentional calming of the nervous system (Cacciatore et al., 2020). ‘Direction’ and ‘Inhibition’ as AT concepts may be two sides of the same coin rather than distinct ideas.

The functional organization and balance of the central body axis plays a primary role in AT because of the critical role of postural tone in this region. The neck may be especially crucial due to its proximal location at the top of spine and direct role in orienting the head (Loram et al., 2017). In one study, participants reported significantly reduced neck pain and fatigue of the superficial neck flexors during a cranio-cervical flexion test after AT lessons (Becker, 2018). In another study, patients with chronic nonspecific neck pain were given AT lessons or acupuncture and both added a small but clinically significant reduction in pain (MacPherson, 2015; Baime, 2016).

The spine’s instability and its central location require that axial tone mediate use of the limbs. Failure to dynamically adapt axial tone can manifest as jerky, uncomfortable, or poorly controlled movement (Gurfinkel et al., 2006). Correcting this can have wide-ranging benefits as postural tone interacts with executive processes, motor acts, emotional regulation, and pain (Cacciatore et al., 2011).

Taken together, ‘direction,’ ‘inhibition,’ and the prime importance of coordination and balance in the central body axis (torso/spine), form the basis of the theory of AT practice. The AT’s effects are theorized to come from positively affecting postural tone, which in turn has other cascading effects. Although the effectiveness of AT lessons has been shown at the behavioral level, their effects on altering brain circuitry are still unclear.

Similarities to MECPs and Psychotherapy

The AT has strong similarities with movement-based embodied cognitive practices (MECPs) such as Yoga (Schlinger, 2006), Qigong (Posadzki, 2009), and Tai Chi (Schmalzl, 2014); as well as more modern derivatives including variations on ‘mindfulness,’ (Siegel, 2007; Stern, 2021) like Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) (Anheyer, 2017). There are also correlations with various ‘somatic education/therapy’ methods (Kim, 2018).

The similarities include multiple parallels in effects treating back pain and PD disability between Yoga (Cramer et al., 2013; Ban et al., 2021) Tai chi (Li et al. 2012), and the Alexander Technique (Stallibrass, 2002; Little et al., 2008; Cohen et al., 2015). This further suggests that mechanisms of action are likely shared among MECPs and AT. One can start to make educated guesses about AT and the brain from imaging studies of these related fields.

There are also many parallels with psychotherapy (Ashar et al., 2022). Dyadic or dialectical contemplation, typically master and pupil, is at the core of many Eastern mindfulness modalities and MECPs and is similar in Western systems such as the AT and body-oriented psychotherapy (Posadzki, 2009; Kim, 2018; Stern, 2021). Interestingly, the AT influenced some forms of psychotherapy, including Gestalt therapy (Tengwall, 1981). Xuan et al. (2020) is a good example of the effectiveness of some Eastern mindfulness practices infused Western therapy practices.

Within the field of contemplative science, the directing of attention to bodily sensations has so far mainly been studied in the context of seated meditation and mindfulness practices. Early cognitive research neglected the issues concerning the activation of action, preparedness, direction, and termination of action (Pervin, 1992). Advances in the neuroscience of motor control and promising initial results have led to increased interest in the role of cognition in motor behavior and the effect of body state on mental state. Fairly recently, cognitive neuroscience started to realize that mental functions cannot be fully understood without reference to the physical body and has shifted from a predominantly disembodied and computational view of the mind to embodied viewpoints (Schmalzl et al., 2014).

AT’s Relationship to Pain, Body Schema and Proprioception

A related component problem of pain is the emotional implications of chronic pain. Functional imaging studies have shown that stimuli associated with pain can activate the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) even when no actual painful stimulus is applied. Singer et al. (2004) found that when women received a painful electrical shock to the back of their hand, their ACC, anterior insular cortex, thalamus, and somatosensory cortex became active. When they saw their partners receive a painful shock but did not receive one themselves, the same regions (except for the somatosensory cortex) became active (Carlson & Brickett, 2022). This illustrates that at least some parts of pain are indeed, ‘in our heads.’ The emotional component of pain can be provoked by empathy for someone, causing responses in the brain like the ones caused by actual pain.

A particularly relevant form of chronic pain in this context is phantom limb pain as one theory maintains that phantom limb pain can arise from a conflict between visual feedback and proprioceptive feedback from the phantom limb (Carlson & Brickett, 2022). People with low back pain (LBP) have, on average, reduced lumbar range of movement and proprioception; they also move more slowly compared to people without LBP (Laird et al., 2014). Chronic back and hand pain are associated with deficits in body schema (Gilpin et al., 2015).

Proprioceptive musculoskeletal education (AT) was shown to enhance respiratory muscular function in normal adults (Austin, 1992) suggesting a connection between AT, proprioception, and muscle activity of the torso/abdomen. Another AT study potentially related to altered body schema showed improvements in functional reach after AT lessons in healthy older women (Dennis, 1999). After overview of the research, Cacciatore et al. (2020) proposed a comprehensive neurophysiological model of the AT suggesting that a primary mechanism of AT’s effects is improving deficits in body schema.

The largest AT study to date was a randomized controlled trial with 579 participants led by Dr. Paul Little (Little et al., 2008). The so-called “ATEAM” trial evaluated the economic viability of therapeutic massage, exercise, and lessons in the AT for treating chronic and recurrent back pain, comparing the costs and outcomes at 12 months of courses of 6 and 24 lessons in the AT, 6 sessions of massage, and a general practitioner’s prescription for home-based exercise with a nurse follow-up for patients with chronic or recurrent non-specific back pain in primary care.

Exercise and lessons in the AT, but not massage, remained effective at one year; 24 lessons had the best results (measured in recorded days with vs without pain), but six lessons followed by exercise prescription was ‘85% as effective’ as 24 lessons. Therefore, the combination of six AT lessons followed by exercise was found to be the most cost-effective option (Hollinghurst, 2008). AT was viewed as effective by most participants (Yardley et al., 2010) and authors suggest that the AT is a powerful tool for self-efficacy as participants were able to apply skills learned from lessons to continue independent learning in the 6 lessons plus exercise group (Little et al., 2008). Subsequent smaller randomized controlled trials have shown the results are repeatable (Hafezi et al., 2021). Considering parallel research, these results also suggest that AT may affect body schema.

Postural Tone and Motor Planning

To plan an action, the motor system integrates sensory information from different sources into a coherent model (Medendorp & Heed, 2019; Gurfinkel et al., 2006). Tone and body schema work together to govern postural organization and provide a foundation for movement and balance (Ivanenko & Gurfinkel, 2018; Cacciatore et al., 2020). In AT, spatial and body-schema phenomena are thought to be deeply interwoven with tone (Cacciatore et al., 2011). Changes in tone lead to changes in the perception of the structural organization of the body, and an improved body percept facilitates further improvements in tone (Loram, 2017).

Using EMG to record muscle activity, one study found AT lessons decreased axial stiffness by 29% on average in subjects with low back pain while resisting rotation, leading the authors to suggest that dynamic modulation of postural tone can be enhanced through long-term training in the AT (Cacciatore et al., 2011). As the research on AT and tone indicates, changes in distribution and adaptivity of tone affect movement and balance. In a broad sense, tone is a foundational system that affects other aspects of motor behavior.

Changes in tone from AT-based instructions suggest that executive function can influence tone and body schema (Cohen et al., 2015; Cohen et al., 2020). This process may be related to what movement scientists call kinesthetic motor imagery, although such studies mostly examine the mental representation of overt movement rather than mental representations of desired postural states (Cacciatore et al., 2020).

Changes in body schema could also underlie changes in the adaptivity of tone. Postural tone (possibly in interaction with body schema) forms the central thesis of the current theoretical model of the AT proposed by Cacciatore et al. (2020). Because body schema is used as a central reference for posture, movement planning, and execution; its accuracy, precision, and integration with the motor system are likely to have widespread motor effects. Postural tone and body schema are similar in that both concern neurophysiological states rather than sequential processes involved in actions (Gurfinkel et al., 2006), and both are particularly suited to influence motor behavior in general. While there is no direct evidence that AT changes body schema, innumerous observations from practitioners and students support its relevance to AT practice (Cacciatore et al., 2020).

Parallels in Developmental Coordination Disorder

Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) has long been considered a motor disorder, but Martel and colleagues showed plasticity in body schema estimates used for motor control is altered in children and early adolescents with DCD, suggesting different pathology. The clinical assessment of the ability to point to or name several body-parts is generally preserved in children with DCD. This preserved motor learning, together with their noted reliance on vision to control hands and tools, point towards a body schema related deficit (Martel et al., 2022).

Children and early adolescents with DCD have trouble when comparing their predicted and received feedback, leading to difficulties in their body estimate (Pisella et al., 2019). Children with DCD experience difficulties in adjusting their body when their posture is challenged as this requires them to access their body representation for action. Physical therapists usually focus their approach on the body rather than motor disorders, working with children to improve their body awareness and find compensatory strategies (Martel et al., 2022). This sounds strikingly like the learning process in the AT and proposed mechanism of action by Cacciatore et al. (2020).

There have been no brain-imaging studies on AT treatment. However, clues into the brain mechanisms involved in AT lessons may be provided by related imagining research into Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD). Symptoms of PD closely resemble symptoms of DCD and deficit in ‘body schema’ is hypothesized in both cases (Martel et al., 2022; Cacciatore et al., 2020).

Psychological’ Effects of AT

A variety of ‘non-physical’ outcomes of AT lessons including improved perceived general wellbeing and increased confidence were found by Kinsey et al. (2021). While physical effects of the AT are measurable, albeit subtle, non-physical outcomes are often reported and are difficult to quantify. Because AT practitioners and students philosophically conceive of the mind-body as an integrated whole, this interaction is not surprising (Tarr, 2011). Kinsey and colleagues make two informed theory statements on how non-physical outcomes can be generated by AT lessons: because the mind-body connection “improvements in physical wellbeing lead directly to psychological well-being,” and “an experience of mind-body integration leads people to apply AT skills to non-physical situations” (Kinsey et al., 2021).

Research that supports these theory statements can be found in the foundational work in AT & Parkinson’s (PD) done by Dr. Chloe Stallibrass and colleagues at the University of Westminster. A pilot study (Stallibrass, 1997) indicated that, in conjunction with drug therapy, AT could benefit people with PD. In a follow-up study (Stallibrass et al., 2002), ninety-three people with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease were assigned into three groups (AT, massage, and no additional care) and assessed using the ‘Self-assessment Parkinson’s Disease Disability Scale’ (SPDDS), ‘Attitudes to Self-scale’ and ‘Beck Depression Inventory’ (BDI). An additional study (Stallibrass, 2005) investigated retention of skills from the main study by voluntary follow up self-assessment questionnaire responses. The AT group improved compared with the no additional intervention group, pre-intervention to post-intervention on SPDDS tests and was comparatively less depressed post-intervention, supporting evidence that lessons in the AT are likely to lead to sustained benefit for people with Parkinson’s disease and that AT lessons may have non-physical outcomes (Stallibrass et al., 2002).

A study of people with chronic lower back pain found significant differences before and after AT lessons in their constructs of intention, perceived risk, direct attitude, and behavioral beliefs providing more evidence of non-physical outcomes from AT lessons (Kamalikhah et al., 2016). Perhaps not coincidentally, the AT was influential in the creation of some forms of psychotherapy (Tengwall, 1981). Some speculate that these outcomes might be explained by the documented therapeutic qualities of empathic touch (Tarr, 2011; Jones & Glover, 2014). 

Physical’ outcomes from Volitional Cognitive Behavior

There is also mounting evidence for psychophysical (physical and non-physical, Mindbody) outcomes among musicians applying the AT. A 2014 systematic review of trials found good evidence that AT lessons improve performance anxiety in musicians (Klein et al., 2014). A more recent a study found AT classes for music students may beneficially influence performance related pain, poor posture, excess muscle tension, stress, and performance anxiety (Davies, 2020). Another study of musicians reported that application of the AT to music performance showed improvements vs controls in heart rate variance, self-rated anxiety, and positive attitude to performance, as well as overall music and technical quality as judged by independent experts blind to subjects’ condition assignment (Valentine et al., 1995).

There have been multiple studies led by Dr. Rajal Cohen of the University of Idaho that quantitatively measured differences in axial tone, postural sway, postural uprightness, and step initiation; before and after verbal AT instruction among PD sufferers and healthy individuals (Cohen et al., 2015; Cohen et al., 2020). Improvements were recorded in the lateral center of pressure (CoP) displacement, smoothness of CoP path, axial rigidity (peak torque) and postural sway amplitude in both Parkinson’s patients and healthy individuals when given brief verbal instructions based on common AT directions compared to directions based on popular concepts of effortful posture correction (Cohen et al., 2015). These findings support other evidence that AT ‘thinking’ (direction, conscious autosuggestion, etc.) has distinct, measurable psychophysical outcomes.

Conclusion

Alexander recognized somatosensory defects, which he called ‘faulty sensory awareness’ and sometimes more provocatively ‘debauched kinesthesia’ as diseases of civilization as early as the 1890s. At the heart of most modern cognitive therapeutic modalities is the idea that maladaptive responses from our biology, that result in accumulation of chronic stress (allostatic load), can be cognitively inhibited to alter behavior and/or improve functioning.

Postural tone is a foundational system that affects all other aspects of motor behavior. The AT positively affects postural tone and therefore may indirectly positively affect all other aspects of motor behavior. Improvements in postural tone and body schema can, in turn, cause ‘non-physical’ outcomes because the interconnected nature of the mindbody denies the false dichotomy of physical and nonphysical. Taken together, these conclusions supports Alexander’s foundational assertion that ‘use’ (psychomotor behavior) affects the functioning of the human organism.

In light of the evidence presented, we can now make educated theory statements that were previously impossible about the questions like, “What is causing psychophysical change in AT practice and how does it happen?” The answer is most likely a combination of systems related to motor planning, interoception, proprioception, and empathic touch, that are recruited in the teaching/learning of the AT. With additional feedback from the instructor, the student’s interoception and proprioception is enhanced, causing modulation of body schema and postural tone. This enhanced state of awareness opens new possibilities for motor planning and behavior modification. Accumulation of enough experiences of enhanced interoception and proprioception develops the skill of recalling those states volitionally without a teacher.

The possible connections among body schema, postural tone, and motor control suggest an intriguing area of potential research on changes in body schema through AT instruction. Similarities between MECPs (Yoga, Tai chi, Qi gong, etc.), Somatic Education/Therapy, and Psychotherapy should be examined in a comparative study. In addition, these inquiries all have interesting implications for the philosophical mind-body problem.

References

Anheyer, D., Haller, H., Barth, J., Lauche, R., Dobos, G., & Cramer, H. (2017). Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction for Treating Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Annals of internal medicine, 166(11), 799–807. https://doi.org/10.7326/M16-1997

Ashar, Y. K., Gordon, A., Schubiner, H., Uipi, C., Knight, K., Anderson, Z., Carlisle, J., Polisky, L., Geuter, S., Flood, T. F., Kragel, P. A., Dimidjian, S., Lumley, M. A., & Wager, T. D. (2022). Effect of Pain Reprocessing Therapy vs Placebo and Usual Care for Patients With Chronic Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Archives of General Psychiatry, 79(1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.2669

Austin, John H.M., and Pearl Ausubel. (1992) Enhanced respiratory muscular function in normal adults after lessons in proprioceptive musculoskeletal education without exercises. Chest, vol. 102, no. 2

Ban, M., Yue, X., Dou, P., & Zhang, P. (2021). The Effects of Yoga on Patients with Parkinson’s Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Behavioural Neurology, 2021, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5582488

Baime, M. (2016). In chronic nonspecific neck pain, adding Alexander Technique lessons or acupuncture to usual care improved pain. Annals of Internal Medicine, 164(6), JC29–JC29. https://doi.org/10.7326/ACPJC-2016-164-6-029

Becker, Copeland, S. L., Botterbusch, E. L., & Cohen, R. G. (2018). Preliminary evidence for feasibility, efficacy, and mechanisms of Alexander technique group classes for chronic neck pain. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 39, 80–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2018.05.012

Cacciatore, T. W., Johnson, P. M., & Cohen, R. G. (2020). Potential Mechanisms of the Alexander Technique: Toward a Comprehensive Neurophysiological Model, Kinesiology Review, 9(3), 199-213. https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/krj/9/3/article-p199.xml

Cacciatore T., Mian O., Peters A., Day B. (2014) Neuromechanical interference of posture on movement: evidence from Alexander technique teachers rising from a chair Journal of Neurophysiology 2014 112:3, 719-729

Cacciatore T., Gurfinkel, V. S., Horak, F. B., Cordo, P. J., & Ames, K. E. (2011). Increased dynamic regulation of postural tone through Alexander Technique training. Human Movement Science, 30(1), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2010.10.002

Carey, T. A., Griffiths, R., Dixon, J. E., & Hines, S. (2020). Identifying Functional Mechanisms in Psychotherapy: A Scoping Systematic Review. Frontiers in psychiatry, 11, 291. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00291

Carlson, N., Birkett, M. (2022), Foundations of Behavioral Neuroscience (10th ed.) etext, Pearson

Contin M., Riva, R., Baruzzi, A., Albani, F., Macri’, S., & Martinelli, P. (1996). Postural stability in Parkinson’s disease: the effects of disease severity and acute levodopa dosing. Parkinsonism & Related Disorders, 2(1), 29–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/1353-8020(95)00008-9

Cohen R., Gurfinkel, V. S., Kwak, E., Warden, A. C., & Horak, F. B. (2015). Lighten Up: Specific Postural Instructions Affect Axial Rigidity and Step Initiation in Patients With Parkinson’s Disease. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 29(9), 878–888. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968315570323

Cohen, Baer, J. L., Ravichandra, R., Kral, D., McGowan, C., & Cacciatore, T. W. (2020). Lighten Up! Postural Instructions Affect Static and Dynamic Balance in Healthy Older Adults. Innovation in Aging, 4(2), igz056–igz056. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igz056

Cramer H, Lauche R, Haller H, Dobos G. (2013). A systematic review and meta-analysis of yoga for low back pain. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 29(5) p.450-460 doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e31825e1492

Davies, J. (2020) Alexander Technique classes improve pain and performance factors in tertiary music students Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies Vol. 24 Issue 1 p.1-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.04.006

Debrabant, J., Vingerhoets, G., Van Waelvelde, H., Leemans, A., Taymans, T., & Caeyenberghs, K. (2016). Brain Connectomics of Visual-Motor Deficits in Children with Developmental Coordination Disorder. The Journal of pediatrics, 169, 21–7.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2015.09.069

Dennis Ronald J, (1999). Functional Reach Improvement in Normal Older Women After Alexander Technique Instruction, The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, Volume 54, Issue 1, Pages M8-M11 https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/54.1.M8

Doherty, K., van de Warrenburg, B. P., Peralta, M. C., Silveira-Moriyama, L., Azulay, J.-P., Gershanik, O. S., & Bloem, B. R. (2011). Postural deformities in Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurology, 10(6), 538–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70067-9

Garlick D (1990). The Lost Sixth Sense: A Medical Scientist Looks at the Alexander Technique. STAT Books. ISBN 0733400019

Gatherer, D. So what do we really mean when we say that systems biology is holistic?. BMC Systems Biology 4, 22 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-0509-4-22

Gurfinkel, V., Cacciatore, T.W., Cordo, P., Horak, F., Nutt, J., & Skoss, R.(2006). Postural muscle tone in the body axis of healthy humans. Journal of Neurophysiology, 96(5), 2678–2687. PubMed ID 6(5), 2678–2687. PubMed ID:16837660doi:10.1152/jn.00406.2006

Hafezi M., Rahemi Z., Ajorpaz N.M., Izadi F.S., (2021). The effect of the Alexander Technique on pain intensity in patients with chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial, Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, Volume 29, Pages 54-59, ISSN 1360-8592, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.09.025.

Hollinghurst S., Sharp, D., Ballard, K., Barnett, J., Beattie, A., Evans, M., Lewith, G., Middleton, K., Oxford, F., Webley, F., & Little, P. (2008). Randomised controlled trial of Alexander technique lessons, exercise, and massage (ATEAM) for chronic and recurrent back pain: economic evaluation. British Medical Journal, 337(dec11 2), a2656–a2656. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a2656

Ivanenko, Y., & Gurfinkel, V. S. (2018). Human postural control. Frontiers in Neuroscience, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00171

Jones, T. & Glover, L. (2014). Exploring the Psychological Processes Underlying Touch: Lessons from the Alexander Technique, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 21, 140–153 DOI: 10.1002/cpp.1824

Kamalikhah T., Morowatisharifabad M. Rezaei-Moghaddam F., Ghasemi M. Gholami-Fesharaki M. Goklani S. (2016). Alexander Technique Training Coupled With an Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction in Teachers With Low Back Pain Iran Red Crescent Medical Journal 2016 Sep; 18(9): e31218. doi: 10.5812/ircmj.31218

Kim, S., (2018). Exploring the field application of combined cognitive-motor program with mild cognitive impairment elderly patients. Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation, 14(5), 817–820. https://doi.org/10.12965/jer.1836418.209

Kinsey D., Glover L., Wadephul F., (2021). How does the Alexander Technique lead to psychological and non-physical outcomes? A realist review, European Journal of Integrative Medicine, Volume 46, ISSN 1876-3820, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2021.101371

Klein, S.; Bayard, C; Wolf, U (2014). “The Alexander Technique and musicians: a systematic review of controlled trials”. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 14: 414. doi:10.1186/1472-6882-14-414. PMC 4287507. PMID 25344325.

Li, F., Harmer, P., Fitzgerald, K., Eckstrom, E., Stock, R., Galver, J., Maddalozzo, G., & Batya, S. S. (2012). Tai Chi and Postural Stability in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease. New England Journal of Medicine, 366(6), 511–519. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1107911

Little, P., Lewith, G., Webley, F., Evans, M., Beattie, A., Middleton, K., Barnett, J., Ballard, K., Oxford, F., Smith, P., Yardley, L., Hollinghurst, S., Sharp, D., & Van Tulder. (2008). Randomised Controlled Trial of Alexander Technique Lessons, Exercise, and Massage (ATEAM) for Chronic and Recurrent Back Pain. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 337(7667), 438–441. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20510639

Loram, I. D.,Bate, B., Harding, P., Cunningham R., Loram, A., (2017). Proactive Selective Inhibition Targeted at the Neck Muscles: This Proximal Constraint Facilitates Learning and Regulates Global Control, in IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 357-369, doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2016.2641024.

MacPherson H., Tilbrook, H., Richmond, S., Woodman, J., Ballard, K., Atkin, K., Bland, M., Eldred, J., Essex, H., Hewitt, C., Hopton, A., Keding, A., Lansdown, H., Parrott, S., Torgerson, D., Wenham, A., & Watt, I. (2015). Alexander Technique Lessons or Acupuncture Sessions for Persons With Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Trial. Annals of Internal Medicine, 163(9), 653–662. https://doi.org/10.7326/M15-0667

Martel, Boulenger, V., Koun, E., Finos, L., Farnè, A., & Roy, A. C. (2022). Body schema plasticity is altered in Developmental Coordination Disorder. Neuropsychologia, 166, 108136–108136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.108136

Mehta. (2011). Mind-body Dualism: A critique from a Health Perspective. Mens Sana Monographs, 9(1), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1229.77436

Moseley, G, L. (2019). Whole of community pain education for back pain. why does first-line care get almost no attention and what exactly are we waiting for? British Journal of Sports Medicine, 53(10), 588. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-099567

Pervin L. (1992). The Rational Mind and the Problem of Volition. Psychological Science, 3(3), 162–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00018.x

Pisella L., Havé L., Rossetti Y. (2019). Body awareness disorders: dissociations between body-related visual and somatosensory information Brain Volume 142, Issue 8, August 2019, Pages 2170–2173, https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awz187

Posadzki P. (2009). Qi Gong exercises through the lens of the Alexander Technique: A conceptual congruence. European Journal of Integrative Medicine, 1(2), 87–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2009.04.001

Preece, S.J., Jones, R.K., Brown, C.A. et al. (2016). Reductions in co-contraction following neuromuscular re-education in people with knee osteoarthritis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 17, 372. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1209-2

Sacks, Oliver (1985). The man who mistook his wife for a hat and other clinical tales. Summit Books, Ch. 7 p. 67-72

Schlinger, Marcy (2006). Feldenkrais Method, Alexander Technique, and Yoga—Body Awareness Therapy in the Performing Arts Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Clinics V.17,4 P865-875

Schmalzl, L., Crane-Godreau, M., & Payne, P. (2014). Movement-based embodied contemplative practices: Definitions and paradigms. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00205

Siegel. (2007). Mindfulness training and neural integration: differentiation of distinct streams of awareness and the cultivation of well-being. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2(4), 259–263. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsm034

Stallibrass C. (1997). An evaluation of the Alexander Technique for the management of disability in Parkinson’s disease- a preliminary study. Clinical Rehabilitation.;11(1):8-12. doi:10.1177/026921559701100103

Stallibrass, C., Sissons, P., & Chalmers, C. (2002). Randomized controlled trial of the alexander technique for idiopathic parkinson’s disease. Clinical Rehabilitation, 16(7), 695-708. https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215502cr544oa

Stallibrass, C., Frank, C., & Wentworth, K. (2005). Retention of skills learnt in Alexander technique lessons: 28 people with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 9(2), 150–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2004.06.004

Stern J. (2021). The Alexander Technique: Mindfulness in Movement Relieves Suffering Alternative and Complementary Therapies Volume: 27 Issue 1: February 11, 10-13. http://doi.org/10.1089/act.2020.29307.jcs

Stilwell, P., & Harman, K. (2021). Phenomenological Research Needs to be Renewed: Time to Integrate Enactivism as a Flexible Resource. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406921995299

Tarr, Jennifer (2011). Educating with the hands: working on the body/self in Alexander Technique Sociology of Health & Illness Vol. 33 No. 2 ISSN 0141–9889, pp. 252–265doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01283.x

Tengwall, Roger (1981). A note on the influence of F. M. Alexander on the development of gestalt therapy Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences volume 17 issue 1. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696(198101)17:1<126::AID-JHBS2300170113>3.0.CO;2-X

Woodman, J. P. Moore, N. R. (2011). Evidence for the effectiveness of Alexander Technique lessons in medical and health-related conditions: a systematic review – International Journal of Clinical Practice VL  – 66 IS  – 1 SN  – 1368-5031 UR https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02817.x

Yardley L., Dennison L., Coker R., Webley F., Middleton K., Barnett J., Beattie A., Evans M., Smith P., Little P., (2010). Patients’ views of receiving lessons in the Alexander Technique and an exercise prescription for managing back pain in the ATEAM trial, Family Practice, Volume 27, Issue 2, Pages 198–204, https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmp093

Valentine, E. R., Fitzgerald, D. F. P., Gorton, T. L., Hudson, J. A., & Symonds, E. R. C. (1995). The Effect of Lessons in the Alexander Technique on Music Performance in High and Low Stress Situations. Psychology of Music, 23(2), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735695232002

Xuan, R., Li, X., Qiao, Y., Guo, Q., Liu, X., Deng, W., Hu, Q., Wang, K., & Zhang, L. (2020). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research290, 113116–113116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113116

Websites:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/alexander-technique/

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/back-pain/symptoms-causes/syc-20369906

Brief History of Early AT Research

The Alexander Technique is in the interesting position of having been practiced for over 125 years in a wide variety of educational and medical settings while a proper biological theory of the mechanisms underlying AT has only recently been proposed. This was also the case for many of the early psychotropic drugs that were discovered serendipitously with no clear explanation for their purported mechanisms of action. The mechanisms of AT are still not fully understood.

American education philosopher and Columbia Teachers College president, John Dewey, wrote introductions to three of Alexander’s books. During the first half of the 20th century, Teachers College faculty members and graduates shaped the fields of educational and psychological assessment, social studies education, urban education and the study of gifted children. Dewey, in How We Think (1910), summarized his ‘analysis of a complete act of thought;’ which became a classic and was adapted by science-textbook authors as a concise description of the scientific method. Incidentally, his introduction to Alexander’s The Use of the Self (1939), was the first to claim that Alexander’s development of AT followed the scientific method. Dewey saw the AT as tied to the discovery of the location of various postural reflexes in the brainstem by Rudolf Magnus, a German researcher on the physiology of posture.

Magnus’ discovery was used as scientific proof of Alexander’s concept of ‘primary control,’ a crudely defined neologism referring to the head-neck-back relationship and its implications for coordination and general wellbeing. The term ‘central control’ was used in England to refer to Magnus’ discovery of the location of postural reflexes in the brainstem. Magnus found this region co-ordinated sensory input and that it was responsible for postural muscular tone. Magnus’ experiments were never done on humans, however, Magnus suggested the applicability of his findings to humans. Because of early poor translation or intentionally liberal application of Magnus, there are several issues in AT literature concerning Magnus and explanations of the AT, however, Magnus is still referenced by some contemporary AT teachers; i.e. Neurodynamics (2015) by Columbia Professor, Dr. Theodore Dimon.

Between 1923 and 1951 the British Medical Journal published 30 articles and letters testifying to the AT’s efficacy. A letter published May 29th, 1937 was signed by 19 doctors and surgeons who reported that patients had greatly benefited from AT and urged the medical community to investigate, however it took another 70 years for AT research to be published in the BMJ. In 1939, three doctors published letters in the BMJ claiming anatomist and researcher Dr. George E. Coghill’s work on the embryonic behavior of the American newt, amblystoma, provided scientific confirmation of Alexander’s discoveries.

The similarity was drawn between Coghill and Alexander’s idea of Primary Control by a number of AT proponents in the medical field who were looking for a biological basis for the AT. Coghill in response, acknowledged Alexander’s work established the same principles in vertebrate behavior and subsequently wrote an appreciation section in Alexander’s fourth and final book: The Universal Constant in Living (1941). However, A scathing critique of the AT in 1944, ‘Quackery Versus Physical Education’ published in the South African Fitness Journal, Manpower, insisted that Coghill’s research did not provide any evidence in support of Alexander. It also referred to Alexander’s ‘followers’ as a ‘head balancing cult’ and put their ‘belief’ down to ‘group hystero-neurosis typical of a new faith.’ As a result, Alexander sued the journal for defamation in 1945. 

The article contained a section, ‘The misquoted Sherrington’ which claimed Alexander had mischaracterized Sir Charles Sherrington’s research as being supportive to his work. Sherrington had coined the term “proprioceptive” in 1893. By 1900 he had concluded that the cerebellum was the head ganglion of the proprioceptive system and he also later discovered the stretch reflex. Sherrington also coined the terms neuron and synapse; he shared the 1932 Nobel Prize in medicine with Edgar Douglas Adrian. Interestingly Sherrington wrote a letter of support to Alexander that helped him win the libel case in 1948. Slowly, teachers of the Alexander Technique started to view Coghill’s research as not relevant to the Technique, but Coghill was widely quoted until at least the 1970s.

In a related vein of research, Nikolass Tinbergen wrote The Study of Instinct in 1951, in which he questioned the roles of internal and external stimuli in controlling behavioral expression and expounded on innate behavioral reactions in animals and the adaptiveness and evolutionary aspects of those behaviors. Tinbergen, writing about Coghill in 1951, concluded: ‘It seems that one cannot “crystallize out” from a diffuse total response, and that a kind of additive type of integration may play a part too, perhaps especially in the higher levels.’ Tinbergen dedicated a large portion of his acceptance speech for the 1973 Nobel Prize in Medicine to the AT as an example of ‘the usefulness of an ethological approach to medicine.’ Tinbergen noted AT teacher’s ‘exceptionally sophisticated observation’ that can ‘alleviate an astonishing variety of somatic and mental illnesses.’ The speech heavily references the work of Dr. Wilfred Barlow, a rheumatologist who married Alexander’s niece, and is reproduced in later editions of Barlow’s book The Alexander Technique.

Dr. Barlow was the first AT teacher to conduct research into the Technique. Barlow was the only AT teacher who developed the idea of making a formal diagnosis of pupils. Recognizing that Coghill, and in relation the AT principle of ‘primary control’ where head-neck relationship was thought to positively affect the ‘total pattern,’ was over-emphasised, Barlow subsequently came to think AT effects are caused by separately learned components, rather than simply by a generalized total pattern. Between 1946-1959 Barlow conducted a number of “before and after” AT lessons studies where pupils would undress and stand against a grid so that any asymmetries or deviations would be easy to identify and record via photography. 

Tufts University professor Frank Pierce Jones did many experimental studies involving the AT between 1951 and 1972. Jones endorsed the AT adopted view of Magnus, that ‘the postural reflexes, the response of the organism to gravity is a fundamental feedback which integrates other reflex systems.’ In his book Freedom to Change he refers to the stretch reflex, the righting and attitudinal reflexes as part of the explanation for the mechanisms of the AT. Jones predominantly measured changes in posture and movement (mainly sit-to-stand behavior) using multiple image photography with markers on various parts of the subject’s body illuminated by flashes. A summary of these studies was published in Psychological Review in 1965 and the book Body Awareness in Action (1976) which was published posthumously.

A physiologist and medical research scientist at the University of New South Wales, Dr. David Garlick, made a preliminary survey of possible physiological explanations involved in the AT and laid the groundwork for current theories. He stressed that the awareness of inter-relationship of muscle and mental states (body schema) as one of the most important effects of the AT. Garlick’s research included various types of postural analysis, the majority of which were published in The Lost Sixth Sense (1990). The “sixth sense” in this context refers to underdevelopment and/or malfunctioning of kinaesthesia and proprioceptive senses. Garlick postulates that the AT mainly operates on these senses and the brain mechanisms related to them; he lists sensory nerve inputs from neck muscle spindles, Golgi tendon organs, skin and joint receptors, and different types of muscle fibers as physiological factors relevant to the AT.

Although the effectiveness of AT has been shown at the behavioral level, their effects on altering brain circuitry are still unclear. In his 1985 book, The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat, Oliver Sacks describes an extreme case of the loss of proprioception in the chapter, ‘On the Level.’  The patient discovers AT-like strategies of additional feedback (in this case affixing a spirit level to his glasses) coupled with the recruitment of cognitive mechanisms to help regulate what should be automatic, consciously adjusting his balance. In the chapter Sacks writes, “The awareness of relative position of trunk and limbs, derived from receptors in the joints and tendons – was only really defined (and named ‘proprioception’) in the 1890s; the complex mechanisms and controls by which our bodies are properly aligned and balanced in space – these have only been defined in our own century, and still hold many mysteries.”

References:

Mouritz.org Companion Articles: ‘Frank Pierce Jones’ ‘Wilfred Barlow’ ‘Wilfred Barlow’s research’ ‘Scientific explanations of the Alexander Technique’

https://mouritz.org/companion/article

The Shoulders: To rest or not to rest?

Finding neutral for the shoulders is one of the most challenging things one can do in terms of the use of the self in my experience. Add a complex activity that requires a certain level of ease in the shoulder girdle on top and you’ve got a recipe for paradox and frustration.

shoulder1Let’s begin with the basic anatomy of the shoulder girdle. When I refer to the “shoulder girdle” I mean the hands & arms, shoulder blades, and collar bone. You may be surprised to learn that the only jointed (bone to bone) connection of the shoulder girdle to the rest of the skeleton is in the front of the torso at the top of the sternum.

Find your collar-bone (clavicle) by palpating the bone and follow it toward the mid-line until find two roundish protrusions at either side of the top of chest bone (sternum). You are on top of the sternoclavicular joint(s) where the shoulder girdle meets the rest of the skeleton.

shoulder3If you follow the collar bone out from the mid-line toward the arm until it reaches the furthest bony protrusion you’ve found the point where the clavicle meets the shoulder blade (scapula), the acromioclavicular joint. It’s called the acromioclavicular joint because it is where the clavicle and the point of the scapula furthest from the mid-line, called the acromion process (processes are protrusions that allow for muscle and ligament attachment), meet. This should not be confused with the glenohumeral joint where the upper arm attaches to the shoulder blade; there is no direct bone to bone attachment of the upper arm to the collarbone.

shoulder2Now, palpate your way back to toward the mid-line from the acromion, this time following the shoulder blade until it reaches what will feel like the corner of a triangle. You are feeling the “spine” of the scapula. Depending on your muscle build you may have to press quite firmly and the scapula may seemingly disappear into muscle. The strong muscles of the back are what support and stabilize the shoulder girdle as there are no bone to bone attachments in the back. The structure of the shoulder girdle, while providing extreme freedom of movement, also brings an ambiguousness when looking for a neutral position for the shoulders and arms.

backmusclesIt shouldn’t be a surprise that how we use ourselves in our daily activities has a profound effect on the resting lengths of our muscles. It is this phenomenon that we are observing when we see pianists and people who spend hours at the computer still in the shape they work from when walking, eating, watching TV, etc. In the case of the shoulder girdle this can be quite extreme. Because of the lack of bony structural support, the resting position of our shoulders is almost completely determined by the resting lengths of our muscles. If we overstretch our muscles in daily activity, we run the risk of deteriorating the support that allows the shoulders to find a comfortable resting position.

supervsdeepbackAlong the way to becoming a “serious” violist, I was told to keep my shoulders relaxed. So I went about figuring out how to do that. I am meticulous in the practice room and before long I had discovered that I could relax my left shoulder while playing although my right didn’t really follow suit. The static nature of the left shoulder in violin & viola playing allows for a certain amount of relaxation (release of all/most muscle tone) while the larger more dynamic movements of the bow require the arm muscles which originate in the back to be active for movement to occur. The left shoulder can relax even more if you use a shoulder rest as you then virtually never have to move your shoulder.

On the surface you’d think that one less thing to worry about (moving the shoulder to balance the instrument) and a little less muscular effort would be good; so for years I ignorantly thought, “I’m raising my right shoulder, that’s not good.” Yet, after hours of playing it was not my right shoulder that cracked and popped, it was my left. Even after years of receiving praise for my tone which of course comes primarily from the bow, I thought, “But my left is down so it must be better than my right,” and went about trying to lower my right. Needless to say I was unsuccessful.

It wasn’t until years of Alexander work that I realized what I was actually doing was relaxing my left shoulder to the point that it was resting on my rib cage. This was the grinding bone on bone I felt in the form of constant cracking and popping when I moved my arm. I was robbing my shoulder girdle of it’s muscular support by relaxing it and then dragging it across my rib cage.

me at 11It turns out that the last thing we want to do when doing any activity is relax (release all/most muscle tone). The word activity even contains active! To remedy my issue, I had to relearn to play the viola without the shoulder rest. I found that every little shift was a welcome opportunity for movement in my shoulder girdle. Rather than trying to hold myself still or relax into a blob I was free to move and the movement had an organizing effect on my shoulder girdle which helped remind my shoulder blades where neutral was. I had been taught that raising my shoulder was off limits movement-wise on the viola. How ridiculous a notion it was to make a movement off limits when all of the great violinists and even Primrose himself did this occasional subtle lift of the shoulder.

This rule I assume was a reaction to the common problem of violists & violinists clamping down on the instrument between their necks and shoulders, which isn’t much better. Although, too much tension is less likely to destabilize your shoulder girdle. In my case, relaxing resulted in my left shoulder’s neutral resting place being painful; I’ve over-stretched the muscles and they now rest on bone and nerves. It takes subtle conscious direction of my shoulder for the pain to subside, which is annoying to say the least.

johnnorestI’m not sure if it is laziness, bad teaching, or what exactly is at the root of the shoulder rest debate in the string playing world. String teachers having a very small part of the body of knowledge necessary is possible, pun very much intended. It could just come down to the fact that playing the viola is extremely difficult and the shoulder rest is a seductive little crutch that can allow us to avoid having to learn how to properly use our shoulder girdle in the process of playing the viola, which is not simple and takes a long time to do.

Once again the most healthy option seems to be to stop trying to gain our end without reasoning out a means whereby to attain it. We need means that at the very least don’t leave us physically and mentally damaged or with a mediocre end: the music which we care so dearly about.

Dark Hidden Origins of the Alexander Technique

Introduction

In his recent best seller, The Myth of Normal, Dr. Gabor Mate describes the state collectively thought of as normal in society as a disordered one caused by maladaptation to the overwhelming stimulus of modernity. More than a century ago, Alexander wrote that modern humans behaved with faulty, overly effortful, reactive habits because of the rapidly changing environment and new, potent types of stimuli that humans are not evolved or adapted for. Alexander recognized somatosensory defects, which he called ‘faulty sensory awareness’ and sometimes more provocatively ‘debauched kinesthesia’ as diseases of civilization as early as the 1890s. At the heart of most modern cognitive therapeutic modalities is the idea that maladaptive responses from our biology, that result in accumulation of chronic stress (allostatic load), can be cognitively inhibited to alter behavior and/or improve functioning. At the turn of the 20th century the idea of diseases of civilization was well established and thought of as a probable cause of cancer and ‘degeneration.’

Degeneration theory was a major factor in medicine, especially psychiatry, from the second half to the 19th century through the beginning of the 20th century. At the time, the theory was a popular hypothesis for the genesis of mental disorders and neurological diseases, as, in contrast with the other fields of medicine, no biological pathology for mental diseases could be found. Alexander adapted aspects of degeneration theory into his own theories, i.e. when someone had poor ‘use of the self’ ‘psychophysical degeneration’ occurred and he claimed his technique would produce the opposite effects potentially curing related diseases. Degenerate theory was closely interlinked with various other ideological theories that formed the background philosophy of natural science during the nineteenth century, especially the theory of evolution which in turn gave birth to the theories of social Darwinism, eugenics, genetics and biological-vitalistic approaches.

Alexander was in many ways a “vitalist,” which was the popular view in biology at the time. Vitalism was tied with social reformers who believed that humans could inherit the effects of a healthy environment and, by passing environmentally-induced modifications to their offspring, achieve continuous progress. Vitalism arguably birthed the current popular scientific viewpoint on consciousness, emergentism, in which the properties of a system cannot be fully described in terms of the properties of its constituents (Schultz, 1998). Prominent vitalists included Louis Pasteur and Johannes Reinke, the latter’s work having influenced Carl Jung. Some AT proponents believe releasing chronic muscular tension and encouraging certain alignments of the head and neck increases vital energy flow and enables a higher plane of consciousness as well as a number of related health benefits.

Vitalism, sometimes called a form of bio-theology, is a rejected tradition in biology which proposed that life is sustained and explained by an unmeasurable, intelligent force or energy. The supposed effects of vitalism are the manifestations of life itself, which in turn are the basis for inferring the concept in the first place; this circular reasoning offers pseudo-explanation. Vitalism has many faces and has sprung up in many areas of scientific inquiry (Keating, 2002). In 1889, evolutionary biologist August Weismann’s germ-plasm theory signaled the beginning of the end of vitalism in biology and the birth of eugenics.

Social Darwinism, a pseudoscientific precursor to eugenics that peaked in popularity during the 1870s, purported to apply biological concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to sociology, economics and politics (Leonard, 2009). In Britain, the most prominent and influential social Darwinist was Herbert Spencer who coined the term ‘survival-of-the-fittest.’ Spencer was a widely read and influential philosopher in England and America during the Victorian era. Openly racist views were common, but race had further reaching implications as ethnic groups (i.e. Dutch, English or French) were considered different races (Lewis, 2016). Alexander’s ideas of the cognitive evolution of consciousness control of the self were likely influenced by these veins of thought. Scholars of social sciences in response created theories of human progress in which the social environment had a central role and biological heredity was diminished, creating a new theory of social progress based on a concept called ‘social heredity’ (Raymer, 2018).

Evolution of a Technique

Alexander’s teaching in Australia originally consisted of acting and Delsarte techniques. Ironically, it was the great success of Delsarte that was its undoing. By the 1890s, it was taught everywhere, and not always in accordance with the emotional basis that Delsarte originally had in mind. No certification was needed to teach a course with the name Delsarte attached and the study eventually regressed into empty posing with little behind it. Perhaps this contributed to Alexander’s noted debts, subsequent move to London and ‘AT’ developments around this time. Alexander’s teaching in London departed from his prior teaching of acting and Delsarte and likely heavily borrowed from Dr. Scanes Spicer (Staring & Bouchard, 2002).

Dr. Scanes Spicer was a consulting ENT surgeon at St. Mary’s Hospital in London who was interested in all manner of the breathing practices that were practiced at that time. He noted that if patients did not have some kind of physical therapy their recovery took longer. Spicer had lessons from Alexander, approved of his method and sent him patients. Alexander helped Spicer with his patients’ therapy and Spicer helped Alexander build a teaching practice when he first arrived in London, especially among actors. This relationship lasted until 1908 when a split occurred (Staring & Bouchard, 2002). Spicer argued against the prevailing ideas from anthropologist and anatomist Sir Arthur Keith, that breathing is dominant over posture. Spicer turned Keith’s argument upside down, asserting that if you have good posture you will breath well as an effect, presenting his theory in 1909. Alexander was working with the idea that posture and breathing are simultaneously reciprocal. There is no doubt from the historical record that Spicer presented his findings to the public before Alexander did (Staring & Bouchard, 2002).

Alexander’s reaction to Spicer’s articles (two pamphlets in 1909 and 1910), was to claim that Spicer had stolen the idea from him. However, the core observations of Alexander were first articulated by Spicer more clearly and in medical terms. The true history of who influenced or taught Alexander is difficult to determine. However, the commonly propagated myth that he invented the AT by looking at the mirror is obviously false. Possible influences and collaborators include Leo Kofler, Oskar Guttmann, William Aikin, William Shakespeare, and Major Reginald Austin (Staring & Bouchard, 2002). Anthropologist and Alexander biographer Jeroen Staring on Alexander, “He was someone who had a double consciousness with authorities, that you use them as long as they are helpful to you and then put them aside when they don’t help you any more.”

After the Pall Mall Gazette medical editor wrote an article on deep breathing and tuberculosis, competing schools of breathing in London at the time wrote articles to the editor promoting themselves. Alexander sent a letter to the editor trying to establish himself by attacking Arthur Lovell and the Ars Vivendi school in a dispute that continued in the press through the summer of 1908. The medical editor of the Pall Mall Gazette, which at the time was the most popular newspaper in London, was Caleb Williams Saleeby. Saleeby was the head of the Eugenics Education Society and very influential. He was able to recruit members like Sir Charles Sherrington who will come into play later. He also invented the word “smog,” but now is forgotten, there is no biography of him (Staring & Bouchard, 2002).

Saleeby was a propagandist for eugenic ideas. A front of eugenics advocated by Saleeby was ‘nurtural eugenics,’ which refers more to public health and preventive medicine than eugenics. Saleeby was also an editor at Methuen, the publisher of Alexander’s book, Man’s Supreme Inheritance. Saleeby favorably described people like Alexander who, in spite of not having medical training, had a positive health impact on people who came to him for lessons. If Saleeby were not a eugenicist, we might be reading his texts on preventive medicine as Saleeby was promoting quitting smoking and being exposed to the sun for health (Staring & Bouchard, 2002). To be fair to Alexander and his proponents, it’s possible that Alexander’s writings on ‘race culture’ may have been an attempt to connect his ideas to Victorian pop-psychology for marketing purposes. Alexander’s ideas related to eugenics boil down to: if you help people change their habits, they can have better children.

In any case, Saleeby helped Alexander fund, and most likely write Man’s Supreme Inheritance. In Man’s Supreme Inheritance, Alexander asserted that modern man had evolved beyond ‘the savage’ whom Alexander described as being driven by instinctual reaction rather than conscious control. In light of Alexander’s philosophy of mind-body unity he saw, ‘conscious control of the self’ (or ‘good use of the self’ etc.) as a moral issue and someone with ‘bad use’ was behaving immorally (unconsciously). Because Alexander’s thoughts on evolution of conscious control (essentially a racist ego development theory), he and Saleeby saw the AT as applied eugenics. In America, the decline of eugenics in the 1930s and 1940s was only one part of the increasing hostility to progressive era eugenics, scientific racism, race-inspired imperialism and the use of biology more generally in the social sciences (Leonard, 2009). Alexander’s teaching studio had a corresponding decline during those years and financial difficulties instigated the first teacher training course in 1931. Alexander’s later writings mostly avoided controversial views on ‘race culture.’

In 1944, a scathing critique of the AT, ‘Quackery Versus Physical Education’ was published in the South African Fitness Journal, Manpower. It insisted that research cited as supportive did not provide any evidence in support of Alexander. It also referred to Alexander’s ‘followers’ as a ‘head balancing cult’ and put their ‘belief’ down to ‘group hystero-neurosis typical of a new faith.’ The article contained a section, ‘The misquoted Sherrington’ which claimed Alexander had mischaracterized Sir Charles Sherrington’s research as being supportive to his work. Alexander sued the journal for defamation in 1945. Interestingly, Sherrington wrote a letter of support to Alexander that helped him win the libel case in 1948. The victory came at a significant cost for Alexander as the award did not cover his costs and the stress likely contributed to a stroke around this time.

Conclusion

This is not the whole story, but some of the omitted details in the AT origin story and myth of F.M. Alexander. Most AT teachers and students are unaware of this dimension and history of AT and perhaps should consider the historical implications when using concepts like evolution in any explanation of the AT. Alexander trained about 80 teachers before his death in 1955, these teachers mostly quietly overlooked Alexander’s eugenics ideas. The fact that his books were out of print for decades kept these shocking facts from being widely known, feeding the hagiographical myth of Alexander that’s typically propagated.

Beyond being factually incorrect, Alexander’s racist and dehumanizing language is shocking today but sadly was not unusual for writings from that era and largely went un-protested during Alexander’s lifetime. Today, AT societies are openly anti-racist, i.e. The Society of Teachers of the Alexander Technique (STAT)’s website has a prominently displayed ‘Diversity and Anti-discrimination Statement’ that reads: “STAT supports diversity and opposes racism’ and every other form of prejudice or discrimination. It deplores all expressions thereof, in any form, contemporary or historical. STAT and its members stand apart from any and all prejudicial or discriminatory passages in the writings of F. M. Alexander. They neither expound nor define the body of practice and theory that has come to be known as the Alexander Technique; they play no part in the manner in which the Technique is taught in STAT- approved teacher training schools or in the practice of the Technique by its Teaching Members; Alexander’s writings are not treated as core texts, but as historical texts read critically for reference. Equality and freedom from discrimination are fundamental to STAT’s advancement of the Technique.” There is also the Judith Leibowitz Scholarship Fund provides scholarships ‘to empower BIPOC who want to train to become AT teachers and expand the AT teaching community.’

However, a long standing question as to whether or not to change the name of the AT seems as relevant as ever. As long as the work is labeled the ‘Alexander’ technique the community will have to deal with the baggage of the man. Alexander insisted he not be mimicked, never used the label AT, and his writings are far from textbooks on how to learn the AT. FM’s writings in many ways needlessly mystify the AT into postural metaphysics. Perhaps it’s time to stop telling the myth of Alexander, if not for reasons previously written, it makes AT appear cultish and turns off prospective students.

References

Schultz S. G. (1998). A century of (epithelial) transport physiology: from vitalism to molecular cloning. The American journal of physiology, 274(1), C13–C23. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpcell.1998.274.1.C13

Leonard. (2009). Origins of the myth of social Darwinism: The ambiguous legacy of Richard Hofstadter’s Social Darwinism in American Thought. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 71(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2007.11.004

Raymer, E. (2018). Human progress by human effort: neo-Darwinism, social heredity, and the professionalization of the American social sciences, 1889-1925. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 40(4), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-018-0225-y

Lewis H. (2016). CHAPTER 2: SOCIAL DARWINISM: A Brief Outline of Social Darwinism and Its influence on 19th Century Britain and Elsewhere. The Journal of Psychohistory, 44(2), 154–.

Staring J., Bouchard E. 2002 The Early History of F.M. Alexander: Jeroen Staring Talk at the American Center for the Alexander Technique 2/13/2002

Keating J. C., Jr. (2002). The Meanings of Innate. The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association46(1), 4–10.

https://www.judithleibowitzscholarship.org/

https://alexandertechnique.co.uk/about-stat/about-stat

Parkinson’s Disease & AT

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a progressive neurological disease that includes a range of symptoms related to control of posture (Doherty et al., 2011). The biological basis for PD is death of dopamine secreting neurons caused by degeneration of the substantia nigra and nigrostriatal system. The brain contains two major systems of dopaminergic (DA) neurons: the nigrostriatal system (damaged in PD), and the mesolimbic/mesocortical system, which consists of dopaminergic neurons in the ventral tegmental area that innervate the nucleus accumbens and the prefrontal cortex. Parkinson’s disease (PD) damages only the nigrostriatal system because elevated intracellular calcium ions and dopamine combine to kill cells in the nigrostriatal system; the mesolimbic/mesocortical lacks elevated levels of calcium ions (Carlson & Bricket, 2022).

Most cases of Parkinson’s disease (PD) do not have genetic causes but there are PD correlated gene mutations known to cause higher levels of defective proteins to accumulate and damage dopaminergic neurons. Primary symptoms of PD are muscular rigidity, slowness, tremor, and postural instability. PD can be caused by environmental toxins (i.e. insecticides), faulty metabolism, or unrecognized infectious disorders. Functional-imaging studies have shown that akinesia (difficult initiating movement) was associated with decreased activation of the supplementary motor area and that tremors are associated with abnormalities of a neural system involving the pons, midbrain, cerebellum, and thalamus (Carlson & Bricket, 2022).

The standard treatment for PD is L-DOPA, the precursor of dopamine. Increased levels of L-DOPA causes a patient’s remaining dopaminergic neurons to produce more dopamine but eventually the number of nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurons declines and symptoms become worse. Deprenyl, an MAO inhibitor, slows the progression of PD, especially if therapy begins soon after onset. MAO inhibitors appear to work on symptoms but do not slow the degeneration of neurons (Carlson & Bricket, 2022). Medication often alleviates some Parkinsonian motor symptoms, but it does not cure them and may make aspects of postural control worse (Contin et al., 1996). Surgical options including fetal tissue transplant, but not all patients benefit and some transplant recipients later develop severe dyskinesias. Other surgical options include brain lesioning the globus pallidus (GPi) and/or the subthalamic nucleus (STN), or implanting electrodes for deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the STN (Carlson & Bricket, 2022). 

Woodman & Moore (2011) suggest the effectiveness the Alexander Technique (AT) in PD related disability. Movement based embodied cognitive practices (MECPs) similar to AT (Posadzki, 2009), such as Yoga, Qigong and Tai Chi have shown promise in alleviating symptoms associated with PD disability (Cohen et al. 2015). The AT is a method of neuromuscular re-education known to affect postural tone and movement coordination (Cacciatore et al., 2011). According to the National Health Service (UK), “lessons in the AT may help one carry out everyday tasks more easily and improve feelings about Parkinson’s disability.” A pilot study (Stallibrass, 1997) indicated that, in conjunction with drug therapy, AT could benefit people with Parkinson’s disease. 

A subsequent larger scale study (Stallibrass et al., 2002) included ninety-three people with idiopathic PD assigned into three groups (AT, massage, and no additional care) assessed using the Self-assessment Parkinson’s Disease Disability scale (SPDDS), Attitudes to Self-scale and Beck depression inventory (BDI). The AT group improved compared with the no additional intervention group, pre-intervention to post-intervention on SPDDS tests and was comparatively less depressed post-intervention, supporting evidence that lessons in the AT are likely to lead to sustained benefit for people with Parkinson’s disease (Stallibrass et al., 2002). Reductions in depression seem to stem from greater agency based on questionnaire responses (Stallibrass, 2005). 

 More recently, Cohen et. al (2015) showed that distinct effects on posture and mobility were apparent by measuring axial tone, postural sway, postural uprightness, and step initiation after Parkinson’s patients were given brief postural instructions based on AT directions. These inquiries all have interesting implications for the philosophical mind-body problem and have inspired continuing research.

More on the topic.

References

Carlson, N., Birkett, M. (2022), Foundations of Behavioral Neuroscience (10th ed.), Pearson.

Cacciatore T., Gurfinkel, V. S., Horak, F. B., Cordo, P. J., & Ames, K. E. (2011). Increased dynamic regulation of postural tone through Alexander Technique training. Human Movement Science, 30(1), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2010.10.002

Contin M, Riva R, Baruzzi A, Albani F, Macri’ S, Martinelli P. Postural stability in Parkinson’s disease: the effects of disease severity and acute levodopa dosing. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 1996;2:29-33.

Cohen RG, Gurfinkel VS, Kwak, E, Warden AC, Horak FB. Lighten up: specific postural instructions affect axial rigidity and step initiation in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair. 2015;29:878–888. doi:10.1177/1545968315570323

Doherty K., van de Warrenburg, B. P., Peralta, M. C., Silveira-Moriyama, L., Azulay, J.-P., Gershanik, O. S., & Bloem, B. R. (2011). Postural deformities in Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurology, 10(6), 538–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70067-9

Posadzki P. (2009). Qi Gong exercises through the lens of the Alexander Technique: A conceptual congruence. European Journal of Integrative Medicine, 1(2), 87–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2009.04.001

Stallibrass C. An evaluation of the Alexander Technique for the management of disability in Parkinson’s disease- a preliminary study. Clinical Rehabilitation. 1997;11(1):8-12. doi:10.1177/026921559701100103

Stallibrass, C., Sissons, P., & Chalmers, C. (2002). Randomized controlled trial of the alexander technique for idiopathic parkinson’s disease. Clinical Rehabilitation, 16(7), 695-708. https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215502cr544oa

Stallibrass, Frank, C., & Wentworth, K. (2005). Retention of skills learnt in Alexander technique lessons: 28 people with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 9(2), 150–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2004.06.004

Woodman, J. P. Moore, N. R. Evidence for the effectiveness of Alexander Technique lessons in medical and health-related conditions: a systematic review 2011 – International Journal of Clinical Practice VL  – 66 IS  – 1 SN  – 1368-5031 UR https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02817.x

National Health Service of the UK – AT page https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/alexander-technique/

The Illusion of Viola Technique

forever-alwaysAs musicians we tend to segregate our practice time. We reserve time specifically for scales, run-throughs, and “technique,” among other things. The aspect of technique was always my primary interest. I would easily bore of concertos and sonatas, often before getting them up to a performance level, but I could practice the same passage focusing on improving my technique endlessly without boredom if it offered the kinds of challenges I needed to grow. I found that improvements that came from this type of practice had an overall improvement on my playing no matter if I was sight-reading or playing the passage I had been practicing.

Early in my career, as I started to take on a more and more orchestral and chamber rehearsals, I started to be in pain after only a few hours of playing per day. It got so bad that if I had an orchestra rehearsal I would not be able to practice more than one hour that day or the next day would have to be a day off or excruciating pain. The discomfort was far worse than anything I had ever experienced resulting from playing in my youth. Some years prior I had acute pain during music festivals where I’d play 6-10 hours in a day for several weeks in a row, this was chronic and didn’t fully go away with rest.

Fast forward to when I found the AT. I would come out of lessons with such a heightened awareness of my body that I would rush to the practice room to work on my viola technique before it wore off. I’d lift and drop my fingers with less and less effort. I’d hold the bow with just the friction of the skin against the wood. I’d stop and notice my habit of shoulders raising here and there. Everything seemed to get easier and sound better all at once.

My only tool at the time to relieve the pain myself was to lie on the floor with a few books under my head. The discomfort was such a strong stimulus that if it was possible, I’d lie down every 30-45 minutes to undo what I was doing to myself while playing. I was somewhat aware of it, but my skill of inhibition was not refined enough to help much while playing which was even more habitual than sitting and standing. At the time there was no way I could avoid the hours of playing/practicing without failing my courses so I figured that I’d just have to build in lots of breaks and stop when I just couldn’t take it anymore in rehearsals.

I went on for years taking Alexander lessons to improve my viola technique and I spent a long time practicing inhibition in various ways. I’d practice on the floor. I’d tease myself with the viola, holding it in my right hand and bring it to my neck trying to notice if I was actually bringing my neck forward to the viola. Taking long periods off the viola helped. I had the great fortune of being able to stop playing for a couple of months which let me forget some of my muscle memory. Relearning to play from a somewhat blank slate was very useful. I even taught myself to play without the shoulder rest because I had never played without one and like learning a fresh piece of music, it wasn’t habitual. It was this last venture (and accumulation of a number of AT lessons) that lead me to a great discovery.

Figuring out how to balance the viola without gripping it constantly is a real parlor trick. My old method of doing this was to adapt the viola to me somehow. I realized that if I was to be able to balance the viola without gripping or filling in the empty space with gear I had to relearn how to use my arms, shoulders, and torso to balance the viola. I will get into the specifics of how to balance the viola without the shoulder rest and the dangers of the shoulder rest in my next post, but for now I’d like to focus on the significance of the discovery that viola technique can’t be separated from the use of the self.

harp illusionThe viola is an inanimate object after all, so what we call viola technique can’t be separated realistically from the technique of movement while balancing in gravity. We are moving around the viola, supporting it, and manipulating it. The viola can only respond to what we do. Suddenly my experience of the AT applied to the viola got vastly clearer and I realized what an idiot I had been for separating the two skills in my mind. I realized that by narrowly focusing on my fingers and arms I drew myself closer to the viola seemingly in an attempt to bring my self (brain, spine, heart, consciousness) closer to the activity.

What was so wonderful about the AT in relation to viola playing for me was that it gave me such a strong distinction of what was me, where I was in space, and what was the viola and where it was in relation to me. Before, I was unconsciously melting into the viola and trying to move around the viola in unnatural ways because I was unaware of how my body worked from a muscular and skeletal level. I knew where I had to get to on the viola and would will my way there, often without reasoning out how I was to get there realistically. Interestingly, this new distinction also had a side effect of helping me separate myself from the identity of being a violist. Suddenly I was me and the viola was the viola instead of some unnatural hybrid. Looking back I had probably heard a teacher say that the viola is an extension of you or something along those lines which I obviously took to an extreme.

I then decided to put my primary focus on letting my consciousness live inside my body rather than superimposing it onto the viola. That’s not to say that the viola, my fingers, etc., weren’t in my awareness, but they were no longer my primary focus. I shifted my attention to what Alexander called, “The Primary Control.” This stated as simply as possible: a certain relationship of the skull, spine, and limbs; where the head and limbs are supported by the central axis of the body that is lengthening naturally in response to gravity, and in turn the head and limbs are not being pulled into the torso.

When the primary control of the body is functioning properly the use of the limbs becomes near effortless in experience. The ribs become free to ride the breath, and movements are initiated from a lengthening of the whole body, from the spine right out to the fingertips and toes. Contrast that idea to what most musicians think they need to do to play: grip the bow, press the fingers into the string, hold the viola, etc.

Intimately tied to the new efficient and easeful way of playing was my mental attitude. I found I could do a new fingering on the fly without missing a beat and play at tempos I wouldn’t be able to dream of if I was consciously micromanaging my fingers in the way I use to. By being mentally present and aware of my primary control with a curious attitude toward the process of playing I could consciously put myself “in the zone.” Thinking of the sounds I wanted to produce in my mind while leaving myself alone (not trying to do the sounds) and letting my body do what it already knew how to do, produced the best results. I’d often be surprised that a bowing or fingering I’d never done before came out, but somehow it was exactly what I had conceptualized sound wise.

If I was determined to get it right the corresponding muscular response was a tightening and pulling in, partly because I was afraid of getting it wrong which invokes the startle pattern (head and limbs pulled into the torso). Even if the result was relatively pleasant sounding, I could feel that I was doing more than I needed or wanted to muscularly to achieve my musical goal and too much playing in this mental state would lead to physical pain.

There is a certain amount of skill one can attain in the realm of control. I’m amazed by what others can do in this realm. I hit the plateau relatively early which I suppose was a blessing in disguise. There was a phase where I got worse before I got better in learning how to give up control of the small things in order to gain more overall control. This was one of the more depressing times in my playing career. I felt like I didn’t have any idea what I was doing and there I was having spent ten years practicing something I hadn’t a clue about.

noviolaThe truth was that I actually did know a lot about playing the viola, but I was too busy getting in my own way to let my voice come through. Ironically I had to forget about the viola to get better at playing it. I would no longer take my viola to Alexander lessons, and while on the training course I didn’t have the time or energy to practice more than an hour here and there, often going a week or two without practicing (I don’t count playing as practicing). However, working on my use kept me feeling warmed up. I never once felt rusty when I’d get my viola out and play.

Now, I’m not saying that I can go and perfectly sight-read a new concerto now. You still have to learn your notes. What I am saying is that there might not be a need to spend so many hours honing the technique of using your hands and body by focusing on them while playing. The best way to improve that aspect of your viola technique may well be without the viola in the picture. Your mind-body are your instrument, the viola technique may just be an illusion.

Epistemological Problems in Alexander Technique Theory

Introduction

One of the biggest challenges in interpreting Alexander and his contemporaries’ writings is not reading them anachronistically. If one reads these works with a modern lens they will find different meanings than were originally intended. The meanings of terms like science, consciousness and evolution have shifted in the century since Alexander conceptualized his technique, that’s to say nothing of the changes in meaning of AT jargon like ‘Primary Control’ and ‘Use’ in that time. 

A modern reading of Alexander without historical context would give one much more sympathy for the original texts. If it were not for the work of Jeroen Staring, a proper reading of Alexander in historical context might not be possible today. Without reading his biography of F.M. one might not be able to grasp the full extent of the relationship of the Alexander technique and eugenics, for example.

Systematic selective revision of the history and concepts of the AT has resulted in teachers (unconsciously) teaching ‘natural eugenics’ as proposed by Alexander, down to the terminology he used. F.M. was proposing something along the lines of “if you help people change their habits, those habits will be passed down to their children” (a theory of social evolution of conscious control). That perhaps sounds mild with a modern lens but Alexander had a sort of classism and ableism that was extremely racist in mind.

Aside from AT’s questionable origins, the main problem with the current state of AT theory is that its concepts remain difficult to define; therefore it is impossible to know what AT is. AT might have clinical efficacy and value, but to be studied by science (and be validated) it needs to operationalize its hypotheses and test them with (modern) empirical methods. AT must throw away constructs that fail to show that they have value (i.e. Primary control, Use, Etc.) and reduce concepts, as much as possible, to the biological level. The AT could almost be forgiven for some time because of the general lack of refinement in the related fields of Neuroscience, Psychology and Kinesiology. However, it is 2023 and AT teachers are still using conceptions that came directly out of Victorian ideas about eugenics. In short, ‘evolution of the technique’ has not kept pace.

We can give better descriptions of what Alexander was doing than he was able to give. One can describe Alexander as responding to the need to replace the human self-image, which had been made obsolete by social and cultural change; with a new self-image better adapted to the results of those changes. Social and cultural change gradually render large scale descriptions of ourselves and our situations obsolete and create the need for new language to form new descriptions. It is past time for new language and new descriptions for the Alexander Technique.

Changes in AT Concepts 

The first generation teachers adamantly and cultishly tried to preserve the AT as F.M. practiced it while quietly dispersing with the unsavory bits. This haphazard method of reduction left the AT more nonsensical than it was originally conceived. F.M. ‘s original conceptions put plainly were something like, “a certain coordination of the head, neck and back results in a higher plane of consciousness; from which the (previously unconscious, or at best semi-conscious) ability to will/direct (or re-direct in the case of habit) one’s ‘psycho-physical’ behavior (use) becomes possible.” This hypothesis was tied to Magnus and Coghill’s research but was infamously debunked in Quackery Versus Physical Education (1944), which insisted that research cited as supportive did not provide any evidence in support of Alexander. It also referred to Alexander’s ‘followers’ as a ‘head balancing cult’ and put their ‘belief’ down to ‘group hystero-neurosis’ typical of a ‘new faith.’

What is the Alexander Technique, really? 

If one looks at the AT objectively without belief in it, one finds an ’embodied’ folk psychology/theory of mind that offers pseudo-explanation and treatment of various disorders, especially those related to motor functioning. 

This question also presents a problem in that the AT is most often characterized in disingenuous ways as most writings on the subject of AT aim to market it. The most common little white lie is that AT is an education or ‘re-education’ method, likely referring to the use of the AT as a tool for habit changing. What then is re-education? Because AT theory is not falsifiable, essentially re-education means indoctrination (reification of said folk psychological theory). 

Why is the AT a folk psychology?

The AT is an amalgamation of vague truisms based on fuzzy concepts (i.e. use, lengthening, widening, collapsing, direction, downward pull, conscious control etc.). The concepts of AT are common words and phrases described with neologistic definitions which creates double meanings which then can be interpreted as significant. A crude analogy can be drawn between how the Hebrew languages’ numerical value(s) of alphabetic characters leads to the sum values of words potentially gaining religious significance/double meaning. AT concepts have no clear boundaries and can be applied to a situation in varying degrees, depending on the context. Because the concepts in AT are ill-defined it is impossible to falsify them, therefore any claims made by AT are somewhat pseudoscientific by definition.

Changing Standards of Truth Claims in Philosophy & Science in Relation to AT

Most scientists today are (consciously or unconsciously) philosophically predisposed to ‘eliminative materialism’. Essentially this is the idea that the majority of mental states in folk psychology do not exist. Some supporters of eliminativism argue that no coherent neural basis will be found for many everyday psychological concepts such as belief or desire, since they are poorly defined. The argument is that psychological concepts of behavior and experience should be judged by how well they reduce to the biological level. Other versions entail the nonexistence of conscious mental states such as pain and visual perceptions. Consciousness and folk psychology are separate issues, and it is possible to take an eliminative stance on one but not the other.

Eliminative Materialism greatly differs in its handling of truth claims from Pragmatism, which heavily influenced Alexander through his contact with John Dewey. Alexander made many grand claims for his technique, but the argument that it was scientific was made by his disciples. Most notably, John Dewey. Dewey wrote introductions to three of Alexander’s books and one particular passage is quite interesting in light of charges that the AT is pseudoscientific:

“The contrast between sustained and accurate observations of ‘living and the usual activities of man’ and those made upon dead things under unusual and artificial conditions marks the difference between true and pseudo-science. And yet [we have become so used to] associating ‘science’ with the latter sort of thing that its contrast with the genuinely scientific character of Mr. Alexander’s observations has been one great reason for the failure of many to appreciate his technique and conclusions. As might be anticipated, the conclusions of Mr. Alexander’s experimental inquiries are in harmony with what physiologists know about the muscular and nervous structure. But they give a new significance to that knowledge; indeed, they make evident what knowledge itself really is. The anatomist may ‘know’ the exact function of each muscle, and conversely know what muscles come into play in the execution of any specified act. But if he is himself unable to coordinate all the muscular structures involved in, say, sitting down or in rising from a sitting position in a way which achieves the optimum and efficient performance of that act; if, in other words, he misuses himself in what he does, how can he be said to know in the full and vital sense of that word? Magnus proved by means of what may be called external evidence the existence of a central control in the organism. But Mr. Alexander’s technique gave a direct and intimate confirmation in personal experience of the fact of central control long before Magnus carried on his investigations. And one who has had experience of the technique knows it through the series of experiences which he himself has.”

Knowledge Argument

Dewey was not so subtlety invoking the strongest argument against eliminative materialism, the philosophical ‘knowledge’ argument or question of qualia best exemplified by Frank Jackson’s Mary’s room thought experiment. The experiment is as follows:

“Mary is a brilliant scientist who is, for whatever reason, forced to investigate the world from a black-and-white room via a black-and-white television monitor. She specializes in the neurophysiology of vision and acquires all the physical information there is to obtain about what goes on when we see ripe tomatoes or the sky and use terms like ‘red’, ‘blue’, and so on. What happens when Mary is released from her black-and-white room or is given a color television monitor? Does she learn anything new or not?”

Jackson claims, and it seems quite obvious, that she does. In essence qualia does seem to have some non-physical properties therefore physicalism is false. For Jackson, this led to Epiphenomenalism, the view that subjective mental events are completely dependent for their existence on corresponding physical and biochemical events within the human body, yet themselves have no influence over physical events. Alexander on the other hand seems to be suggesting that subjective suggestive or auto-suggestive mental events (direction) do influence physical events, at least within the body where the so-called mental events are taking place. 

It was John Locke’s version of empiricism which harkens back to (now debunked) ancient notions (tabula rasa) that Dewey was referring to in his endorsements of Alexander. The dominant strand of philosophy in England by 1700 was “experimental philosophy”, a view that was associated strongly with figures such as Boyle, Newton and Locke. Locke believed that the senses supply us with all knowledge but that the senses were limited and therefore what we can know about the world is accordingly limited. This position bears some vague resemblance to AT philosophy on perception/sensory appreciation. In relation, Alexander claimed his technique could improve perception, with the old ‘empirical’ view of the world that perception (phenomenal experience) equates to empirical knowing; Dewey was insinuating that deeper perception brought from AT would equate to deeper understanding of knowledge generally.

At the time Dewey was writing his introductions he was consistent in calling Alexander’s experiments ‘scientific’ as they would have been considered science by the standards of the time. Consider some of the early case studies of psychologists/psychiatrists like Freud as a parallel. To put it bluntly, what was taken as empirical in that age was anything phenomenally experienced and recorded by an authority on the matter. In other words, nearly any vague conjecture from a scholar could pass as a scientific theory with some empirical data behind it and any recorded phenomenal data was considered empirical, even anecdotal reports.

Subjectivity of the Meaning of Qualia

Alexander’s thought process goes in reverse of Jackson in trying to discover the laws of qualia from the qualia itself, a crude phenomenological approach. Alexander claimed we are all like Mary until experiencing improved sensory appreciation that has a kind of metaphysical connection to spinal/torso coordination. In other words changes in the quality of experience can be brought about by volitionally altering breathing, motor plans and body position. The proof of effect being in the changes in subjective qualia. However, nearly anything (including placebo) can cause changes in the qualia of experience, not least the position of the head for many obvious reasons to do with balance and the inner ear and sight-line. One doesn’t then declare that the position of the head is the master control of qualia (unless you’re F.M. Alexander).

Jackson, Dewey, and common sense would argue that of course Mary learns something from the lived experience of color that is separate from everything there is to know (theoretically) about color. Essentially, Dewey is saying we are all in some version of Mary’s room and only are let out upon experiencing the Alexander technique. The problem with invoking the argument of qualia here is that not only does it presuppose that the Alexander client’s default qualia is wrong (faulty sensory awareness/debauched kinesthesia), it assumes that whatever qualia AT is ‘re-educating’ people with is the correct one without evidence. It’s also worth pointing out that qualia can’t be ‘re-educated,’ only interpreted; this is almost to the level of indoctrinating due to the lack of evidence. It also sounds all too much like some kind of secular Western version of the myth of enlightenment (Improved Use/Sensory Appreciation/Conscious Control) that can only be passed down by transmission from a guru.

Bloch, in his biography of Alexander, mentions that F.M. distanced himself from the once helpful Dewey after Dewey proposed a scientific trial of the technique. The prospect alarmed Alexander as he had no confidence in the investigation and in addition feared a loss of control over the technique.

Alexander’s Investigations by today’s standards

It’s important to remember that Alexander’s theory was essentially based on anecdotal and/or phenomenal observations. In Not Quite Science, Tim Cacciatore argued that Alexander’s writings lack the components of a scientific theory because the concepts lack precise definition and are not based on previously established scientific principles but instead are essentially a phenomenological description rather than a predictive theory. For this reason it’s quite difficult, if not impossible, to pin down exactly what the AT is. Not because the AT is acting upon some mysterious and little known force called Use, but rather because the focus on superficial phenomena without a grounding in established fields of study.

Karl Popper proposed falsifiability as a standard specific to the sciences in his book The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1934), informed by the contrasting approaches of Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud. Popper noticed that Einstein sought out data that would disprove his theories; he made predictions about future instances based upon the past, and then tried to learn more to test the validity of his hypothesis. Freud, on the other hand (like Alexander), used data that could be shaped to fit his theories, and his theories were crafted to explain the past, not the future. For Popper, this clarified a key difference between science and pseudoscience. Namely, a theory or hypothesis is falsifiable (or refutable) if it can be logically contradicted by an empirical test. This is the current standard for truth claims in modern science.

Strange Metaphysics of AT

Alexander’s metaphysics appear convoluted and nonsensical when analyzed. One might be tempted, at first glance, to group Alexander with non-dual philosophies such as Vedanta, as superficially, Alexander preached “psycho-physical unity.” Vedanta is arguably the most refined non-dual ideal theory, essentially everything is one mental substance, namely God’s dream.

However, it is blatantly obvious that AT assumes a logically inconsistent type of individualistic ‘empirical’ cartesian dualism disguised as monism (psycho-physical unity). Simply put, the cartesian dilemma AT metaphysics creates is that the I/Me (director) is not the same thing as the body it is directing (the thing being directed). Who is the director in the ‘conscious control of the individual’? Where’s the part that controls the unity? The problem becomes infinite regress.

In addition to being a dualistic ideal theory, which is somewhat self-contradicting, Alexander metaphysics almost require a libertarian view of free-will with seemingly limitless powers to overcome any physical obstacle with its application. Something which science has essentially debunked. Libertarian free will is central to Alexander’s conceptions and it is tied to his moral philosophy. Alexander equated good use to moral behavior. His morals were tied to a classism steeped in eugenics. Using yourself well meant behaving properly (like a Victorian white English gentleman, etc.). 

Conclusion

Bloch mentions in his biography that Alexander described himself as an agnostic, but was profoundly influenced by his Christian upbringing, “his speech as an adult was peppered with biblical quotes, and he had been imbued a strong sense of right and wrong, self-discipline and personal responsibility.” Considering the dominance of neo-platonic dualism in Christianity and his hardcore individualism, it’s a fairly safe bet he considered his mind to be equivalent to his soul in a then popular, cartesian/vitalistic fashion. What Alexander was referring to with conscious control was almost certainly a cartesian idea of mind/soul interacting with the body. It’s no surprise then why AT is so often mixed with various spiritual practices if one makes synonymous the terms mind, soul, self, thinking, direction, etc. 

Alexander’s efforts to explain psychophysical functioning were also held back by the mechanistic, eugenics influenced, understanding of biology available at the time. While Alexander had a fair number of medical endorsements, he and his followers’ various models have been challenged or refuted many times. There have also been many attempts to redefine AT concepts, but nearly all take the approach of relying on anecdotal or at best clinical observations, not replicable scientific data in forming a hypothesis.

A new model of AT is needed that reduces the metaphors to their essential component parts and eliminates needless abstractions. Some AT teachers realize the need to revise the core concepts of AT and are open to outside knowledge but many wish to remain secluded from science as infallible gurus. It is my suggestion to avoid the latter and search out teachers who have integrated Alexander’s original conceptions into evidence based approaches and theories.

Using the Alexander Technique to Play like Primrose

WilliamWilliam PrimroseBYU (Submission date: 05/19/2005) Primrose is universally known as the virtuoso violist. In this article I explain through the lenses of the Alexander Technique what allowed him to reach his full potential and how everyone has this inborn potential.

It is obvious, even to the untrained eye, that Mr. Primrose had excellent use of himself. You need not venture beyond one of his video recordings of the Paganini Caprices for proof of this. The virtuoso violinist Mischa Elman is said to have exclaimed upon seeing his performance, “It must be easier on viola!” (the opposite is true of course). What gave Mr. Primrose this exceptional ability to stay easeful while playing the most difficult passages? His response to a question about practicing from the interview with David Dalton (Playing the Viola) provides some insight, “Now, there are students many years younger than I, who practice this etude sedulously, and their hand is never terribly facile. But we must remember that to an extent, dexterity lies in an inherent muscular and nervous system.” This is strikingly similar to what Patrick Macdonald, one of the first teachers trained by Alexander, had to say about exercises, “Exercises, particularly those calculated to bring about relaxation, will, in nearly every case, exaggerate the unwanted condition. Only those whose use of their bodies is extremely good can do exercises with impunity. The reason for this is that exercises make no fundamental change, they only promote what is already there, and if what is already there is bad, it is folly to accentuate it.”

primrose3Mr. Primrose was a natural, not just with regards to the viola- but in his everyday life. He never lost his childlike poise, even in the face of great challenge. Janos Starker (virtuoso cellist) described him as, “a man of enormous courage, humility, knowledge, and insatiable curiosity … a man reaching heights but never losing sight of his frailties, while unflinchingly pursuing the loftiest goals.” Those attributes are paramount to successful study and application of the Alexander Technique. F. M. Alexander described what he called the ‘right mental attitude’ as one of a curious child engaged in learning, par for the course for Mr. Primrose.

You might be thinking, “I’m no natural, how could I ever hope to play like Primrose?” What Alexander discovered is that it is natural to use ourselves well, but for most people it is not habitual. We all have the potential to use ourselves (and in fact play the viola) as Primrose did, but we must learn to not do what takes us out of this natural state of being. Another way of saying this would be that rather than trying to directly do what he did, we must first not do what he didn’t do. There would be no way for someone to play like Mr. Primrose if he were actively pulling his head and limbs into his torso and shorting his stature; which brings us to Mr. Alexander’s discovery of an organizing principle of coordination of the self, what he called the ‘Primary Control.’

Alexander described the ‘Primary Control’ as “A certain relationship of the head, neck, and back.” It is not a position, but a dynamic relationship of a lengthening spine with the skull balanced delicately at the top and the ribs free to move with the breath. Alexander discovered that the organization of the Primary Control profoundly affects the quality of general use of the whole self. If the Primary Control is well organized, the general coordination of the self trends toward integration and organization, whereas if the Primary Control is not in a healthy relationship there is a tendency toward mal-coordination and disintegration. The Primary Control does not operate in a vacuum, as use of other parts affect it and the whole, but as the area in question contains the majority of our nervous system and is the central axis of support for balance and movement its role to play is both basic and of the utmost importance. If the habitual use of the Primary Control includes mal-coordination and disintegration it will manifest in the specific parts and in the activities of life which depend on the use of the self (everything). Put simply, use affects functioning.

A free-spirited young violinist named Karen Tuttle was so taken by Mr. Primrose’s ease of playing after seeing him perform with the London String Quartet in Los Angeles, that she immediately asked to study with him. He agreed on the conditions that she move to the East-coast to study at Curtis and that she switch from violin to viola. Ms. Tuttle is quoted from the interview ‘Body and Soul, “But because [he was so natural], trying to elicit information from him about something he did technically was a bit like asking the average person, ‘How do you breathe?’ Still I knew that I would be able to unravel my own technical problems by watching Primrose and absorbing what he did. Watching him was a great lesson in itself.”  Ms.Tuttle eventually became his teaching assistant and Mr. Primrose would often refer students to her for technical questions claiming that she knew more about his playing than he did himself.

Ms. Tuttle began to notice that Primrose had what she called ‘releases’ before events in playing such as shifts, crescendi, changing the direction of the bow, etc; most noticeably in the neck and lower back/pelvic region. In other words, she was noticing that Mr. Primrose’s ‘Primary Control’ was becoming more organized and available in preparation for a movement/activity. What’s more, the release and subsequent movement continued through the gesture. She eventually developed a system of playing that she called ‘coordination’ in which she strived to integrate musical ideas, appropriate ‘releases’ in the body, and emotions with the ultimate goal of bringing as much of her self into the picture while playing the viola as possible (as Primrose did naturally).

While her discoveries were groundbreaking, very few of her students could grasp what she was on to. A likely culprit is the word, “release.” The true meaning of what she called ‘releases’ has little to do with physical gestures and superficial positions/movements. What she called release had to do with the initiation of the movement, however the movement itself was expansive and active, not collapsing and floppy. What she called release movements, are akin to what Alexander called lengthening and widening. The external movements involved in Tuttle coordination will happen naturally in someone who uses herself well, there is no need to consciously and artificially impose them.

Without the underlying natural use, the movements that are involved in Tuttle’s coordination are not very helpful. Tuttle had this to say about her use of the word release, “Release movements are predominantly subtle, have a soft yielding quality and, in those players inherently capable of them, they appear smooth and natural rather than extraneous or self-conscious … release is actually what initiates the movement.” In other words, natural movement starts with an undoing, because of this the movements involved in coordination can’t be done in the way most people understand doing. You can’t do an undoing after all.

primroseage12We do not come into this world with an instruction manual when we are born, and our general use patterns are developed before we are terribly self aware. How we learn to balance, move, and think as children becomes our habitual use in everything we do later in life. As children, we learned intuitively and the self was a relatively blank canvas. We must remember that the self works as a whole and it is impossible to separate the mind, body, spirit. When we perform a specific task such as playing the viola, everything we know about balance, beauty, and indeed all of our personal experiences are in play as those experiences have been fed into our nervous system and have become integrated into the self.

If those experiences have had an effect of disintegrating of the self there will be general mal-coordination that manifests in everything we do. This is not to say that there is some rule that having pleasant experiences will produce good use or that bad experiences will produce bad use. It is how we react that counts. Most people believe that they are a slave to their experiences, “I’m like this because my horrible childhood.” Primrose states, “The student of whom I am very suspicious from the outset is the person who comes and presents me with a long list of teachers with whom he has studied … students who are always seeking the magic potion or are looking for greener pastures when the cure really lies within themselves.”

There are far too many reasons as to why our natural use is disrupted to spend much time on the topic in this context, but generally if we learn to respond to the various stimuli of life with fear, anxiety, and overworking, a specific activity will be experienced as scary, stressful, and difficult. If we meet the stimuli of life with curiosity, freedom, and expansiveness, the activity will be perceived as enlivening, interesting, and relatively easeful; regardless of the specific activity. This provides an explanation for the many accounts of individuals overcoming great hardship while remaining relatively unscathed, and similarly people for whom the smallest inconvenience is reacted to and experienced as the greatest hardship.

Alexander developed an extremely effective technique to free us from the cycle of stimulus and habitual response allowing the possibility for change on a deep level. Through the technique one can learn to let go of the things holding us back from reaching our full potential. F.M. Alexander was a Shakespearian reciter. Fairly early in his career he began losing his voice when he recited. As he only lost his voice when reciting he decided that something he was doing while reciting must have been causing the trouble. He consulted with a physician who agreed with him but could not tell him what he was doing while reciting so he set out find the source of his troubles by using mirrors to observe himself while he recited. F.M. began to notice that when he recited he pulled his head ‘backward and downwards’ onto his spine which in turn was putting pressure on his vocal mechanisms. He concluded that this must be the root of his trouble. What was more, he discovered that this pulling the head into the spine was often the first reaction to the thought of doing any activity.

He also noticed that when he decided to put his head ‘forward and up’ he could not maintain this direction of the head when reciting. He could not feel his habit engaging when we he started to recite, instead he felt as if his head was forward and up when it was in fact being pulled back and down onto his spine. This was a major turning point in his self-exploration because he realized that his feeling sense (proprioception) was not trustworthy. He later realized that he must simultaneously give the intention for each part of the process of the activity while withholding consent to the idea of doing the activity. In other words, if he thought of reciting he would immediately pull his head back and down into his spine because the habitual thought of reciting manifested the habitual coordination associated with the habitual thought.

Alexander came up with an ingenious process to get himself out of the rut he was in. He would give himself the stimulus to do something (such as reciting) but instead of reacting he would say no to any habitual reactions and instead projected the thoughts for “his neck to be free, for his head to go forward and up, his back to lengthen and widen, and his knees to go away” which he came up with as preventative directions against the habits associated with his mis-use patterns. These things happen naturally in someone who has good use. Once he found himself sufficiently well organized by thinking the directions he would either give consent to the activity while simultaneously saying no to his habit and projecting the directions, do nothing, or do some other activity. In this way he slowly restored his childlike use of himself.

We typically haphazardly stumble through the learning processes of life with no idea how to create habits other than the common experience that we must do the task in question “right” many, many times and a habit eventually sets in. At this point we have little conscious control over the habit apart from the ability to initiate (and/or hopefully stop) it. In the dreaded case that one learns a wrong (or bad) habit, common experience is that it is infinitely more difficult to “break” a habit than to create a new one.

Playing the viola is a ridiculously difficult proposition. There are so many things must be going well simultaneously that one simply does not have the conscious bandwidth for all aspects of playing to be directly controlled. Therein lies the need to create a set of habits. Similarly, we do not have the conscious bandwidth to directly control all aspects of balance, breathing, movement, or even thinking, so again we must form habits. The quality of all these habits collectively can be called the habitual use of the self. Charles C. Noble once said, “First we make our habits, then our habits make us.”

The deepest sets of habits are the habits of being: temperament, reactivity, balance, presence & focus, fearfulness, etc. All other habits and functions of the self are affected and built on top of these. Similar to the obvious fact that when one begins playing an instrument the first habits develop and act as a basis for all following habits. Where you hold the instrument determines which bow path is straight, where the fingers and arm are in relation to the torso, etc. It is fairly well known (especially in the viola community) that set-up is important, however little is known about what goes on underneath the instrument. Many positional rules exist, such as holding the instrument parallel to the floor, but what good is that if the person is hunched and pulling all limbs into the torso, or is only able to stand by stiffening the legs and ribs? Where would the viola be if they stopped hunching and unstiffened?

William_primrose2The viola is an inanimate object after all, so what we call viola technique can’t be separated realistically from the technique of movement while balancing in gravity. We are simultaneously moving around the viola, supporting it, and manipulating it. Most people are so bent out of shape by their habits before they ever pick up the viola that telling them, release this, raise your elbow, or whatever specific instruction that seems appropriate only layers on more habits to the onion of habits they’ve already created.

This is not to say that new habits layered on top of a mess can’t be helpful, at least temporarily. Instead my point is that we can use the Alexander Technique as a shortcut to something more substantial; to cut right to the core of our being and to break the cycle of reacting and doing in the old way. This is the starting point to play like Primrose, to be a natural. The old pathways will always be there and will be tempting, but to get where you want to go you must take a new path, there is no way to get new ends with old means.

Ten potential pitfalls in studying the Alexander Technique & How to avoid them

pitfallsign2Studying the Alexander Technique can seem like a never-ending road filled with mysterious obstacles and seductive bunny trails that often lead to dead-ends. However, it can be less so if you become aware of these potential pitfalls:

1) Doing the directions

Alexander called the directions “preventative orders” because they are meant to stop you from actively shortening your stature, narrowing your back, and pulling in your limbs. Any new found expanded state is a result of getting out of the way of natural upright. You can’t do an undoing, so don’t force yourself to lengthen or widen. Think (wish, intend, imagine) the change you’d like to see happen and then allow yourself to breathe. Repeat.

2) Relaxing (releasing all muscle tone)

The Alexander Technique is about finding an easeful way of balancing, moving, and being; where your mind and muscles work for you, not against you. We are looking for healthy muscle tone without excess, thinking without effort; that doesn’t mean no work. Don’t let non-doing become nothing doing.

3) Letting your feelings guide you

If we do what feels right, we are doing our habit. A general rule of thumb: if it feels right, it’s wrong; if it feels wrong, it’s new. This is different from learning to recognize your habit(s), which we all must do. Eventually your kinesthetic sense does become more reliable, but we must move out of the realm of feeling and into the realm of thought to improve even then. Alexander once said, “When the time comes that you can trust your feelings, you won’t want to use it [kinesthetic sense].”

4) Trying to levitate

No matter how much up direction you give yourself, you must still be grounded for it to be useful. A lengthening of the body comes from the ground and goes up. Don’t be so concerned with your head going forward and up that you lift your feet off the ground.

5) Focusing on specific parts without relation to the whole

Concentrating often narrows our view, not allowing us to see the entire system we are affecting. We then start “fixing” specific problems only to move on to the next problem that we faultily perceive to be independent of the last one. We then feel like we’ve accomplished something by “fixing” many little things, but in reality we haven’t achieved anything useful if we don’t account for part’s relation to the whole; in fact, you even run the risk of destabilizing the entire system.

The most common example of this I see is “putting the head forward and up” as if forward and up were a position of the head, not a relationship of the head to the whole body. When we perceive a problem, it’s best to take a wider view of the area surrounding the problem rather than directly fixing it.

6) Believing that the startle pattern is a habit

We go into the startle pattern (head and limbs pulled into the torso like a turtle going into it’s shell) because we are afraid of something. Whether it’s stage fright or fear of falling on the ground; the startle pattern is a reaction to a thought or feeling; either of which can be habitual. If we don’t want to startle, the thing to do is find the thought/feeling that is causing the startle pattern and inhibit (say no to) it. This is not to say that you won’t have to explore why you are having those thoughts or feelings.

7) Inhibiting doing the activity instead of inhibiting the thought of doing the activity.

This sounds complicated, but it’s actually very simple. Inhibiting (or saying no) can end up being plain old stiffening if we are not clear about what we are inhibiting. Are we saying no to the thought (and therefore the habitual reaction) of sitting or standing while doing chair work, or are we saying no to the activity and muscling through? It is helpful to ask, “What am I inhibiting?” then “How am I doing that?”

8) Mind-wandering

Going inside to try and figure things out, thinking about what you’re going to do later, or anything other than what’s going on in the moment (being present and aware of your thoughts, seeing the room, hearing, and feeling your contact with the ground) just gets in the way of your goal. Even if you are planning for a future event, it’s not helpful to leave the present while thinking about it.

9) Trying to get it right

One of the most powerful experiences in my practice of the Alexander Technique was in a chair turn with Barbara Kent where I realized that no matter how hard I tried to get it right, I couldn’t sit in the chair without stiffening and plopping down into the chair. Barbara picked up on this and said, “Let’s try it again and this time, let’s both be wrong.” I then effortlessly made it to the chair with no plop. Barbara then followed up with a smile, “It’s never going to be perfect, so there’s no point in trying to be.”

10) Being hard on ourselves

Our habits have gotten us to where we are in life. Thank them, and then gently let them know that they are no longer needed. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction- therefore the more effort we exert in trying to overcome our habits the more difficulty there will be in doing just that.

In my experience it’s much easier to tell when we are headed in the wrong direction than when things are going well. This list is far from exhaustive, but if kept in mind it provides clues about when we’ve fallen off the straight and narrow path and makes the difficult journey of personal transformation easier to navigate.

Mindfulness and the Alexander Technique

092914bucks-carl-sketch-master675There have been several articles in the New York times on mindfulness recently and it would seem that mindfulness is back in vogue. One that caught my eye most recently was focused on a study that found that pausing, even for just half a second, between having a thought and making a decision to act on that thought improved decision making.

Now this isn’t shocking new information to many people, especially anyone who has studied the Alexander Technique; but the question, “How do we access the space between thought and action?” is still an interesting one.

Most mindfulness practices when boiled down to their essence consist of these instructions:

  1. Be conscious of what you’re doing while you’re doing it. Pay attention without judgement to the present moment, not letting your mind wander elsewhere.
  2. Include your self doing the activity in your awareness, don’t solely focus on what you’re doing.
  3. When you notice your mind wandering, bring your attention to your breathing/feelings.

There are many variations and exercises designed to cultivate this state of ‘mindfulness’ but they are all essentially related to the above. The principles seem simple enough but try putting them into practice. You will soon find that it’s difficult to notice your mind wandering and come back to the awareness of your breath when you’re doing nothing, let alone when there is a task at hand.

Here’s where the Alexander Technique is invaluable. Through hands on experiences from a teacher your awareness of your self is significantly improved so it doesn’t require so much effort to pay attention to what you’re doing.

Most people have difficulty being conscious of what they are doing because there is a general misunderstanding of the nature of consciousness. Consciousness is not the voice in your head as many of us believe; however, we can be conscious of the voice in our head. Consciousness is also not our brains telling our bodies what to do non-verbally (i.e. desire for coffee, lift right arm to pick up coffee). We can be conscious and experience these things, but for the most part we are watching our unconscious habits unfolding. This is different than making a conscious decision. Consciousness essentially allows us to do two things. Pick a direction and stop; although not necessarily in that order. Generally you must stop doing your habit(s) that are taking you in directions you don’t want to be going to move in a direction you do want to go.

The difficulty here is that we have so many unconscious habits going on below the level of our awareness and it’s nearly impossible to stop doing something we don’t know we’re doing.

One thing I never liked about the word mindfulness is that it implies a separation between the mind, body, and consciousness. The three are parts of a whole that are intimately connected and functionally equivalent. The nervous system takes in sensory information and responds to the various stimuli we encounter. Our consciousness is able to access a limited amount of that information at any given time in order to act as a failsafe to our instinctual reactions. If the wrong response is learned one can inhibit the reaction by being conscious (or mindful if you will) and creating a space between stimulus and response for choice.

F.M. Alexander discovered that the information registered by the nervous system could be distorted by patterns of malcoordination and muscular rigidity that originated in the conceptualization of movement and posture. This is a huge point to consider because if our sensory information is flawed, even if we make the space for choice our decision is based on unreliable sources. Therefore, proper use of the self which results in reliable sensory feedback is an essential first step to a successful mindfulness practice.

There are some things often taught as mindfulness that actually take you away from being consciously aware.

  1. Close your eyes when you pay attention to your breath.

Closing your eyes doesn’t bring you into the moment, it’s essentially hiding from it. You can’t very well take a moment to close your eyes to pay attention to your breath while driving on the freeway.

  1. Imagine a sunny day (or some other scenario that is pleasant).

Again this type of instruction takes your consciousness away from your self. It’s much more helpful to be aware of what is there and your reaction to it. Whatever is there will still be there when you come back from your happy place.

AT-Mindfulness Tips:

  1. Find the top of the spine (roughly between your ears/behind your eyes). See if you can keep your awareness of the top of your spine without losing your other senses; keep seeing, hearing, feeling your feet on the ground etc. This will expand and quicken your conscious awareness as you learn not to hyper-focus on one thing at the cost of everything else in your awareness.
  2. Seeing is a great indicator of the quality of your consciousness in any given moment. If your vision goes blurry, your presence has a similar quality. When you think about something, do you still see? Or do you turn your eyes toward your brain to concentrate? Is it necessary to leave the present moment to think?
  3. When you have the urge to do something (pick up your phone when it rings, cross the street on green, etc.), take a second to stop and find the top of your spine. Keep the awareness of the top of your spine as you give consent to the activity or choose to do something else. Notice if you are reacting or actually making a choice.

The Shoulders: To rest or not to rest?

Finding neutral for the shoulders is one of the most challenging things one can do in terms of the use of the self in my experience. Add a complex activity that requires a certain level of ease in the shoulder girdle on top and you’ve got a recipe for paradox and frustration.

shoulder1Let’s begin with the basic anatomy of the shoulder girdle. When I refer to the “shoulder girdle” I mean the hands & arms, shoulder blades, and collar bone. You may be surprised to learn that the only jointed (bone to bone) connection of the shoulder girdle to the rest of the skeleton is in the front of the torso at the top of the sternum.

Find your collar-bone (clavicle) by palpating the bone and follow it toward the mid-line until find two roundish protrusions at either side of the top of chest bone (sternum). You are on top of the sternoclavicular joint(s) where the shoulder girdle meets the rest of the skeleton.

shoulder3If you follow the collar bone out from the mid-line toward the arm until it reaches the furthest bony protrusion you’ve found the point where the clavicle meets the shoulder blade (scapula), the acromioclavicular joint. It’s called the acromioclavicular joint because it is where the clavicle and the point of the scapula furthest from the mid-line, called the acromion process (processes are protrusions that allow for muscle and ligament attachment), meet. This should not be confused with the glenohumeral joint where the upper arm attaches to the shoulder blade; there is no direct bone to bone attachment of the upper arm to the collarbone.

shoulder2Now, palpate your way back to toward the mid-line from the acromion, this time following the shoulder blade until it reaches what will feel like the corner of a triangle. You are feeling the “spine” of the scapula. Depending on your muscle build you may have to press quite firmly and the scapula may seemingly disappear into muscle. The strong muscles of the back are what support and stabilize the shoulder girdle as there are no bone to bone attachments in the back. The structure of the shoulder girdle, while providing extreme freedom of movement, also brings an ambiguousness when looking for a neutral position for the shoulders and arms.

backmusclesIt shouldn’t be a surprise that how we use ourselves in our daily activities has a profound effect on the resting lengths of our muscles. It is this phenomenon that we are observing when we see pianists and people who spend hours at the computer still in the shape they work from when walking, eating, watching TV, etc. In the case of the shoulder girdle this can be quite extreme. Because of the lack of bony structural support, the resting position of our shoulders is almost completely determined by the resting lengths of our muscles. If we overstretch our muscles in daily activity, we run the risk of deteriorating the support that allows the shoulders to find a comfortable resting position.

supervsdeepbackAlong the way to becoming a “serious” violist, I was told to keep my shoulders relaxed. So I went about figuring out how to do that. I am meticulous in the practice room and before long I had discovered that I could relax my left shoulder while playing although my right didn’t really follow suit. The static nature of the left shoulder in violin & viola playing allows for a certain amount of relaxation (release of all/most muscle tone) while the larger more dynamic movements of the bow require the arm muscles which originate in the back to be active for movement to occur. The left shoulder can relax even more if you use a shoulder rest as you then virtually never have to move your shoulder.

On the surface you’d think that one less thing to worry about (moving the shoulder to balance the instrument) and a little less muscular effort would be good; so for years I ignorantly thought, “I’m raising my right shoulder, that’s not good.” Yet, after hours of playing it was not my right shoulder that cracked and popped, it was my left. Even after years of receiving praise for my tone which of course comes primarily from the bow, I thought, “But my left is down so it must be better than my right,” and went about trying to lower my right. Needless to say I was unsuccessful.

It wasn’t until years of Alexander work that I realized what I was actually doing was relaxing my left shoulder to the point that it was resting on my rib cage. This was the grinding bone on bone I felt in the form of constant cracking and popping when I moved my arm. I was robbing my shoulder girdle of it’s muscular support by relaxing it and then dragging it across my rib cage.

me at 11It turns out that the last thing we want to do when doing any activity is relax (release all/most muscle tone). The word activity even contains active! To remedy my issue, I had to relearn to play the viola without the shoulder rest. I found that every little shift was a welcome opportunity for movement in my shoulder girdle. Rather than trying to hold myself still or relax into a blob I was free to move and the movement had an organizing effect on my shoulder girdle which helped remind my shoulder blades where neutral was. I had been taught that raising my shoulder was off limits movement-wise on the viola. How ridiculous a notion it was to make a movement off limits when all of the great violinists and even Primrose himself did this occasional subtle lift of the shoulder.

This rule I assume was a reaction to the common problem of violists & violinists clamping down on the instrument between their necks and shoulders, which isn’t much better. Although, too much tension is less likely to destabilize your shoulder girdle. In my case, relaxing resulted in my left shoulder’s neutral resting place being painful; I’ve over-stretched the muscles and they now rest on bone and nerves. It takes subtle conscious direction of my shoulder for the pain to subside, which is annoying to say the least.

johnnorestI’m not sure if it is laziness, bad teaching, or what exactly is at the root of the shoulder rest debate in the string playing world. String teachers having a very small part of the body of knowledge necessary is possible, pun very much intended. It could just come down to the fact that playing the viola is extremely difficult and the shoulder rest is a seductive little crutch that can allow us to avoid having to learn how to properly use our shoulder girdle in the process of playing the viola, which is not simple and takes a long time to do.

Once again the most healthy option seems to be to stop trying to gain our end without reasoning out a means whereby to attain it. We need means that at the very least don’t leave us physically and mentally damaged or with a mediocre end: the music which we care so dearly about.

Using Nonviolent Communication to Enhance AT Practice

nonviolentNonviolent Communication: A Language of Compassion by Marshall B Rosenberg PhD is a powerful tool that helps one connect to their own feelings and needs as well as the feelings and needs of others. Typically, I would be writing about how the Alexander Technique enhances some other activity; my primary focus in this essay will be how to use NVC to enhance your AT practice.

While the author comes out early and states that NVC contains nothing new, he has pooled together a wealth of information with practical application and exercises designed to free us from the cycle of reactions so that our words “become conscious responses based firmly on an awareness of what we are perceiving, feeling, and wanting.”

The NVC Model as stated by Marshall Rosenberg:

  1. The concrete actions we are observing that are affecting our well-being
  2. How we are feeling in relation to what we are observing
  3. The needs, values, desires, etc. that are creating our feelings
  4. The concrete actions we request in order to enrich our lives

Within this form, there are two parts to NVC:

  1. Expressing Honestly
  2. Receiving Empathically

Let’s take a look at the different aspects of NVC and how they apply to the AT.

Observations

Dr. Rosenberg makes the point that judgement, making comparisons, and evaluation is life-alienating communication and traps our focus on rightness and wrongness; the result being that we only think of analyzing and classifying wrongness instead of focusing on unmet needs. If you think of this in the context of the type of awareness we deal with in Alexander work a typical thought process of a student might go like this: “I can’t get into the chair without stiffening my legs, and my neck is tight! Sally can do it, she’s better than me. I’m not very good at this. What’s wrong with me?”

Instead of focusing on what we may be doing “wrong” if we turn our attention to what we are needing in the moment to achieve our goal we will find our goal more attainable. MBR, “We learn to be ‘up in our head’ wondering, ‘What is it that others think is right for me to say and do?’ Rather than to be in touch with our feelings.” What happens when we as Alexander students try to do what we think the teacher wants or even try to directly do what we think is right without being in touch with what we are feeling and needing in the moment? Alexander said, “You want to feel-out whether you are right or not. I am giving you a conception to eradicate that. I don’t want you to care a damn if you’re right or not. Directly [if] you don’t care if you are right or not, the impending obstacle is gone.”

Feelings

NVC differentiates actual feelings from “words and statements that describe thoughts, assessments, and interpretations.” Some examples relevant to AT:

“My ankle is tight” vs “My weight is on the front of my foot”

“The student has a lot of up” vs “There is internal movement happening in this moment”

“I’m pulling down” vs “My head is going backward in space toward my spine”

NVC also puts emphasis on taking responsibility for one’s feelings. Dr. Rosenberg reminds us, “What others do may be the stimulus of our feelings, but not the cause.” adding “We see that our feelings result from how we choose to receive what others say and do as well as our particular needs and expectations in that moment.” In the context of the AT it is very important to take responsibility for our feelings. People often say things like:

“My back hurts” not “Something I’m doing is hurting my back”

“My arm hurts when I play the violin” not “My reaction to the stimulus of playing the violin is hurting my arm”

The idea that you can’t trust your feelings is thrown around quite a bit in the Alexander world. While it may be true that our feelings may not accurately represent the situation, they do accurately represent our interpretation of the situation, so it’s best to pay attention to them and ask, “What am I needing that is causing this feeling?”

Needs

Dr. Rosenberg strongly emphasises that needs are the root of feelings and that previously mentioned life alienating communication is often an expression of our unmet needs. He suggests that, “Expressing our needs directly gives us a better chance of having them met than using evaluation, interpretations, and images” and that we ought to practice translating evaluations into unmet needs. Some examples:

“My arm is tight, there are flaws in my technique.” vs. “I have a (unmet) need for comfort while playing”

“I’m not good at initiating movement” vs. “I have a need to improve my skill of initiating movement”

Requests

MBR, “The clearer we are about what we want back, the more likely it is that we’ll get it.” This statement reminds me of the Alexander concept of direction. The clearer our conception and request for neck free, head forward and up, torso lengthening and widening, knees forward and away; the more likely we’ll get it. Dr. Rosenberg advocates for, “Making requests in clear, positive, concrete action language [as this] reveals what we really want.” adding, “How can you do a don’t?” This is an interesting point as it is common practice in the AT to say, “don’t do this, don’t do that.” When we choose to use this methodology we should be careful to at least hint at what we do want.

I recently heard a story from a music professor who had hired an Alexander teacher to teach a class and was horrified when the teacher proceeded to humiliate a student on stage saying, “Don’t do that!” repeatedly when the student didn’t have any idea how to not do what she was doing or what she ought to do instead. It is interesting to note that Alexander framed the directions positively, perhaps he was onto the same thing.

Expressing Honestly & Receiving Empathically

Worrying about what others think, that we might be wrong or not good enough can be a stimulus for us to be dishonest with ourselves and others. However, if we are not honest with ourselves about our problems we can’t possibly hope to resolve them. Dr Rosenberg’s instructions in regards to receiving empathically is striking similar to Alexander’s concept of inhibition. MBR, “When we sense ourselves being defensive or unable to empathize, we need to stop, breathe, scream nonviolently or take time out.” When we allow ourselves to be truly present, noticing what feelings and needs arise without reacting, we then can make a choice as to how to respond. MBR notes that our habits of reacting by advising, one-upping, educating, counseling, storytelling, shutting down, sympathizing, interrogating, explaining, and correcting get in the way of true empathy- simply being with the other person (or yourself) and listening for what they (or you) are observing, feeling, needing, and requesting.

The remainder of the book goes on to explore the power of empathy, expressing anger fully, the protective use of force, liberating ourselves and counseling others, and expressing appreciation in NVC. On a personal note, NVC has helped me become more empathic with myself and others which has enriched my Alexander practice. NVC has proved itself invaluable in interacting with people who have violent and/or passive-aggressive habits of communication. I use to avoid possible friction; now I see an opportunity to practice inhibition by not reacting with the same sentiment I receive, followed by searching for their feelings and needs in hopes that empathy can provide some healing.

Finally let’s compare a statement from Judy Leibowitz to one by Marshall Rosenberg:

JL: “Ultimately, the Alexander Technique will help you deal with any life situation. To accomplish this you must give yourself the most important gift you can give to yourself: time. It takes time to incorporate and direct your energies to learning the Alexander Technique, you will not only change in ways that you want but also discover new and unexpected beneficial changes in your life.”

MBR: “Probably the most important part of learning how to live the process that we have been discussing is to take our time.  We may feel awkward deviating from the habitual behaviors that our conditioning has rendered automatic, but if our intention is to live life in harmony with our values, then we’ll want to take our time.”

Interview with Walter Carrington

walter210pxIn the Interview with Walter Carrington by Sean Carey, Walter describes a plethora of events on the training course with F.M. including personal stories, clarification of historical events, and practical lessons- mostly from Alexander himself.

Walter was attracted to the work by the transformations he saw in his mother and friend who had taken lessons from Alexander. There was a common theme of some of the trainees (including Walter) of being young men with not much of an idea what they wanted to do with their lives; the training course seemed new and interesting to them.

Walter talks extensively about the problems on the first training courses, while simultaneously defending Alexander. He quotes F.M. as saying, “All they were doing was going around imitating me like a cartload of monkeys!” According to Walter, Alexander expected the trainees to read the books and figure it out for themselves. When the trainees realized that they wouldn’t be taught they were disenchanted, and similarly so was Alexander when he realized they were so clueless. Reflecting to my own training I do remember after the first year (all I had originally planned to complete) thinking that I hadn’t learned anything about how to teach the Technique, even though the following two years were mostly the same in practice. I think this, wanting to find out what it was really about, kept me coming back. Strangely, there is no secret; only further refinement. Sometimes I joked, “I realized that somehow I became an Alexander teacher while I was busy working on myself.”

Walter provides many insights into the development of the Technique, both F.M.’s own personal development and his own additions as well as the additions of the other teachers of his generation. He says about the use of the hands, “It was only gradually that he [FM] began to find more and more that it was what he did with his hands that counted. As long as he made the right kind of soothing noises it didn’t seem to matter what he said.” He admits that F.M. never said where to put or how to use the hands; which kept with his minimalist approach. The advantage of having such an approach, according to Walter, is that the students learn most this way. Another interesting point is the connection of Delsarte to the origins of Alexander’s work. While most teachers admit that Alexander’s discovery and development of the technique as outlined in his books is pure fantasy and that there is no way he could have created the technique from nothing, very few teachers ask questions about his influences.

Walter does tell to the best of his ability the origins of the procedures, most of which were not of Alexander’s invention. Particularly of interest is how the saddle came to be used in the case of a child without the use of her legs. Crawling, which was developed by Dart and incorporated into training by Carrington, was a point of contention; he was defensive of crawling (or creeping as they say in England), as it was a criticism of his style by other schools of thought in the AT community at the time. He criticizes the wide stance that Patrick Mcdonald had students use, saying that it makes it easier for the students to get in and out of the chair but students learn less about inhibition and direction. He also warns against straightening the back against the wall (Dr. Barlow). The stories clarifying infighting between teachers from the first training courses litter the book and are a pretty big waste time as the people in question are all dead and the quarrels have little relevance to the principals of the work.

Walter points out that it was only by chance that table work was created at all; that at some point someone had the idea that the assistant teachers ought to put people on the table instead of always laying people on the floor. Also interesting is that Alexander had little to do with the development of table-work and that it was mostly the assistant teachers. While on the subject of tables, Walter objects to massage stating, “Massage is a terribly bad thing except for the most superficial kind of massage” adding that deep massage can actually damage tissue and make working with people on the AT more difficult. He had similar feelings about Rolfing.

There are long sections devoted to examining Alexander’s life views. While interesting, these kinds of questions have an undertone of suggestion that F.M. Alexander was some kind of Jesus type character who knew the truth and therefore should be emulated. Not only is this obviously false, from what I can gather about Alexander he would have wanted nothing of the sort; I believe he would have wanted people to figure their life views out for themselves. Carrington and Alexander both had an attitude toward religion that can be summed up as, “I don’t know.” A some-what related point that Carrington makes is, “FM always contended that it’s almost impossible to know what’s right, but that one could with time practically establish what is wrong and then set-up measures to avoid it.”

Among Alexander’s views explored were his views on other modalities such as Reich’s work, Osteopathy, Freud, and the Bates method. He was strongly opposed to all of them for separating the whole into parts and/or being an unproven theory being worked out on people (rather than a method derived from practical work and its theories coming from said work). While he may have been “right” in both cases, the attitude did not help the spread of his own work and often alienated the work from others; such was the case with Feldenkrais.

I believe the infighting between “similar” methods is related to the infighting between the first generation teachers and it certainly didn’t help any of the parties involved. On the whole, I was disappointed to see how much of the interview was concerned with these matters. That being said, the interview does offer an intimate view into the work of Alexander through Walter’s unique perspective.

Friction: An under-appreciated aspect in relating with objects & people

pushing-thru-resistance1-300x207Friction is often considered a dirty word in the context of relating one person or thing to another. In the Thesaurus, next to friction you will find: conflict, opposition, hostility, resentment, disagreement, antagonism, resistance, erosion, and so on. Many people will also make an association with pain and difficulty when thinking of friction in their lives.

In my experience, friction is a key indicator of the quality of contact or connection (relationship) between two objects (or people).

What I consider to be a good quality bow hold/grip (I’m not a huge fan of the standard terminology by the way) is one that the friction of the skin of the fingers against the wood of the stick and frog is enough when force is applied through the arm to initiate movement of the bow or change direction of the bow. This type of friction is known as Static friction: friction between two or more solid objects that are not moving relative to each other. When this friction is established you can hold the bow without any squeezing or gripping of the bow with the muscles of the hand and doing less gripping actually increases friction. A 2012 study has demonstrated the potential for a negative coefficient of friction, meaning that a decrease in force leads to an increase in friction. This contradicts the common belief that an increase of normal force improves friction.

I’d also like to point out that the shape of the hand is much less important than the quality of the contact. Amontons’ second law of dry friction states that: The force of friction is independent of the apparent area of contact (the amount of surface area contact doesn’t really matter).

Friction between two objects that are moving in relation to one another(kinetic friction or sliding/rubbing) results in a release of energy. According to the law of conservation of energy, no energy is destroyed due to friction, though it may be lost to the system of concern. If we return to the bow as an example, if sliding occurs there is a loss of energy that would otherwise go into the string (probably in the form of heat). This release of energy can deteriorate the relationship and even the wear on the objects themselves.

Since we are looking at friction in the context of relating to people and things, we will call moving independently of the person or thing too little friction. When there is too little friction a solid connection is never established. The two objects can become completely separated or crash into each other violently.

Just the right amount of friction fosters a responsive connection that acts to unify the two objects in such a way that they can move together or in opposition to one another without losing energy or loosening the bond.

It is my belief that these principles go beyond the physical realm. For example: a couple that challenges each other to grow individually is a healthy form of friction. Too much friction in this relationship and the bond can become heated and deteriorate, too little friction and there is not enough of a bond between the two, allowing for them to move apart and/or occasionally bump into each other. With just the right amount of friction the two are responsive to each other’s movements and can move together or apart(in their interests and development) and simultaneously balance each other’s differences and needs. These dynamics can be found in all relationships.

Over the years I have learned not to fight or run away from friction, but rather to let myself meet and be challenged by it. This creates an internal condition of healthy working.

When working with the Alexander Technique, it is possible to undo changes in the shape of the body resulting from trauma and/or bad habits of using one’s self with extremely subtle manipulation from a teacher. I found the following physics principles to be insightful in the process: The change of an object’s shape is called strain. The force causing it is called stress. Stress does not necessarily cause permanent change. As deformation occurs, internal forces oppose the applied force. If the applied stress is not too large these opposing forces may completely resist the applied force, allowing the object to assume a new equilibrium state and to return to its original shape when the force is removed.

That new equilibrium state is what we are constantly trying to find, and it is an ever moving target. An AT teacher can help you learn to guide your own internal forces to oppose the forces of habit that are disturbing your equilibrium and keeping you from achieving your goals and full potential.

Connecting Links

IreneTaskerfmalexanderbooksConnecting Links is a transcript of an informal talk given by Irene Tasker in 1967. By this point Irene had over fifty years of experience teaching the Alexander Technique. She had a unique position as a teacher of Montessori who applied the Alexander Technique to her teaching of mostly ‘disabled’ children with tremendous success. A proponent of the technique in the field of education, she had close ties to John Dewey and was herself a connecting link as she was instrumental in the writing and editing of the majority of Alexander’s books.

In the talk she describes the largest takeaway from her work with Montessori as observation and attention to the ‘means whereby’ recalling, “I learned from Montessori that my function as a teacher was primarily to observe and, according to what I observed, to provide each child with material best suited to him at his particular stage, and then acting as his guide, to give him the least help necessary to enable him to educate himself.” She stresses repeatedly through the talk the importance of giving the means, not the ends. I can’t help but compare this to my philosophy of teaching the viola where my main goal is to teach my students how to practice, how to figure out problems on their own.

Ms. Tasker’s descriptions of the writing and editing of F.M.’s books was a very interesting section in the talk. I had no idea that she and Ms. Ethel Webb had worked so extensively on them and they deserve added credit. She seemed to be a bit defensive about some criticism of Alexander’s books that were circulating at the time stating, “On the question of repetition, F.M. was insistent that you had to say things over and over again if you wanted them to sink in.” She also very fairly asserts that, “I think it is true to say that there are some people who prefer to know first about the Technique and from what they read decide whether or not to know it. Equally, there are others who are not interested to read about the Technique and the philosophy with it, until they know the effects of the working of the Technique upon themselves.”

A point that comes up in the talk has been bouncing around my mind, as I enjoy writing about the AT; to express concepts previously unexpressed in language is bound to be problematic and that writing which concerns itself with truth requires work to understand. I often find that only after I experience a truth, that I can recognize and appreciate it.

There is a wonderfully charming and heartwarming account of Ms. Tasker’s application of the Alexander Technique at the “little school” as well as other teaching positions she held over the years. She stresses the importance of applying the work to speaking advising, “I don’t think too much importance can be placed on the application of the work to speaking” adding “I think it should be part of the training of Alexander teachers. It is true that we teach with our hands to convey sensory experiences, but it is speech which conveys the ideas of which the sensory experiences are the counterpart.” Reflecting back on my training, I wish more emphasis was put on this, it took quite a while before I felt I could keep my inhibition and direction going while speaking and was often tempted to work in silence. We certainly did not spend the kind of time Alexander did working with speaking from what I can gather from the accounts of the early trainings.

I can’t help but relate to Ms. Tasker’s experience with the work. She describes taking the concept of inhibition to an extreme and F.M.’s response, “The other extreme of too hasty reaction, [F.M. went on] is drift.” I find this point to be one of the most difficult in practicing the AT. It seems Ms. Tasker did also as she mentions, “To keep the delicate balance between refusing consent to wrong doing and giving consent to the new doing seems to me the never-ending task for us all, both in our own use and carrying over that use into teaching.”

I love her response to the ever present question of progress in the AT: “We tend to speak of the ‘work’ and ‘the progress of the work’ forgetting that ‘we’ are the work.” I take that to mean that the collective body of Alexander teachers and students working (inhibiting and directing) will determine any progress in the work as a whole, not the perfect image or breakthrough scientific theory of the Technique.

Although the talk is nearly fifty years old, it seems as relevant as ever. Perhaps Ms. Tasker and I are kindred spirits as her emphasis on “not knowing”, that we [teachers] are the learners, and using Technique to connect the different parts of our understanding so we are more than the sum of the parts reflect my own values.

The Alexander Technique

theatliebconnThe Alexander Technique by Judith Leibowitz & Bill Connington opens, not with a technical definition or theoretical/philosophical description as many books on the Alexander technique do, instead the authors choose to begin with a relatable list of a variety of imaginary people with stress related ailments asking the reader what they have in common followed by a very straightforward explanation that excess tension and stress are direct results of misuse of the body. They even go so far as to list a number of conditions that can be alleviated by using the Alexander Technique.

Many modalities preach awareness, however, few directly improve specific awarenesses. The authors assert that Alexander’s technique heightened his awareness on many levels; including (from the Introduction):

  • kinesthetic- He became aware of (1) the feelings and tensions in his body and (2) his body in space.
  • visual- He saw his habits more clearly.
  • structural- He had greater knowledge of his anatomy and movement.
  • intellectual- He was more clearly aware of his thinking process.
  • emotional- He saw how he interacted and behaved with other people and his environment.

The book has a warm, personal and relatable style, detailing the personal journeys of Judy (who overcame many aspects of Polio) and Bill (who overcame personally learned mal-coordination to hone his skill as an actor). After the authors’ stories the book moves into case studies of many Alexander students which are more akin to personal stories of transformation from students than scientific case studies keeping the tone personal. Along with the theme of personal transformation, there seems to be an interest in childhood development as the later crops up repeatedly throughout the book and it’s importance is stressed; the authors on the subject, “We have to overcome our schooling and conditioning, which was of a goal-oriented or “end-gaining” nature that often leads to a fear of learning and of succeeding.”

Another theme that is recurrent is mindset. The authors assert that mindsets or beliefs create muscular holdings in the body and that leaving one’s self alone is key. They cite Zen in the Art of Archery as an accurate description of the Alexander process and go on to describe the relationship between the principals of the AT; Inhibition, Mental Directions, and Sensory Awareness (in that order). They detail the primary directions and their meaning. Interestingly, the direction, “and let my shoulders widen” is given equal value to the other directions.

The authors make a case for learning basic anatomy stating, “Because the mental directions refer to the anatomical structure, understanding the structure will help understand direction.” The authors make a case against visualization which is interesting as many teachers do not follow this advice, “Unlike some teachers, we do not ask our students to think of their bodies as balloons filled with helium, or to imagine the tension draining out of their bodies like water down a sink drain- in other words, we do not work with what is usually known as visualization.”

In the next chapters on mind-body connection and self-image & psychological factors there are more stories from the authors about how the AT accelerated progress in psychotherapy, relating the experience to the work of Reich. There are also many more stories of personal transformation related to those topics from students keeping with the overall personal and relatable tone of the book.

Some interesting tidbits to put in context of time are the questions, “How much does an AT lesson cost?” and “How often should I take lessons?” The answer to the former is $30-70, which means the cost hasn’t risen all that much since the book was written in 1990. The answer to the later is also interesting as she mentions that Alexander would tell people to come for a “course of lessons” meaning five lessons a week for six weeks. The authors advocates for three lessons a week for two weeks, two lessons for two weeks, then a lesson per week citing financial and time constraint changes in the average person since Alexander’s death. Also interesting is the advice to get a referral from your doctor and send in an insurance claim/reimburse form for your Alexander lessons; I wonder what the success rate for this practice is.

Following this is a section on what happens in lessons which in addition to the overall style and tone of the book make it an excellent introduction to the Alexander technique. The authors note that group classes are more economical but, “You must remember that the hands-on help is the most important part of the lesson.” Also in this section is useful information for student and teacher, “The Alexander teacher never forces a change upon a student but asks the student to think the directions so that messages are sent from the student’s brain through the nervous system to the muscles.”

The second half of the book contains “The Leibowitz Procedures” which Judy developed while teaching actors at Juilliard. While Judy notes that the Leibowitz Procedures and the Alexander Technique are not the same thing, they include many of the movements a teacher would guide a student through in an Alexander lesson. The section opens with instructions on how to observe yourself accompanied by a long list of questions leading to awareness of specific parts. This is then taken into activities including speaking, sitting at the computer, writing, talking on the phone, driving, climbing stairs, lifting heavy objects, vacuuming, carrying bags, sleeping, and gardening.

Following this trend Judy takes the procedures and applies them to sports and exercise activities such as weightlifting, swimming, biking, aerobics, walking, running, golf, tennis, dancing, skiing, riding, horse riding, and yoga. Judy mentioned earlier in the book that one of the purposes of the book was to offer a chance for the many people who don’t have access to an Alexander teacher nearby something to work with on their own. The Liebowitz Procedures are some of the best instructions for self-study that I’ve come across, however there is much less of a chance for success without a teacher’s hands as the authors admit.

The book concludes by stating that the Alexander technique is a tool for living and will help you deal with any life situation, but that you must give yourself plenty of time. As Judy had a hand in training most of the teachers that trained me, I can clearly see her influence in their teaching. It’s interesting to me to note the points where my trainers departed from her methodology as she didn’t have a cookie-cutter process. It’s clear through her writings and her influence on several generations of teachers that her commitment to the principals and skill made her a master teacher of the Alexander technique.

Positions vs Conditions

ImageTwo aspects of life’s balancing act that we must constantly grapple with are positions and conditions. The two are often at odds with one another, although they don’t have to be.  Whether referring to a position of the arm in relation to the viola or an appointed position (otherwise known as a job), if the condition(s) of the mind-body are not in the required state that the position demands, the position will be exceedingly difficult to “hold on” to and may cause physical, mental, and emotional distress if the position is held for too long (if it is even obtainable in the first place).

Most people associate positions with rigidity, stiffness, and holding – however, this does not have to be the case. The typical approach in learning to master a position is to do it (force ourselves into a shape) as best we can and hold on to it as long as possible with hopes that we will eventually build enough stamina to stay there for long periods. What we are usually doing at this point is practicing our misconception of what the position requires (also known as our habit).

While we may build stamina in holding a rigid pose, the advantage of the position (why it was thought up in the first place) is probably being negated by this excess tension. In fact, if moving into a position without first creating satisfactory conditions is the habitual response to the stimulus of any activity, not only will any mechanical advantage of the position be lost, the result may be worse than if he or she was in no particular position at all during the activity.

I can’t even begin to count the number of music students I’ve seen trying to find the “perfect position” for the instrument (or hands, arms, etc.) without taking into account what they are doing with their bodies. The students that do bring the body into the picture typically impose a posture that to the untrained eye looks upright and erect, however, underneath the skin there often is a ball of knots. This rigid forced upright may look and sound better than a collapsed posture but it won’t look, sound, or feel nearly as good as natural upright; something which is not imposed on the body. Natural upright emerges when the postural mechanisms are un-interfered with.

How does one achieve natural upright and improve conditions?

One must first value freedom of the joints, maintaining one’s length and width between the joints, and allowing energetic flow through the whole system; and prioritize those values above the molding of the body.

To translate that back into the career example, one must value freedom of thought (keep an open mind and don’t act habitually), honoring and balancing every aspect of the job, and connecting all of the different aspects of the work.

If one continually values positions over conditions, he/she will eventually find that they are unable to do what is required of them in a satisfactory manner. Take for example a violist whose habit is a little slump and has decided to force herself into an upright playing posture advocated by a teacher. To her teacher she looks pretty good externally, but internally there is no sense of flow, her joints are held, and her muscles are stiff and shortened. Instead of stopping the downward pull of her deep postural muscles (improving conditions) she creates a new habit of hauling herself out of the slump with the superficial external muscles. Essentially one group of muscles is fighting another to stay upright, and anytime she needs to move the muscles that hold her in her position have to be overwhelmed by the muscles moving her. She notices that her intonation has suffered and holding herself up is incredibly exhausting. She goes on practicing the new posture and gains endurance; however nothing seems to improve other than her ability to stay in the posture for longer periods.

Take the member of an organization that was only appointed to his management/administrative position for political reasons. He has no practical experience (unsatisfactory conditions) doing the job he was hired to do, but his father donates large amounts of money to the organization. He proceeds to make a mistake that costs the company a large contract and they have to fire several low-level employees. When the company fires the individual, his father ceases to donate any money to the organization.

Take the tenured professor that has a great deal of knowledge and experience but she is teaching at a third rate school and the students can’t even begin to grasp the material she wants to focus on. The professor becomes uninterested in teaching due to the lack of stimulation and her students suffer. In the music world this happens often as the number of positions and good students are so limited. Perhaps a very talented student chooses to go to this third rate institution for the exceptional teacher; however, this puts the student in a worse position to improve his conditions.

In all of these examples it is clear that if we force ourselves (or others) into positions we are not ready for, we can harm ourselves and others. However, if the conditions are satisfactory, positions offer a wonderful framework with which one can work on his or her self.

Grow to your full potential within the construct of the position. Keep yourself free enough that you don’t get stuck in the position. Maintain balance between your needs and the demands being put on you. If thought of in this way, positions can provide improved stability, efficiency, and accuracy.

Body Learning

LB-body-learningBody Learning by Michael J. Gelb was one of the first texts I read on the Alexander Technique, as it was required reading in the very first group introduction to the AT class I took. Upon re-reading it I see now why my teacher and so many others recommend the book to people with little or no experience with the AT. The book contains all of the core concepts of the Alexander Technique with minimal pontificating on possibilities of the future of mankind and other dense topics that plague many AT books, including ones written to be introductions. Also somewhat important in an introduction to the Alexander technique, which can sometimes be seen as a strange and esoteric practice, is the fact that Michael Gelb carriers some weight as an author from his other books which lends itself to the AT; not to mention the many endorsements by well-known individuals in related fields and a foreword by Walter Carrington.

I don’t remember being very taken by the book when I read it in college except for a few points here and there which were revolutionary for me at the time, mostly to do with observing without judgement and the effects of trying to be ‘right’ vs letting the right thing do itself. Being such a stereotypical Westerner, anything resembling Zen was far outside my experience except for the times I’d stumbled into it while practicing the viola. The author quotes F.M. Alexander, “Everyone wants to be right, but no one stops to consider if their right is right.”

As I read the book more recently, I was interested in the book as a potential teaching tool for my students. Right off the bat, I have to say I love the title and cover photo. As with his other books, he shows off his cleverness with double-entendre (ex. Thinking for a Change). I was more than satisfied with the descriptions of Alexander, the detailed timeline of his life and the development of his work, as well as his organizing the principals into ‘operational ideas’ which comprise the first two sections of the book. Mr. Gelb repeatedly makes it known that it is essential to work with a qualified Alexander teacher as the book does leave one wanting something to practice. At one point he describes the “ultimate Alexander exercise” as picking up your phone and making a lesson appointment. In all fairness, there are questions designed to broaden ones awareness at the end of each chapter but the book is hardly a do-it-yourself guide- the primary focus seems to be on building awareness which is the first and arguably largest step.

In fact, I get the sense that Mr. Gelb may be intentionally leaving certain explanations vague as to let a teacher fill in the blanks with hand-on experience (the best way to learn the work). He moves very quickly through many concepts and one is left with a general idea of the technique without a lot of specifics about the inner workings, which again may be best for the beginner as it is somewhat well-known amongst Alexander teachers that a lot of theoretical knowledge of the technique can actually slow learning in the practical sense, the two must be cultivated together, organically.

The author sums up what is commonly known as the mind-body problem quite concisely by stating, “[so long as we keep in mind that the whole is more than the sum of its parts.] Most personality problems are the result of conflict between these parts. Our bodies tell us one thing, our thoughts another and our emotions yet another (for example, I want to eat some cake; no, I shouldn’t, I’ll get fat; I feel guilty about eating, and so on.)” Another favorite quote of mine from the author illustrating that habits are always there but we can choose not to indulge, “I use to be characterized by a raised chest, tight stomach, set jaw, and hunched shoulders- the classic male defensive-aggressive posture. Now I am free to save this for special occasions!”

Mr. Gelb moves from the principals of the AT into a section “Learning how to Learn” which contains relevant ideas to the AT such as, how children so easily learn, fear, cultivating attention, experimentation, and non-interference vs effort. He then uses a number of illustrations of himself applying the principals of the technique to learning skills including: singing, juggling, teaching, riding a unicycle, speed reading, writing, running, swimming, public speaking, and Aikido. This is the best part of the book in my opinion as it shows the AT in action vs concepts out of context. While his explanations of the concepts earlier in the book are sometimes only adequate, the personal stories of his application of the technique are very useful and entertaining. The only exception to this being the section on Alexander work and organization change as he never bridges the gap between philosophical ideas and practical applications; although it is a cute look at the subject of organizational change through Alexander jargon, showing how organizations behave like organisms.

In Body Learning, Michael Gelb also manages to bring together most of the gems from many of the authoritative Alexander Technique texts; you would normally have to wade through many pages and chapters of dense writing to find these otherwise, and that’s asking a lot of someone who isn’t terribly invested in learning the technique. You could argue that this is the best aspect of the book, as many of the source materials are out of print and there is no shortage of explanations of the principles and applications of the work available nowadays, perhaps this was different when the book was written in 1981.

Overall, Body Learning is a worthwhile read to anyone interested in the Alexander Technique, even those with a lot of experience as the wonderful quotes, application descriptions, and pictures alone make it worth reading; it also makes a great gift to friends who are curious about the technique. The organization of the book also lends itself well to the group class setting as you can have a class per section in the book, giving the next section as homework to speed-up the understanding, and reduce the amount of time in class spent on explaining the concepts so you can get to the most important part- the hands-on work.

Can Laziness be a Virtue?

lazy3I have always held the belief that I am lazy. I procrastinate, spend more time watching TV than I should, and will often go to great lengths to avoid doing work that I don’t want to do.

Interestingly, in my efforts to avoid work I often end up doing more work in one form or another. One of my most recurrent habits around this is getting home and throwing my clothes on the floor because it feels like less work than putting them away, however I then have to go and pick them up later and inevitably have to wash them or iron them because I was avoiding the less labor intensive work upfront.

I often feel paralyzed, as so much of my mental processing power is being consumed by worrying about needing to do whatever the specific thing is, that I don’t have any room left for the task. The fear of the difficulty involved in the task, fear of the unknown in doing the task, fear of the unknown resulting from not doing the task, among others; also can be paralyzing. As a result of this, everything I do manage to accomplish suffers, not to mention the physical toll of the added stress.

My usual response to noticing these tendencies is to jump on my own case. In my mind it goes something like, “You lazy good for nothing! Get to work! You are worthless!” and so on- with many variations.

laziness - Just a derogatory word for efficiencyOne day I stumbled on a little “demotivational poster” (right). It is a picture of a doorstop still in the package, being used as a doorstop with the caption reading, “Laziness: Just a derogatory word for efficiency.” At first I thought it was simply funny and cute, but it got me curious about the nature of laziness as I have always strived for efficiency of movement in viola playing and I kind of liked the idea that I could change the way I framed my beliefs about myself; so I began investigating laziness.

The following excerpts are from the Wikipedia article on Laziness which I found fascinating and drove me to look deeper:

“Leonard Carmichael notes that “laziness is not a word that appears in the table of contents of most technical books on psychology… It is a guilty secret of modern psychology that more is understood about the motivation of thirsty rats and hungry pecking pigeons as they press levers or hit targets than is known about the way in which poets make themselves write poems or scientists force themselves into the laboratory when the good golfing days of spring arrive.”

“Frédéric Bastiat argues that idleness is the result of people focusing on the pleasant immediate effects of their actions rather than potentially negative long-term consequences.”

“Hal Cranmer writes, “For all these arguments against laziness, it is amazing we work so hard to achieve it. Even those hard-working Puritans were willing to break their backs every day in exchange for an eternity of lying around on a cloud and playing the harp. Every industry is trying to do its part to give its customers more leisure time.”

Going back to the “demotivational poster,” there was a silver lining in my version of laziness: The desire to accomplish tasks with minimal effort/maximum efficiency. This sounds quite Alexandrian to me, and F.M. was far from what I would consider lazy.

So I set out to define laziness in my own terms and this is what I came up with:

Laziness is a misconception of the method/process of least work required to complete a specific task. This often leads to extra work because associated with this misconception is the temptation to skip steps in an attempt to gain the result.

Taking a look at the definition of work is helpful in understanding this concept.

Work = Force x Distance (W=Fd)

If we skip steps that we later have to complete, we are increasing the distance it takes to get from the beginning to the end of any given task. Let’s look at a very basic example. Say we need to get from A to D and the distance between each letter is 1 distance unit. If we take the most direct route it will look like this:

A – B – C – D = Distance of 3

But if we skip B and we must move linearly, it will look something like this:

A – (skipped B) – C – B – C – D = Distance of 5

Anyone who has forgotten to pick up milk on the way home has experienced this. We do it to ourselves frequently and often subconsciously. When this happens we dramatically increase the work needed to get from A to D; in the above example: W=Fx3 vs W=Fx5.

While we are still looking at work (W=Fd), it’s important to note that excessive force also significantly increases work. Let’s say we are trying twice as hard as necessary to get from point A to point B; it would look something like W=(Fx2)d vs W=Fd.

I soon discovered that my personal definitions of laziness were at odds with one another. On one hand was essentially work avoidance and on the other was striving for efficiency. These two mix like oil and water. You can’t be efficient if you do no work. You can only increase efficiency in a system where there is an abundance of force, otherwise you must add force to the equation.

This made complete sense in relation to my physical patterns of use. I’m a slumper and need to do what feels like more work than my habit to be upright. In reality I have a habit of pulling myself down which is more work than supporting my spine in natural upright, but my perception is that being upright is more work.

lazy2Work avoidance feels good in the moment because we faultily perceive efficiency. This is one of many examples of how what Alexander described as faulty sensory awareness (or debauched kinesthesia) is deeply rooted in our belief systems and behaviors (and it’s a two way street).

Perhaps most interesting; whenever I do get around to the task at hand I almost always find that however difficult I anticipated the activity being, it’s never that bad; and I am often pleasantly surprised by how fun it is to do work when I approach it with the right mental attitude (one of curiosity).

A note about procrastination: Sometimes even when I want to do a task desperately I often forget to do it. I have found forgetfulness to be a defense mechanism to avoid painful experiences. The tasks I most often forget are the ones that I anticipate will cause me mental or physical anguish (even if those fears are not based in reality). At this point it’s generally helpful to tell myself that it’s okay to be afraid, and ask, “Is there really anything to be afraid of?”

This essay came out of a question I asked myself, “Can laziness be a virtue?” I believe the answer is yes if we change our definition of laziness from work avoidance and create the following conditions:

1) Inhibit the desire to avoid work. 

You can’t get something from nothing, so unless your desire is to do nothing you must do work. It is interesting that the world’s major religions strongly warn against laziness in the form of work avoidance.

From Wikipedia:

One of the seven deadly sins in Catholic thought is sloth, which is often defined as spiritual and/or physical apathy or laziness.

In Buddhism, the term kausīdya is commonly translated as “laziness” or “spiritual sloth”. Kausīdya is defined as clinging to unwholesome activities such as lying down, procrastinating, and not being enthusiastic about or engaging in virtuous activity.

The Arabic term used in the Quran for laziness, inactivity, and sluggishness is kَsَl‎ (Arabic: كَسَل‎.). The opposite of laziness is Jihad al-Nafs (Arabic: النضال ضد الذات), i.e. the struggle against the self, against one’s own ego.

2) Hone your skills of perception to the point that you can tell the difference between required work and unnecessary work.

We must check in with others to sharpen our own skills of perception, as reality it relative. Don’t be so sure of yourself that you are not open to being wrong about your views of yourself and the world around you. Don’t be afraid to do the wrong thing in an effort to find the right. Find an Alexander teacher!

3) Properly conceptualize the activity and strive for efficiency (remove what is unnecessary).

Once you discover the extra things you are doing, stop doing them. F.M. once said, “When you stop doing the wrong thing, the right thing does itself.” Strive to do less in any given activity (while still honoring the requirements of the task); repeat. In this way, laziness can become a virtue.

The AT: In Conversation with John Nicholls and Sean Carey

JNbookjpgHaving had a fair amount of personal experience with John Nicholls in lessons and classes, I had some preconceived ideas about how this book would read. I expected a straight-forward pseudo-medical explanation with scientific research to support the ideas without the “hippie stuff” that comes with many of his generation’s group of teachers. I was surprised that within the first chapter the conversation had already included Buddhist meditation, Gurdjieff, and possibilities for world change as a result of AT work. The subject of morality came up as John Dewey, Dr. Frank Pierce Jones, and Aldous Huxley believed that the technique lead to a form of ethics/morality. John Nicholls inferred that, “[the AT] may help the construction of a personal morality out of one’s own experience;” that the AT helps “to connect with the inner guide.” JN drew connections through many seemingly unrelated areas; he pointed out an interesting parallel to the schooling of horses, noting that the idea of “Self-carriage” or support of the limbs by the back is very similar to the idea of Primary Control. All of the subjects were approached and discussed in very practical ways without making any far reaching claims lacking evidence.

Coming back to the practical wisdom put down in the text, John offers many practical tips to young teachers including the need to tailor one’s teaching & explanation of the technique to the individual needs of the student. A particularly interesting opposition in this area that Alexander teachers often come up against is the reluctance to call the technique a cure for any specific ailment as it’s true nature is an educational (or re-educational) method and any cure comes about as a side-effect; however JN states, “It would be quite wrong and unfair to deny the technique to people who just wanted a cure for their back pain and say ‘We’re not talking to you because we’re educational and not therapeutic folk’.” Once the subject of scientific proof of the AT comes up there is an interesting point that, “any lack of complete scientific explanation of how the Technique works has a lot to do with the absence of explanation in the whole neurophysiology of posture, balance, and locomotion.”

One thing that was clarified in my own process of thinking when I first read this book was the simultaneousness of inhibition and direction. At an earlier point of my process I thought of inhibition as something one did before directing, not continuing to inhibit my habit while simultaneously directing the new intent, but now it’s obvious that the two really go hand-in-hand.

He also makes good points about the different “styles” or “schools” of AT teaching noting that “the general public doesn’t always find the vast differences that we [teachers] often find.” He warns about being a “paper-back psychologist” repeatedly; noting that, “if we start presenting ourselves as quasi-psychotherapists, we are inviting a big load of psychological transference and projection.” More so than any other teacher I’ve encountered, JN discusses psychodynamics in formal terms and points at a potential weakness in AT training as there is a general lack of knowledge in this area amongst Alexander teachers. He does not suggest combining the two within the same session, in fact he warns against mixing various therapies within an AT lesson with many good examples of why it’s not a great idea.

An interesting theme that runs through the book is John Nicholls obvious interest in deep psychological processes and consciousness itself, he states, “If we are to be consciously present in the moment then we must be consciously inhabiting our own bodies, not trying to be disembodied intellects.” A point that is made repeatedly in different ways is that the AT helps put the insight of many other disciplines into action. On the contrary he makes the point that insight without practical application isn’t of much value stating, “We all know people who’ve had endless counselling and who can talk with amazing insight into their problems but still carry on behaving quite stupidly. They’ve failed to take that final step of translating insight into behavioral change.”

The appendix includes the 1986 FM Alexander Memorial Lecture which further expands on position of the AT in relation to “Depth Psychology” (starting with Freud and Jung), “Body Work” (Feldenkrais, Rofl, etc.), Eastern Practices (Mindfulness, Zen), and the interconnectedness of these modalities through a set of themes:

1.Consciousness
2.Understanding and Controlling Reactions
3.Connecting with feelings
4.Integration of Body and Mind
5.Search for Natural Functioning
6.Search for a central core Self, I
7.Vital force, bio-energy, Chi, etc.

John describes the AT as, “a very precise tool for putting into practice the ideals of these larger movements.” It seems to me that No.7 is actually the most common through-line as all of the aforementioned disciplines seek to remove blockages of energy. A related point that is made and also serves as a through line is a reminder of the emphasis that F.M. Alexander put on “reducing thoracic rigidity.” John Nicholls adds, “Figuratively it’s as if the ribs are indeed a cage for most people, symbolically and physically imprisoning themselves. But undoing that cage can be a liberating and joyful experience.”

While the Alexander community doesn’t throw around the term master teacher, John Nicholls certainly would be in the running if there were such a distinction as his hands-on skills are excellent, he is extremely clear in his explanations, is active in learning relevant skills and information, yet is committed to not distorting the technique. This book is a very good read for anyone training or teaching the technique- especially for those interested in the Alexander Technique’s place in what John describes as “a larger context.”

The Alexander Technique: As I See It

atasiseeitThe Alexander Technique As I See It by Patrick Macdonald is a charming, clear, and at times laugh out loud funny take on learning, teaching, and practicing the Alexander Technique.

Clearly not one to spend much time pontificating, Mr. Macdonald opens the book with three simple questions that are not only the most commonly asked in the AT but also three of the most difficult questions to give a concise answer to:

What is the Alexander Technique?  What does it do? What is its value?

Keeping with his no nonsense approach, the majority of the book is contained in the first section, “Notebook Jottings.” In these jottings he gives his opinions and insights on most themes even remotely related to the Alexander Technique. These entries include musings on trying, feeling, exercises, directing, breathing, doctors, learning, seeing, relaxation and collapse, egotism, thinking, time, nervousness, the Bible, hoping, imitation, specialists, responsibility, judgements, luck, statistics, laziness, shaving, and even siesta. Some of my favorite jottings from the first section include:

On Trying: When at first you don’t succeed, never try again, at least, not in the same way. Trying almost always involves extra and excessive tension.

On Right and Wrong: If your right is wrong, then it follows that any attempt on your part to be right will produce the wrong result. Rather it is better to be prepared to be wrong. This leaves the way open for the real right to take place. Do not forget that right and wrong change; What’s right today should be wrong tomorrow … Remember, you are slowly eliminating the wrong. Finality, for most of us, and that includes me, is not in sight.

On Managing to Exist: The ability of some people to be terribly dis-coordinated and yet to remain alive is one of the marvels of Nature.

On the Modern Arts: A good number of people, nowadays, confuse gross mal-coordination with originality.

On Change: You cannot change and yet remain the same, though this is what most people want.

On Thinking and Doing: In the first place you must learn to think and not to do. After that you must learn to let the doing come about as a result of the thinking … It is alright to do, as long as you do the right thing.

On Ends and Means: I think it was Aldous Huxley who wrote, after lessons with Alexander, that it was of the utmost importance to see that the means used to any end did, in fact, bring about that end and no other. It will be seen that the controversy about whether ends justify means or not has no basis in reality. What is real is that means condition ends directly, and that ends condition means indirectly. All the rest is verbiage.

On Yoga: I may have been unlucky in having pupils who came to me after incorrectly studying Yoga. They were rigid both in neck and brain, and it would appear that learning to stand on one’s head had not done any good to the one or to the other…

On Up: You need to know where up is, and what up is. One has to learn the Art of falling upwards.

Learned Ignorance: John Dewey, when asked by Alexander what a conference of philosophers had been about, replied, “Learned ignorance, my dear Alexander, learned ignorance.”

Once you get through the very entertaining and informative jottings, the very short (only about 40 pages) formal book appears. The first chapter details Alexander’s Discovery very concisely. There are extensive quotes from Alexander’s book, “The Use of the Self” detailing the ingenious process that Alexander worked out to change his habits of use. One interesting note is that he substitutes Alexander’s terminology “Primary Control” with “Master Reflex.” Stating that when the head/neck/back relationship is well established the subsequent organization of the whole body does itself reflexively.

In the second chapter Mr. Macdonald begins by reminding us of the changing meaning of words, specifically in regards to the technique once one has had additional experiences with the technique (ex. Neck free, head forward and up, etc.). He uses an interesting example of a child, John Smith age 10 and then John Smith age 12. While he is the same John Smith, he is also different.

He then goes on to explain the primary directions (and what directions is) mostly focusing on what not to do, as well as describing many of the common tendencies of pupils and what is seemingly behind those tendencies such as belief systems. Another great analogy that Mr. Macdonald uses is that the AT is as simple as A B C; it should be borne in mind, however, that A B C is only simple to the non-native english speaker after he has learned what A B C is about.

The third chapter is about why people study the AT and after some useful general and specific information about Use and the forces in play within the body the chapter makes way for several inspiring case studies of Mr. Macdonald’s students. The students were suffering from problems including: Asthma, Bronchitis, Paralysis (from stroke), Depression, Slipped Disc, Migraines, Rheumatism and Arthritis, Heart Trouble, and Childbirth Complications.

In chapter four (on teaching the technique) Mr. Macdonald further explains direction and gives a very clear and unique description that is helpful in understanding the nature of direction. He distinguishes direction, muscular movement, and position explaining that direction should be taking place consciously within muscular movement and position and that the internal direction does not always go in the same direction as the muscular movement. He uses the analogy of a magnet being drawn to a piece of metal, even if you move the magnet away from the metal it is still being oriented in that direction. In sitting even though you are moving down in space with muscular movement, the internal direction should be a lengthening spine with the head going forward and up.

He further explains that the internal direction or flow is always going on whether conscious or unconscious and that the primary job of the Alexander Teacher is to persuade one’s student to exchange contracting impulses with expansive ones. Before reading this I had thought direction was something I did while being a mindful Alexandrian, however this is not the case, even as I sit still internal direction/flow is happening; you can make a choice to be aware and influence it or let your habits take the lead.

Also included in the chapter are notes about style and originality in teacher the technique, which he mostly warns against. He reminds the reader of the importance of the teacher’s use and gives tips on getting expansive responses from the student and gives a good deal of different explanations and practical applications of inhibition and direction. He frames giving the directions in a sequential way, noting that each direction depends on the last one being maintained and reinforced.

Let the neck be free

Let the neck be free for the head to go forward and up

Let the neck be free for the head to go forward and up for the back to lengthen and widen (etc.)

The final chapter is a compilation of letters and excerpts expressing appreciation of the technique by professors, doctors, scientists, authors, and various former students. Mostly written to various medical associations and newspapers to encourage greater awareness of the technique, they reflect the general lack acceptance by the medical and academic communities at the time. The chapter concludes with a timeline of Alexander’s life in relation to the development of the technique- something that is not completely agreed upon within the AT community.

Overall the book is a must read for any serious AT student or teacher. Patrick Macdonald was a unique figure that was highly educated (Cambridge), had a medical background, and also had a physical background as an amateur boxer. He is reportedly (in the accounts from other teachers that were on the training course with F.M.) the one who discovered what Alexander was getting at in the first training course, before this Alexander had little faith that anyone could learn to teach his technique. The book contains gems from sixty years of teaching, it’s a real shame that it is out of print. If you find a copy, buy it immediately!

My Story

As an up and coming classical violist & violinist, I began experiencing a plateau in the development of my playing. No one else seemed to think there was anything wrong, actually quite the opposite, but I knew that my lessons weren’t  getting me where I needed to go and no matter how many hours I spent in the practice room I wasn’t getting the results I wanted. The problem seemed to be centered around the physical aspect of playing, specifically how to support the instrument and remain free enough to move around. I used all manor of gadgets to aid my me in my struggle and became an expert on the the various devices.

My professor suggested I try the Alexander Technique. Without any idea of what it was other than that it would help my playing, I pretended to have pain while playing so that the dean would let me in to the already full class. I was amazed that almost instantly, with the help of the teacher, my playing improved dramatically and felt easier. I knew right away that this is what I had been yearning for.

BWV-1001-editOne of the most surprising side-effects of the Alexander Technique was that my thought and speaking became noticeably more articulate. Early in my AT lessons I remember glancing at the Bach Adagio in g minor which had previously looked like an indecipherable mass of black ink. However, this time I could clearly read the differences between the tiny divisions of notes as easily as I read this page. The effects were so total and profound that I knew I was destined to teach the Alexander Technique.

Trying not to try

tryingnottotryI woke up and turned on my radio to find that there was a wonderful talk about something I had been ruminating on for quite some time now, “Trying not to try.” I called in and managed to get in a plug for the Alexander Technique. It was sort of ironic as I was so nervous that the idea of trying not to try went out the window, but here it is for your listening pleasure:

Trying not to try

Check out my essay on this topic:

How the desire to do things keeps us from doing them (well)

Excerpt: If musicians play a piece and try very hard to “make” a beautiful sound and to “make” or “create” music, what happens? Short answer: Music. Alternatively, if we play a piece and don’t try to “create,” what happens? Is it no longer music? Is it boring? Is it no longer our interpretation if we don’t try to “make it our own?”

 

 

The Illusion of Viola Technique

forever-alwaysAs musicians we tend to segregate our practice time. We reserve time specifically for scales, run-throughs, and “technique,” among other things. The aspect of technique was always my primary interest. I would easily bore of concertos and sonatas, often before getting them up to a performance level, but I could practice the same passage focusing on improving my technique endlessly without boredom if it offered the kinds of challenges I needed to grow. I found that improvements that came from this type of practice had an overall improvement on my playing no matter if I was sight-reading or playing the passage I had been practicing.

Fast forward some years to when I discovered the Alexander Technique. I would come out of lessons with such a heightened awareness of my body that I would rush to the practice room to work on my viola technique before it wore off. I’d lift and drop my fingers with less and less effort. I’d hold the bow with just the friction of the skin against the wood. I’d stop and inhibit my shoulders raising here and there. Everything seemed to get easier and sound better all at once.

Along with this awareness of what was going on with my body while playing the viola, came an awareness of the aftermath. For the first time in ten years of viola playing I was in pain after only a few hours of playing per day. In fact, if I had an orchestra rehearsal I would not be able to practice more than one hour that day or the next day would have to be a day off. The discomfort was far worse than anything I had ever experienced resulting from playing. I had had acute pain during music festivals where I’d play 6-10 hours in a day for weeks, but not from only a few hours a day.

My only tool at the time to relieve the pain was to lie on the floor with a few books under my head. The discomfort was such a strong stimulus that if it was possible, I’d lie down every 30-45 minutes to undo what I was doing to myself while playing. I was somewhat aware of it, but my skill of inhibition was not refined enough to help much while playing which was even more habitual than sitting and standing. At the time there was no way I could avoid the hours of playing/practicing without failing my courses so I figured that I’d just have to build in lots of breaks and stop when I just couldn’t take it anymore in rehearsals.

I went on for years taking Alexander lessons to improve my viola technique and I spent a long time practicing inhibition in various ways. I’d practice on the floor. I’d tease myself with the viola, holding it in my right hand and bring it to my neck trying to notice if I was actually bringing my neck forward to the viola. Taking long periods off the viola helped. I had the great fortune of being able to stop playing for a couple of months which let me forget some of my muscle memory. Relearning to play from a somewhat blank slate was very useful. I even taught myself to play without the shoulder rest because I had never played without one and like learning a fresh piece of music, it wasn’t habitual. It was this last venture (and accumulation of a number of AT lessons) that lead me to a great discovery.

Figuring out how to balance the viola without gripping it constantly is a real parlor trick. My old method of doing this was to adapt the viola to me somehow. I realized that if I was to be able to balance the viola without gripping or filling in the empty space with gear I had to relearn how to use my arms, shoulders, and torso to balance the viola. I will get into the specifics of how to balance the viola without the shoulder rest and the dangers of the shoulder rest in my next post, but for now I’d like to focus on the significance of the discovery that viola technique can’t be separated from the use of the self.

harp illusionThe viola is an inanimate object after all, so what we call viola technique can’t be separated realistically from the technique of movement while balancing in gravity. We are moving around the viola, supporting it, and manipulating it. The viola can only respond to what we do. Suddenly my experience of the AT applied to the viola got vastly clearer and I realized what an idiot I had been for separating the two skills in my mind. I realized that by narrowly focusing on my fingers and arms I drew myself closer to the viola seemingly in an attempt to bring my self (brain, spine, heart, consciousness) closer to the activity.

What was so wonderful about the AT in relation to viola playing for me was that it gave me such a strong distinction of what was me, where I was in space, and what was the viola and where it was in relation to me. Before, I was unconsciously melting into the viola and trying to move around the viola in unnatural ways because I was unaware of how my body worked from a muscular and skeletal level. I knew where I had to get to on the viola and would will my way there, often without reasoning out how I was to get there realistically. Interestingly, this new distinction also had a side effect of helping me separate myself from the identity of being a violist. Suddenly I was me and the viola was the viola instead of some unnatural hybrid. Looking back I had probably heard a teacher say that the viola is an extension of you or something along those lines which I obviously took to an extreme.

I then decided to put my primary focus on letting my consciousness live inside my body rather than superimposing it onto the viola. That’s not to say that the viola, my fingers, etc., weren’t in my awareness, but they were no longer my primary focus. I shifted my attention to what Alexander called, “The Primary Control.” This stated as simply as possible: a certain relationship of the skull, spine, and limbs; where the head and limbs are supported by the central axis of the body that is lengthening naturally in response to gravity, and in turn the head and limbs are not being pulled into the torso.

When the primary control of the body is functioning properly the use of the limbs becomes near effortless in experience. The ribs become free to ride the breath, and movements are initiated from a lengthening of the whole body, from the spine right out to the fingertips and toes. Contrast that idea to what most musicians think they need to do to play: grip the bow, press the fingers into the string, hold the viola, etc.

Intimately tied to the new efficient and easeful way of playing was my mental attitude. I found I could do a new fingering on the fly without missing a beat and play at tempos I wouldn’t be able to dream of if I was consciously micromanaging my fingers in the way I use to. By being mentally present and aware of my primary control with a curious attitude toward the process of playing I could consciously put myself “in the zone.” Thinking of the sounds I wanted to produce in my mind while leaving myself alone (not trying to do the sounds) and letting my body do what it already knew how to do, produced the best results. I’d often be surprised that a bowing or fingering I’d never done before came out, but somehow it was exactly what I had conceptualized sound wise.

If I was determined to get it right the corresponding muscular response was a tightening and pulling in, partly because I was afraid of getting it wrong which invokes the startle pattern (head and limbs pulled into the torso). Even if the result was relatively pleasant sounding, I could feel that I was doing more than I needed or wanted to muscularly to achieve my musical goal and too much playing in this mental state would lead to physical pain.

There is a certain amount of skill one can attain in the realm of control. I’m amazed by what others can do in this realm. I hit the plateau relatively early which I suppose was a blessing in disguise. There was a phase where I got worse before I got better in learning how to give up control of the small things in order to gain more overall control. This was one of the more depressing times in my playing career. I felt like I didn’t have any idea what I was doing and there I was having spent ten years practicing something I hadn’t a clue about.

noviolaThe truth was that I actually did know a lot about playing the viola, but I was too busy getting in my own way to let my voice come through. Ironically I had to forget about the viola to get better at playing it. I would no longer take my viola to Alexander lessons, and while on the training course I didn’t have the time or energy to practice more than an hour here and there, often going a week or two without practicing (I don’t count playing as practicing). However, working on my use kept me feeling warmed up. I never once felt rusty when I’d get my viola out and play.

Now, I’m not saying that I can go and perfectly sight-read a new concerto now. You still have to learn your notes. What I am saying is that there might not be a need to spend so many hours honing the technique of using your hands and body by focusing on them while playing. The best way to improve that aspect of your viola technique may well be without the viola in the picture. Your mind-body are your instrument, the viola technique may just be an illusion.

Understanding the Primary Directions: Which way is up?

upThe primary directions, or preventative orders as Alexander sometimes called them, are deceptively simple and can be painfully misleading at times. For years I would think to myself something like, “Allow the neck to be free to let the head go forward and up to allow the back to lengthen and widen to let the knees go forward and away” without any idea what those words meant. My AT teachers told me to “think” the directions, so I repeated those words to myself with little effect to the point where I wondered if there was any value in thinking the directions. Eventually I started to actively investigate for myself what those words meant and what I was actually doing when I was “thinking the directions.”

What does it mean to direct?

Simply put, directing in the Alexander sense is having an intention for something to happen while simultaneously withholding consent (inhibiting) the immediate (habitual) response that comes up with the idea of the activity. When going well this essentially forces us to learn a new way of doing whatever task we are intending to do as we are saying no to traveling down the old neural pathway and forging a new one.

Directing is more of a mental activity than a practice of manipulating specific parts of the body. Just as a conductor doesn’t leave the podium, pick up a specific instrument and play when he wants a part of the orchestra to follow his direction; consciousness doesn’t need to leave our heads to give a cue to the part of the body we want to direct. An example illustrating the difference could be intending/imagining the tips of the fingers moving away from the wrists and letting what happens happen vs consciously controlling the path of the fingertip and actively doing something. The later is consciously doing your habit, as any movement we can conjure up on the fly is one that has been learned and ingrained. The former is experimenting with something new. Bring an awareness of this distinction as you read on.

Allow the neck to be free

Freeing the neck is an undoing of holding, pushing, and pulling on the neck by the various neck muscles. You can’t do an undoing, so to allow the neck to be free you are gently asking the muscles of the neck, especially those under the back of the skull, to release into length.

Notice any pulling of the crown of your head into your upper back. Notice if you are pulling on the skull with the muscles of the sides of the neck or holding the jaw still. If you can perceive either of these or anything else that seems to be pulling the head off it’s balancing point (located roughly between your ears and behind your eyes), gently ask whatever it is to do less.

To put [allow, wish, etc.] the head forward and up

forward and upThis is perhaps the most confusing of the preventive orders as the word “put” seems to imply that “head forward and up” is a position of the head. Adding: in relation to the neck brings some clarity but still can be misleading because of the temptation to hold the head in a place one has deemed forward and up in relation to the neck.

Defining the forward as an unlocking of the head from the top of the spine is helpful. This often has the side effect of the neck moving back in space and the nose dropping just a bit in relation to the ground. Notice I said, “side effect” not “drop your nose and move your neck back.”

jetstream12

“What’s up?” you might ask. The deep muscles that run along the spine provide a natural upward flow that opposes gravity. These deep muscles are made up of special fibers that are much more resilient in the face of the constant force of gravity than our superficial musculature. The skull was designed to be poised atop the upward flow of the spine. Balancing the head on top of the spine is similar to balancing a ball on top of a column of air. The major difference being that the head can’t completely fall off because we’ve got muscles and ligaments keeping it attached.

When the head leaves the upward flow of the spine two things can happen. The more superficial muscles that are not designed to do the work of the deep spinal muscles kick in to catch and hold the falling skull and/or the weight of the skull pulls on our ligaments and muscles in unnatural ways; either option can seriously bend us out of shape and cause lasting side effects.

Because the natural tendency for the body to organize in opposition to gravity and for the head to move forward and up in relation to the spine, the thing to “do” is to stop pulling the head in directions that take it away from the top of the spine (most often back and down in relation to the spine).

To allow the back to lengthen and widen

What are we talking about when we say back? Is it our superficial back (skin, back of the ribs, spinous processes) or is it deeper and fuller? Clearly defining what we are looking at is very helpful in understanding this direction.

laminectomyLengthening comes from allowing the force of gravity to move through the bodies of the vertebra (front of the spine) so the deep spinal muscles, which are not under conscious control, can react in kind. When we interfere by holding ourselves upright (most people’s conception of sitting or standing up straight) we are shifting the workload from muscles that were designed to support the skeleton for long periods in gravity to muscles that were designed to lift heavy objects or strike a death blow to an animal (activities that require short bursts of great power).

The two most common postural patterns that interfere with the natural up flow of the spine are the slumped and overextended patterns (or some combination of the two). Slumped being (not exclusively) a downward and inward pull on the chest in the front of the torso. Overextended (again not exclusively) being a pushing forward and up through the mid-back. Both habits disrupt the central axis of the body causing alarm signals to be sent throughout the nervous system that bracing is needed to keep one from falling.

The direction [allow the back to lengthen and widen] is meant to undo bracing the ribs and contorting of the spine. Finding gravity can help stop the bracing in the torso. Place a hand firmly on the top of your head, applying gentle downward pressure. Without collapsing in the neck or torso, let that pressure move through the bodies of the vertebra of your spine all of the way through your spine down to your tail. This tells your spine which way is up. Now, without removing your hand, let your ribs move freely with the breath. You are lengthening and widening.

To let the knees go forward and away

Any effective use of the direction [let the knees go forward and away] doesn’t come from pushing the knees forward in space by conscious muscular effort. It’s very helpful to ask, “knees away from what?” The quick answer being: away from the pelvis which is the base of the spine and torso.

Human vs Gorilla legIt is important to understand that our limbs come out of our backs. It’s easier to see in our similar the gorilla (right), but we still have the same basic set-up. Thinking of our gluteus maximus (glutes as they are commonly known) originating from the sides of the sacrum (roughly under the buttocks) and then out from the sacrum and lengthening down the backs and sides of the legs is essential to sending the knees forward and away from the pelvis. Another way of saying knees forward and away is: knees not pulled backward and up into the hip joints.

Opposition & Secondary Directions

The knees are also moving forward and away from the heels. Notice that there is always a two way street with the directions. Head forward/back back, knees forward and away/heels back and down. Without thinking oppositionally there is a tendency for one part to drag another along with a movement.

When you think knees forward and away from heels directed back and down away from your lengthening and widening torso that is directed back and up in relation to the head that’s directed forward and up; you’ve got the whole thing and could go round starting anywhere. Because of the limitations of language, we can’t say or verbally think all of that at once, but we can think the kinesthetic meaning of those words all at once when we have some idea of what they mean. Alexander would say, “All together and one at a time” to that affect.

Surprisingly absent in the primary directions is anything about the arms. Thinking of the arms coming off the back, elbows going away from the back and away from the wrists similarly to the knees away direction for the legs is a good first step. Alexander gave us the directions: fingers lengthening, wrists in, elbows apart to add on to the primary directions when using the hands. It can be helpful to think: shoulders widening and elbows dropping in addition to these.

You can always get more and more subtle, creative, and clear with your directions. You can direct your little toes to lengthen away from the ankle, or your eyelids to soften for example. You can widen the lenses and become more global by thinking: I’ve got time, Do less, I’m going up and letting down. Once you’ve sent a direction let it go. If nothing happens, send another. You wouldn’t hold onto a letter and expect it to get to it’s addressee. Lastly, have fun! The more imaginative, lighthearted, and curious you are in the attitude you bring to the game, the more effective the results will be.

Allow the neck to be free; for the head to go forward and up; for the torso to lengthen and widen; for the knees to go forward and away

Breathing and vocal exercises

thumbI came to the Alexander Technique without many (if any) preconceived notions about how to breathe. The first time I can remember consciously changing my breathing to affect a physical change was after getting a tip from one of the coaches in my middle school gym class. I found that I could slow my heart rate by extending my exhales, which was somewhat helpful in running “the mile” as we not so affectionately called the four laps around the soccer field we would often be forced to endure.

The effectiveness of this technique was most notably proven when I went to have my wisdom teeth removed. I observed that my heart rate was quite high because of my nervousness and when the dental assistant went to check my pulse & blood pressure I was worried that they might not want to do the surgery; so I subsequently began extending my exhales only to get a startled response from the nurse that my blood pressure was surprisingly low. I mentioned to her that I was purposefully lowering my heart rate and when I stopped the exercise, my vitals returned to normal.

The only other influential breathing activity I’d experienced was to coordinate my breathing with my bowing while playing the viola. The general rule was to exhale before starting to play, preferably beginning during the exhale. A different teacher instructed students to inhale on the up bows and exhale on the down bows. The later was a lot to think about and other than insuring that I wasn’t holding my breath I didn’t find the practice particularly helpful. The former often only had an influence on the first few notes or phrase and the results were mixed.

Spending three years “doing nothing” on an Alexander Technique training course made me question the value of breathing exercises. For a long period I poo-pooed them as a whole and thought less of anyone who indulged in them other than variations of the whispered “ah.” I took yoga classes and refused to participate in “yoga breathing.” I saw that the yogis as well as my classmates who had done various breathing and speaking training had a tendency to violently suck in air or gasp for breath when they would demonstrate speaking or breathing the “correct” way. These experiences reinforced my belief that learning “how” to breathe was not really possible. It dawned on me that the thing to “do” was to look at how not to breathe and subsequently how to stop doing those things.

Breathing is governed by the autonomic nervous system. We don’t need to consciously tell our bodies to breathe; which is a damn good thing because when we are asleep, unconscious, or extremely focused on a task we still need oxygen. It can even be annoying to be conscious of breathing. Some cousins of mine use to play a malicious game where they would say, “You are now breathing consciously” and sure enough, it worked. The difficulty in being conscious of the breath’s comings and goings is getting out of the way.

“How do you get out of the way?” you might ask. Some examples of ways we interfere with breathing are: Holding/bracing in the ribs, breathing in when we haven’t fully expelled the stale air, pulling our head & limbs into the breathing container (torso), shortening and contorting our spines (therefore limiting the range of motion in the rib’s facet joints), tightening the jaw and/or facial muscles, sucking in air with the nostrils, “belly breathing,” “chest breathing,” “breathing with the diaphragm” (you can’t directly control your diaphragm so I’m not sure what people are doing when they say this), or pretty much any idea about breathing with a specific part. If we can not do all of that, we are in pretty good shape.

Recently a good friend of mine showed me some breathing exercises designed to improve energy flow through the body. I was skeptical as usual. When he demonstrated, I was horrified by the tension and misuse through-out his body and I was ready to throw away the procedure as another tension creator. I started in on him with a lecture about how useless and harmful what he was doing was. Instead of agreeing, he really let me have it and insisted I try the exercise. I only humored him because I valued his friendship and respected his knowledge and intelligence in other fields tremendously. I figured I would give it a try but with the prerequisite being that I would prioritize my use over getting the exercise “right.” What I found rocked my beliefs around breathing and vocal exercises to the core.

It wasn’t that this particular procedure was the most profound thing I had encountered, instead I realized that just because I was observing misuse is people doing breathing and vocal exercises didn’t mean that the exercises themselves were of no value. I remembered a quote that had bounced around the training course that went something like, “speaking is an athletic activity;” the only difference from what we traditionally view as athletic being the use of different muscle groups, similar to viola playing. When I thought of breathing/vocal exercises as specific activities, not something that I needed to be doing in relation to “normal” breathing I no longer had the associated stigma that I was doing something “wrong.”

I now can see the value of breathing and vocal exercises. The value is similar to that of push-ups or head-stands in that they are challenges to the system. However, there is a real danger of damaging the system if how you are using the vocal mechanisms isn’t your top priority and/or you try to make these exercises your normal. I liken yoga breathing to singing an aria. The major difficulty not being doing the activity itself, but doing the activity and not interfering in any of the ways I mentioned above while doing the activity.

I much prefer being able to isolate breathing and speaking exercises from
normal use as I no longer feel like I need to abstain from such acts. This personal break-through did not weaken my resolve for non-doing, if anything it reinforced my belief that the Alexander technique is a prerequisite to adequately/fully enjoy the benefits of almost any specific activity. The more global awareness I can bring to an activity while striving for minimal physical effort has proven time and time again to enhance everything I do.

I suppose the next step for me is inhibiting the desire to be right to the point that if I see someone doing an activity with misuse: A) not to judge them for doing something “wrong” and B) not to associate the wrongness with them or the activity itself. We humans are capable of doing all kinds of amazing things. My wish is that we can just be a bit more mindful while doing them!

Instructions for the whispered “Ah”

Allow the tongue to rest behind the lower teeth. When you find yourself on an exhale whisper out the vowel “ah” like in the word “father.” Don’t try to extend your exhale by pushing for more than is there. At the end of the exhale close your mouth and let the breath come in through the nostrils without sniffing or sucking in the air. Let the inhale be as reflexive as possible (wait for it). There’s no need to try and tank up on the inhale, let whatever wants to come in come. As you start another round of the activity, think of something funny to bring a smile behind your eyes. Allow the muscles in the cheeks and forehead to relax as you whisper out another “ah.” Continue with this process with an intent for the back of your skull to move away from your upper back. After about 10 cycles, let yourself go back to normal breathing.

The same thing can be done with vocalizing or whispered/voiced counting in sets of 5-10. Try this lying on the floor, sitting, and in upright. Add in the Alexander directions periodically.

Traveling from A to B

bridgeWhen I was a child, I played in the community orchestra in Panama City, FL- The Orchestra of St. Andrew’s Bay. The conductor of the orchestra, Rusty Garner, would occasionally pass down a practice tip as the orchestra was full of local amateurs and children who needed help with the challenging standard repertoire we would regularly perform. One of the things he said stuck with me at the time and little did I know, I’d still be exploring the meaning of what he said to this day.

Rusty had learned this trick while studying bassoon performance at the New England Conservatory and I have never heard it put quite so simply. He asserted that if you are ever having trouble with a difficult musical passage, you can be sure of one thing: The problem(s) lay between the notes. 

In other words: hitting the notes (at the right time, in-tune, appropriate volume, color, articulation, etc.) was not the issue so much as the process of getting there.

Contrast this to many musician’s conception of practicing; the practice of “hitting (or arriving at) the notes.” We tend to trust that our bodies will be able to sort out the rest and if anything goes wrong the answer is to try harder and play the passage or specific note in question over and over again.

The truth is that when we play a note late or out of tune, it’s not because we have bad technique or a bad ear- it’s because we haven’t properly conceptualized and embodied how to get from point A to point B (musically, psycho-physically, & emotionally).

Let’s call getting from note A to note B a “movement phrase.” Then to go from note B to note C is another movement phrase. If note B is a  sour note, there is no need to practice picking B out of the air or going from B to C, as the first problem in need of attention lies between A and B.

At this point, be curious about the process of getting from A to B. How far is it from A to B? Get use to the feeling of moving between the two without being afraid of missing your target. It’s perfectly fine (and probably necessary) to be wrong at this stage. Decide if you want to show the distance (slide) or hide it. Even if you want to hide a shift, don’t jerk your hand from one point to another- let your fingertips lead the whole arm into the movement and enjoy the journey rather than trying to get it overwith as soon as possible.

Just like musical phrases, movement phrases can be very long and complicated; but also can be broken down until you’ve reached the most basic point A to point B and then put back together again. In this way, we can take the most difficult and complicated musical passages and make them as simple as getting from A to B.

Turning a bad situation into a growth opportunity

Calvin-hobbes-32-uppwyd2ye8-1024x768In life we are often presented with situations that are less than ideal. Whether they be work related, interpersonal, or even habits of body and mind, the default response to these difficult circumstances is to “fix” them or to avoid them if at all possible.

It should be fairly obvious that avoiding the situation can not result in personal growth or a change in the situation (unless by accident- which happens rarely). Things may change over time seemingly by themselves, although in reality other factors apart from you are affecting the potential for change. This route leaves the outcome of the situation completely to chance. Depending on the situation, this can work out well or be disastrous (or somewhere in between).

If we attempt to fix the situation by doing something about it directly a few things can happen. Examining the word “fix” provides some insight into this process, so let’s take a look at some possible definitions of the word and how they apply to this idea.

1)To put into a stable or unalterable form.
If we take a bad situation and try to fix it directly, we often end up solidifying the situation; making it more difficult or impossible to change. This is because every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If you push on something, it will push back, unless it’s already moving in that direction.

In example: If you need someone to do something they don’t want to do, telling them to do it will likely result in the person digging in their heels; making the goal of getting them to do whatever is required more difficult or just plain impossible. If you force the action/change there will be collateral damage because you are breaking/deforming the structure holding the situation together. In this example you can destroy the relationship between you and the person you’d like to do something.

2)To correct or set right
This at first glance this would appear to be a good thing to do. You see a problem and correct it; no more problem right? Unfortunately it is never this simple. When you change something within a system of balance (we all live in many systems of balance) you are affecting the entire system, not just the thing you changed. Therefore, when you fix one problem in a system another inevitably arises as the problem you fixed was balanced with something else. You can’t remove something without replacing it with something else. Our tendency to repeatedly fall into this trap is exacerbated by two things: faulty perception of what the real problem is, and our next definition of fixing:

3)To direct one’s efforts or attention; concentrate
This definition would again seem to be a good on the surface, however, how we go about directing our attention (concentrating) often leads to too narrow a view, not allowing us to see the entire system we are affecting. We then start fixing problems only to move on to the next problem that we faultily perceive to be independent of the last one. We then feel like we’ve accomplished something by fixing many little things but in reality we haven’t done much of anything (except maybe destabilizing the system) if we don’t account for their relation to the whole. I have to continually remind myself of this in working with the Alexander Technique, as it’s completely unhelpful to lengthen one part of the body at the expense of another- something which is almost guaranteed to happen if I do not keep the whole person in front of me in my awareness.

How can I improve/resolve a bad situation if I can’t fix it without collateral damage?

The first step is to turn our attention inward. How can we create the conditions for a change to be possible? The current state of balance (conditions) in the system we are looking at does not allow for the change we perceive is necessary. Be curious about what’s going on in the system. It’s helpful to refrain from thinking about things in terms of good/bad, right/wrong, specific problems/solutions as these types of thinking narrow our focus. If you do narrow in on a “problem” take a wider view of the area surrounding the problem and rather than directly fixing it, ask, “What can I do in myself to encourage the problem to change?”

If someone has a habit of verbally attacking you, you may be tempted to give them a taste of their own medicine or teach them a lesson. This will only result in them digging their heels in or, if enough pressure is applied, they will break and there will be collateral damage- which isn’t of much value either. Ask yourself, “What is their intention? Why might they be treating me this way? What could I have done to cause them to react this way? What do I know about this habit? What can I do to meet their needs without causing a negative reaction? What is likely to happen if I proceed with my planned action?” (This requires taking time before acting and the result is often different than what we expect.) “How can I learn from this?”

In short, don’t jump to fix a problem; open yourself to the possible solutions to make room for a change. This ensures personal growth, regardless of the outcome in the specific situation (and it’s usually the best way to improve a bad situation anyways).

10 Things I need to be reminded of from time to time

1) When I see a wound, not to go sticking my finger in it right away. Give it time to heal before taking off the scab.

2) I’m not special, a genius, or gifted with any supernatural powers and there’s no point in wasting time pretending I am.

3) Spend more time working than complaining, criticizing, and condemning.

4) Instead of going through the motions, it’s better to do nothing if I’m going to be unproductive and save my energy for the real work.

5) Stop relying on outside factors for motivation.

6) Treat people with the respect I would like to receive.

7) I don’t have to react with the same intensity/sentiment that I meet/come up against.

8) Take more time to figure out the process before trying to achieve my goal.

9) Learn from the past, plan for the future, but live in the present.

10) Don’t worry about where I am in relation to others, it’s a waste of time and energy.

Perception & Reality: A two-way street

perception-vs-reality “I believe everything, and I believe nothing” – F.M. Alexander

Many of us don’t make a distinction between our perception of the world around us and reality. We assume that what we see is what is there. That is, until someone or something comes along and makes us realize that what we had held as true is actually false.

When I was a child, I once saw Santa’s back one early Christmas morning as he was making his exit out the front door of my family’s Florida apartment (we had no chimney). I went chasing after him but when I looked outside the apartment he wasn’t there. Magic, I thought. All the proof I needed was the load of presents that had appeared under the tree.

Of course my parents had supplied the presents during the night, but I believed in Santa Claus so he was real to me. So real in fact, that I perceived him in my presence with my own eyes. The same thing happens with our perception of ourselves. If I believe that I have bad posture, for example, I will see just that when I look in the mirror – no matter what shape I take.

For years I was a very reactive, angry person. Even after years of Alexander work had changed my state of reactivity immensely, I still believed (and subsequently perceived that) I was very reactive. It was not until someone told me that the sound of my voice was calming and complimented me for having great patience that I began to change my view. I thought she was joking at first because I had always thought of my voice as an agitated extension of my inner state and I certainly had little patience.

While this insight did not completely change my views in an instant or keep me from continuing to work with my reactivity, it poked a large hole in the dam that was my belief system at the time. Before I perceived the change, it wasn’t real (embodied) to me. I then noticed that the more my beliefs about who I was changed, the more I perceived change, and the more easily I actually changed. Who I wanted to be was no longer fighting against who I thought I was.

It is very important to remember that how we see the world has less to do with what is actually there than what we have decided is there. The brain receives some information through the sensory mechanisms, but then must fill in the blanks. This is where our belief systems come into play. If we are Theistic, for example, we will see things through that framework and that is real to us. When hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans many believed it was an act of god to cleanse the evil that resided there. Whether you believe this — or that the hurricane was caused by a tropical depression — doesn’t matter because either will be real to you if you believe them. They can co-exist.

What Alexander discovered was that poor use of the body was causing what he called “faulty sensory awareness” and “debauched kinestesia.” In other words the information received by his brain from his sensory mechanisms was being disrupted by excess muscle tension and misalignment; causing his perception of what was happening and what he was doing to be inaccurate. The Alexander Technique improves your awareness of reality by removing the blockages of information between brain and sensory organs. In addition, the AT indirectly allows us to observe without judgment, letting our habitual belief system take a vacation by taking us out of our habitual state of being. Without the later step, there is no room for change. F.M. once said that “Belief is a matter of customary muscle tension.” Similar to what Wilhelm Reich called “character armoring”, our beliefs (another habitual response to stimuli) are literally held in the muscle memory. This is why change is a slow process: the mind makes a decision but the body must be taught to work with the new belief system (or lack thereof).

If we are upright and don’t believe we are, it won’t be part of our reality. If we are unaware that we are constantly slumping and in pain, it won’t be part of our reality. Whatever we believe is real to us. To change our reality we must change our beliefs.