400

Tradisjonen tro skriver jeg en oppsummering ved hvert hundrede blogginnlegg. 

Anatomi

Siden sist jeg kommenterte har jeg fullført serien artikler om skjelettet. Den første artikkelen var om skjelettet generelt, deretter skrev jeg om det øverste nakkeleddet og så videre bit for bit gjennom kroppen til hånda som var siste stopp på turen gjennnom beinbygninga. Kjennskap til hvordan kroppen henger sammen er nyttig når du lærer Alexanderteknikken, særlig om hvor leddene er og hvordan de fungerer. 

Men jeg har skrevet om andre ting enn skjelettet også, for eksempel om de dype nakkemusklene og om røde og hvite muskelfibre 

Det er alltid noe nytt å lære om kroppen og det kommer mer, kanskje mer om skjelettet også. Jeg prøver stadig å finne nye måter å beskrive kroppen på som kan ha praktisk nytte. Du finner artiklene under emneknaggen anatomi i listen over «etiketter» (nedenfor «bloggarkiv» til høyre).

Øvelser

Det andre jeg har gjort siden sist er å begynne en serie med tema øvelser. Helst burde jeg kanskje ha kalt det eksperimenter. Dette er eksempler på aktiviteter som kan brukes i alexandertimer og som du kan prøve ut på egenhånd. Det er vanskelig å beskrive slike øvelser på en god måte og vanskelig å utføre dem etter en beskrivelse. Risikoen er stor for misforståelser og risikoen er stor for at leseren sitter igjen med feil inntrykk av hva Alexanderteknikken egentlig er. Jeg er selv ikke sikker på om jeg er fornøyd med artiklene, men håper de kan være til nytte i alle fall for dem som allerede tar eller har tatt timer i teknikken. 

Noen av øvelsene har direkte overføringsverdi til dagligdagse aktiviteter, for eksempel er det en artikkel om å ta i mot vekt og en annen om å støvsuge. Ellers har jeg skrevet om praktiske aktiviteter i blogginnleggene om å lese og å skrive, og i artikkelen om taiji og chi gong. 

Apropos vanskeligheten med å forklare teknikken med ord har jeg skrevet om akkurat det å bruke ord i undervisningen, og det å undervise via Skype, som er noe jeg fikk prøvd ut i fjor. 

Ellers har jeg også skrevet et par innlegg som dreier seg om idrett, nærmere bestemt skøyter og hopp. 

Forskning

Et tema som jeg stadig kommer innom er Alexanderteknikk og forskning. I 2015 ble det publisert en studie om Alexanderteknikk, akupunktur og nakkesmerter, ATLAS-studien som den også ble kalt, Studien viste en viss positiv effekt av alexandertimer, men effekten var mindre enn vi kunne håpe og kan gi grunn til å revurdere hvordan vi møter mennesker med slike problemer. Jeg har også skrevet et par artikler basert på en spørreundersøkelse av Alexanderteknikk-elever i England om hva slags mennesker som tar timer i teknikken, nemlig kvinner  og eldre.

Begynnere og viderekomne

Jeg forsøker å skrive med jevne mellomrom blogginnlegg som kort og enkelt forklarer hva teknikken er, som i Hvafornoe, En enkel forklaring og Hva er Alexanderteknikk; og hva den går ut på, som i Hvordan fungerer Alexanderteknikken.

Jeg håper de som ikke vet noe om Alexanderteknikken kan lese og forstå, men jeg tror at de som har mest nytte av artiklene vil være de som allerede har hatt timer. Jeg har ofte tenkt at jeg skulle hatt flere blogger, en for hver målgruppe. Foreløpig publiserer jeg alt på samme sted. Jeg vurderer for eksempel å lansere en egen blogg på engelsk for Alexanderteknikk-lærere.

Det siste året har jeg skrevet tre artikler spesielt for lærere. De to første, The lost element og An advantageous position, er om øvelser eller prosedyrer knyttet til undervisningstradisjonen. Den tredje artikkelen, A dark chapter er den siste jeg har publisert og handler om at Alexander i alle fall indirekte hevdet å kunne kurere kreft. Alexander ble beskyldt for kvakksalveri. Han saksøkte for ærekrenkelse og vant. Men ser vi nærmere på historien var ikke seieren entydig. På visse områder kan vi slå fast at han kan kalles kvakksalver.

Jeg kommer inn på Alexanderteknikkens historie i flere av de siste hundre blogginnleggene, ofte med en kritisk vinkling. Refleksjon og kritikk er viktig for utviklingen av Alexanderteknikk som fagfelt. Hensikten med denne bloggen er ikke bare å informere elever og andre, for meg handler det også om faglig utvikling, derfor tar jeg gjerne i mot råd og tips. Hva er dine ønsker for de neste hundre blogginnleggene?

Relaterte blogginnlegg: 

300 

200 øl 

Innlegg nr 100

A dark chapter

This blog post is written mainly for Alexander Technique teachers and is a rewritten and expanded version of Et mørkt kapittel (in Norwegian).

The claims to cure cancer and other potentially life threatening diseases reveals the dark side of the alternative health industry. There seems to be an abundance of implausible methods on offer, and there are many examples of how tragically it may end if necessary conventional medical treatment is abandoned. 

We Alexander Technique teachers prefer saying the technique is not a therapy, but still we do put forwards claims of health benefits. For the most part these claims are quite reasonable, but if we go back in time, we do find claims of cure of serious diseases on behalf of the Alexander Technique, even cancer. 

Cancer 

In the preface to his first book, Man's Supreme Inheritance⁽¹⁾, Frederick Matthias Alexander writes:

In the work which will follow I shall deal with the detailed evidence of the application of my theory to life, of cases and cures, and all the substance of experience. And there are many reasons why I should hesitate no longer in making my preliminary appeal, chief among them being the appalling physical deterioration that can be seen by any intelligent observer who will walk the streets of London or New York, for example, and note the form and aspect of the average individuals who make up the crowd. So much for the surface signs. What inferences can we not draw from the statistics? To take three instances only: What of the disproportionate and undeniable increase in the cases of cancer, appendicitis and insanity? For that increase goes on despite the fact that we have taken the subject seriously to heart. (Alexander 1996, p. xx-xxi) ⁽²⁾ 

Alexander continues by criticising the scientific efforts of finding pathogenic causes for cancer, (the success of the HPV-vaccine proves him wrong), and then offers his own solution: 

Therefore I look to that wonderful instrument, the human body, for the true solution of our difficulty, an instrument so inimitably adaptable, so full of marvellous potentialities of resistance and recuperation, that it is able, when properly used, to overcome all the forces of disease which may be arrayed against it. (ibid, xxii) 

It was Alexander's view that if we use our bodies in the best possible way, any disease could be overcome. He does not say so directly, but in the context, we have to assume this also includes cancer.

Faith-healing

In the chapter titled Conscious Control Alexander criticises faith-healing, writing that: ‘Faith-healing is dangerous in its practice and uncertain in its result.’ (ibid, 30). But he is at the same time in accordance with the notion that changing mental habits could have an effect on bodily tissues: 

The ... way in which this act of faith operates is in the breaking down of a whole set of mental habits, and in the substitution for them of a new set. The new habits may or may not be beneficial from the outset apart from the effect produced by the emotional state, which is hardly ever maintained for a long period, but even so the breaking down of the old habits of thought does produce such an effect as will in some cases influence the whole arrangement of the cells forming the tissues, and dissipate a morbid condition such as cancer (ibid). 

Erroneous preconceived ideas 

In the chapter Synopsis of Claim, cancer is again mentioned: 

My next claim is that the limitations and imperfections referred to above, as well as cancer, appendicitis, bronchitis, tuberculosis, etc., are too often permitted to remain uneradicated and frequently undetected, and so to develop in consequence of the failure to recognize that the real cause of the development of such diseases is to be found in the erroneous preconceived ideas of the persons immediately concerned, ideas which affect the organism in the manner described in Part I of this book (ibid p.114). ⁽³⁾

Serious diseases, like cancer and tuberculosis develops, according to Alexander, because of bad habits of thought, ‘erroneous preconceived ideas’. Mental attitude is a factor in any condition, but believing that getting rid of ‘erroneous preconceived ideas’ would mitigate cancer is dangerously naive.

Alexander continues: 

The only experience which the average man or woman has in the use of the different parts of the human organism is through his or her subconsciousness. The result is a subconscious direction which in the imperfectly co-ordinated person is based on bad experiences and on the erroneous preconceived ideas before mentioned. Small wonder, then, that such direction is faulty and leads to the development of serious defects and imperfections (ibid).

‘Erroneous preconceived ideas’ leads to faulty subconscious direction which in turn leads to ‘serious defects and imperfections’, including, we must assume, cancer and tuberculosis. As we shall see later, this subconscious direction must be replaced by a reasoned conscious direction, a vital element in ‘treatment’.

Treatment by re-education

In the chapter ‘Notes and Instances’ Alexander replies to questions from the readers of the first edition of Man's Supreme Inheritance ⁽⁴⁾. One of the questions is: ‘How are the principles of Conscious Control to be applied to the cure of specific bad habits, or to the cure of specific diseases?’ (ibid, 176). 

Again, Alexander writes about what he believes causes the problems: 

In the first place, all specific bad habits, such as overindulgence in food, drink, tobacco, etc., evidence a lack of "control" in a certain direction, and the greater number of specific disorders, such as asthma, tuberculosis, cancer, nervous complaints, etc., indicate interference with the normal conditions of the body, lack of control, and imperfect working of the human mechanisms, with displacement of the different parts of that mechanism, loss of vitality and its inevitable concomitant, lower activity of functioning in all the vital organs. When the subject has arrived at this condition, harmful habits become established, and the standard of resistance to disease is seriously lowered’ (ibid, 177). 

According to Alexander, ‘re-education’ (Alexander Technique) was a necessary part of the ‘treatment’: 

To regain normal health and power in such cases, what I have called "reeducation" is absolutely imperative. This treatment begins, in practically all cases, by instructions in the primary factors connected with the eradication of erroneous preconceived ideas connected with bad habits, and the simplest correct mental and physical co-ordination. The displaced parts of the body must be restored to their proper positions by re-education in a correct and controlled use of the muscular mechanisms. In this process the blood is purified, the circulation is gradually improved, and all the injurious accumulations are removed by the internal massage which is part and parcel of the increased vital activity from such re-education (ibid). 

The habits causing the unhealthy condition can only be changed through conscious control: 

Thus the first stage in the eradication of bad habits and disorders is reached when improved conditions of health are established. Nor must it be forgotten that in this process of re-education a great object lesson is given to the controlling mind. In the very breaking up of maleficent co-ordinations or vicious circles which have become established, a new impulse is given to certain intellectual functions which have been thrown out of play. The reflex action which is setting up morbid conditions can only be controlled and altered by a deliberate realization of the guiding process which is to be substituted, and these new impulses to the conscious mind have, analogically, very much the same effect as is produced on the body by the internal massage referred to above. The old accumulations of subconscious thought are dispersed, and room is made for new conceptions and realizations (ibid).

It almost seems as if Alexander believes that the ‘faulty’ subconscious directions in themselves constitutes ‘injurious accumulations’, and that the new conscious direction likewise have healing properties. The idea that diseases are caused by accumulation of toxic substances is an old one, which is still very much alive in the alternative health industry. ⁽⁵⁾ 

Judgement 

In 1944 the periodical Manpower published an editorial strongly criticising Alexander and his work. The title was Quackery versus Physical Education. Manpower was the periodical of the South African ‘National Advisory Council for Physical Education’, and the article was written by its editor, Dr. Ernst Jokl. ⁽⁶⁾ 

Alexander, seeing his work threatened, sued for libel. After a lengthy process in the South African judiciary system Alexander won the case and received damages of £1000. In the years after, Alexander Technique teachers have seen this case as proof that Alexander's theories and method were sound and not quackery. They are not entirely correct. ⁽⁷⁾

Judge Clayden says in his judgement: 

In the passage at p. 110 [in MSI] the claim is, I consider, made that cancer, appendicitis, bronchitis and tuberculosis can be prevented. 

And further on: 

As far as cancer is concerned he says in MSI, p. 28, that the teaching ‘will in some cases influence the whole arrangement of the cells forming the tissues, and dissipate a morbid condition such as cancer,’ and at p. 173 he speaks of the cause of cancer, among other diseases, and says, ‘To regain normal health and power in such cases, what I have called “re-education” is absolutely imperative’. Both these passages are referred to in the index under ‘cancer’. There can, I think, be no other reading of these passages than that a claim to cure cancer in certain cases is made. 

And referring to the evidence from the Jokl's defence: 

Now, accepting as I do, that Mr Alexander has no cure for cancer, or for appendicitis in the middle stage, yet claims to cure these diseases, it seems to me that much of this evidence is unanswerable in its force. 

In his judgement, Judge Clayden gave a fair description of the Alexander Technique but his conclusion was: 

The conclusion to which I come is that the defendants have shown that Mr Alexander is a quack in the sense that he makes ignorant pretence to medical skill; they have shown that many of the physiological reasons put forward are wrong; they have shown that in its claims to cure the system constitutes dangerous quackery; but in these matters they misrepresented the views of Mr Alexander and in showing how foolish were these views, which he did not put forward, they have in the article called him much more of a quack than they were entitled to do. In addition they have failed in my view to prove that the system cannot bring about the results which it does claim in the improvement of health and the prevention of disease, and again they have made matters worse by overstating the claims made for the system (Alexander vs. Jokl And Others). ⁽⁸⁾

Alexander won the case, not because he wasn't a quack, but because he was less of a quack than he was accused of being. 

Related articles 
Et mørkt kapittel (in Norwegian)

Wishful thinking 

Habitual reactions 
Research on health benefits

Notes 

(1) Man's Supreme Inheritance is actually a collection of texts written over the span of several years. The first part was published as Man's Supreme Inheritance in 1910. In 1911 an Addenda was published. In 1918 the book was re-published and extended to include Conscious Control (1912) and The Theory and Practice of a A New Method of Respiratory Re-education (1907) which constitute the second and third parts of the book respectively. 

(2) It is a well established fact that Alexander made use of a ‘ghost writer’ for his first book, the author J.D. Beresford. The collaboration was terminated early in the process, but it is assumed that parts of the preface here quoted, and the two first chapters are formulated by Beresford. But we still must hold Alexander responsible for the content and its meaning.

It is interesting that the Wikipedia article on Beresford has this comment mentioning several of his novels: ‘He has used his novelist's skill to convince the sensitive reader that the age of miracles is not over, and that, in certain circumstances, the spirit may exercise what seem to us miraculous powers over the substance of the body. This he did in 'The Camberwell Miracle' and 'Peckover'; and in this absorbing novel, he returns to the theme, with the study of a man fitting himself to become a great healer.’ Was Beresford in some way inspired by Alexander? Or did the just happen to share some of the same ideas?

(3) In this quote Alexander mentions tuberculosis. In 1903 Alexander wrote a pamphlet titled The Prevention and Cure of Consumption (Alexander 1995) in which he envisages a role for his technique in the fight against the disease. With today's knowledge this does not seem very realistic. The subject of Alexander and tuberculosis deserves a separate article 

(4) The chapter ‘Notes and instances’ constitutes Addenda to Man's Supreme Inheritance, written 1911. 

(5) We may be amused by Alexander's outdated views on the cause of disease and proposal for treatment, but he was not alone. When Alexander arrived in London in 1904 he brought with him introductory letters to several leading medical men, among them was Dr. Robert Henry Scanes-Spicer. Spicer was a leading throat specialist who had already written about negative effects of mouth breathing. This could be the reason the got on very well from the start. Both Spicer and his family became pupils of Alexander. In 1909 Spicer presented a talk at a meeting of the British Medical Association titled 'Cancers of the Throat'. He says: ‘To my mind cancer is a biological syndrome or symptom complex which may be caused ..., by intrinsically arising mechanical forces, which are excessive in degree when the muscular mechanisms of the body, and especially those of equilibrium and respiration, are chronically used other than to maximum or, at least, very high efficiency. In such cases the increased irritation and undue stimulation of cell growth, the power expended unproductively being transformed into the energy of cell-growth and multiplication. This is the local irritation factor. This alone is not cancer. Now the very same low efficiency use of the muscular mechanisms (especially those of equilibrium and respiration) which have caused local irritation (much power lost and wasted in doing internal work), also result in impaired oxygenation and purification of the blood, defective aspiration and compression of the blood out of the portal area, and a general state of splanchnic stagnation, intestinal texaemia, and non-elaboration of essential internal secretions, alexins, opsonins and ferments. ... When both [factors] are at work each process reacts on and intensifies the other. Each manufactures its own poisons in ever-increasing bulk, and so the biological syndrome advances to the fatal end. Such is the view of the nature and origin of cancer that I have been led to form. I believe this is new.’ (Spicer 1909, p.1151). 

Spicer presented his theory on several occasions, without referring to Alexander who, at least in part and most probably, was the inspiration for his theory. Alexander published articles criticising Spicer and indirectly accused him of plagiarism (Alexander 1995). The story about Alexander and Spicer is an interesting one and possibly the subject of another article. 

(6) Ernst Jokl (1907-1997) was a German born doctor and Director of physical education in South Africa. In 1942 he received a demonstration of the Alexander Technique from one of Alexander's assistants, Irene Tasker, who had moved to South Africa in 1935. But she refused to give him lessons, possibly because she felt he did not have the right frame of mind (Bloch 2004, p. 198). She advised him instead to contact Alexander himself in London, not very realistic during the height of war. Maybe the story had been different if Jokl had had lessons instead on having to rely only on Alexander's books? 

Jokl has a bad reputation in the Alexander Technique world, but he seems to have been a man of both competence and integrity: Dr. Ernst F. Jokl, a Pioneer In Sports Medicine, Dies at 90

 (7) Wilfred Barlow and Frank Pierce Jones in their books More Talk of Alexander and Freedom to Change edits their quotations from the judgement quite heavy-handedly, leaving out anything that could put Alexander or the Alexander Technique in a bad light, in particular the word ‘quackery’. See Barlow (2005, p. 325) and Frank Pierce Jones (1996 p. 92). Barlow in particular does this without revealing that the text has been edited. This is morally questionable. The result is that the fact that the judgement was not entirely in Alexander's favour is unknown to most Alexander Technique teachers

(8) Jokl's article was written in a scornful tone and ends derisively: ‘It seems indeed appropriate that Mr Alexander's concepts, although alleged by its founder to apply to normal human beings, are in reality based upon experimental evidence obtained from decerebrate preparations’. (Decerebrate preparations = vivisection animals who have had parts of the brain removed). But it seems that Alexander won the case mainly because Jokl overstated his claims about the technique. The judgement says: ‘To be effective, the justification must be as broad as the libel. In the present case, defendants had said that there was quackery in the field of physical education, and dishonest quackery in the field of medicine, both in claims to cure and in claims to prevent disease and improve health. They had proved only quackery and dishonest quackery, in the sense that quackery is always dishonest, in the claims to cure. Even in that regard they had made the quackery appear to be worse than it was and they had alleged dishonesty to a greater degree than would be implicit in the quackery itself. The justification was not, in these circumstances, as broad as the libel’ (Alexander versus Jokl and Others).

Literature: 

Alexander. FM. 1995. Articles and Lectures. Mouritz. 

Alexander, FM. 1996 (1918). Man's Supreme Inheritance. Mouritz. 

Barlow, Wilfred (ed.). 2005. More Talk of Alexander. Mouritz (2.ed). 

Bloch, Michael. 2004. F.M. The Life of Frederick Mathias Alexander. Little, Brown. 

Jokl, Ernst. (1944). Quackery versus Physical Education. (Editorial) Manpower (Volkskragte), vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1-26. 

Jones, Frank P. 1996. Freedom to Change. Mouritz.

Spicer, R. H. 1909. Cancers of the Throat: some remarks on their sites of origin, pathogeny, early diagnosis, and radical cure. British Medical Journal 1909 Oct 16; 2(2546): 1149-1152. 

Supreme Court of South Africa (Witwatersrand Local Division). Frederick Matthias Alexander versus Ernst Jokl, Eustace H. Cluve, Bernard M. Clarke. 19th February, 1948. 

Indirekte kontroll

I forrige blogginnlegg skrev jeg om da Alexander saksøkte en lege som hadde kommet med saftig kritikk mot ham i en artikkel. Alexander vant saken og ble tilkjent erstatning. Legen, dr. Ernst Jokl, hadde rett i at Alexander på visse områder kunne kalles en kvakksalver, men Jokl hadde ikke satt seg godt nok inn i hva Alexanderteknikken gikk ut på og kom med påstander om teknikken som ikke var riktige. Om det han kaller «Alexander's mysterious consious control cult» skrev han: 

An Australian actor named Alexander has written four books in which he advertises a system of postural gymnastics of his own design. He believes that by devoting attention to the position of the head in relation to the cervical spine he can enable his pupils not only ‘to control consciously’ all their voluntary movements, but also the activities of their internal organs. (Jokl 1944)

Alexander påstod aldri at han kunne kontrollere indre organer. Han skrev tvert imot i en av sine bøker at det ville vært farlig:

So many people, I find, seem to regard the principles of conscious control as a kind of magic which may be worked by some suitable incantation. They appear to think that we may obtain conscious control of, say, the secretive glands, that we may be able to give an order to secrete more or less bile or gastric juice by a command of the objective mind. If such a thing were possible, and if I could endow any person with such power to-morrow, I should know perfectly well that I should, by so doing, be signing that person's death warrant; I might equally well give him a dose of poison (Alexander 1996, s 178).

Dr. Jokl hadde fått med seg at «conscious control» var tingen, men hadde ikke forstått hva Alexander mente. Alexander skriver videre i sin bok: 

To refer to my metaphor of the sovereign ruler, you might as well expect a king to order and superintend the detail of his subjects' private life as expect the conscious mind directly to order and. superintend every function of the body. If the king will ordain good and just laws, his policy will prosper; the detail of organization must be left to inferior officers. In the care of the body the organization is there, aptly and perfectly adjusted to its functions, and when the ruling power of conscious control has ordained the sane laws which shall establish peace and prosperity within the assembly, the organization already in force will work in harmony to its fit and proper ends (ibid).

På samme måte er kontroll i Alexanderteknikken alltid indirekte. Vi kontrollere ikke spesifikke bevegelser, men forutsetningen for bevegelse, først og fremst organiseringen i forhold til tyngdekraften. 

Negativ kontrol 

Et eksempel på slik indirekte kontroll kan ses i en vitenskapelig studie jeg omtalte kort i et tidligere blogginnlegg. Studien ble utført på en gruppe fiolinister som fikk i oppgave å løfte instrumentet og spille. Samtidig kunne de observere aktiviteten i egne nakkemuskler via en skjerm som viste ultralydbilde av nakken. Da musikerne fikk instruks om å minimere muskelaktivitet i nakken hadde dette positiv effekt på bevegelsene generelt i form av reduksjon av unødvendige bevegelser og reduksjon i muskelspenning. I studien beskrives dette som: «Proactive-selective inhibition targeted at the neck muscles reduces the global cost of movement» (Loram et al 2017).

Kontroll i Alexanderteknikken går blant annet ut på å kunne inhibere (stoppe) unønskede reaksjoner som ellers ville kunne forstyrre optimal funksjon, ikke minst stoppe uønsket spenning i nakken.

Primary control

Forholdet mellom hodet, nakken og ryggen spiller en viktig rolle i Alexanderteknikken. Alexander kalte dette forholdet for «the primary control». (Han kom med ulike definisjoner av «primary control» men dette er den enkleste og greieste). Den nevnte studien kan tyde på at hypotesen om en «primær kontroll» stemmer. Men samtidig er studien ikke noe endelig bevis for at dette forholdet er «primært». Det kan jo tenkes at forsøkspersonene hadde oppnådd lignende generell effektivisering av bevegelse gjennom for eksempel å unngå spenninger i føtter, ankler eller legger.

Vi kan si at «primary control» i alle fall til en viss grad er en fysiologisk mekanisme, en mekanisme vi drar praktisk nytte av i Alexanderteknikken. Men Alexander brukte ordet kontroll også på et mer overordnet plan. 

Midler og mål 

Alexander sa at «Control should be in the process, not superimposed» (Alexander 2000, s.75). Vi har kontroll i prosessen når vi fokuserer på «arbeidsoppgavene» for å nå målet, «the means-whereby» som Alexander kalte det (Alexander 2000b, s.11). Hvis du for eksempel skulle lære deg å spille et vanskelig stykke på piano vil det lønne seg å mestre elementer som grunnleggende spilleteknikk, skala og akkorder etc., og å ha en god klanglig forestilling om hvordan stykket skal låte. Ved å fokusere på midlene, på den stegvise prosessen kontrollerer du utfallet eller målet indirekte. 

Gandhi skal ha sagt: «take care of the means, and the ends will take care of themselves», som i prinsippet er det samme. Det motsatte er «end-gaining» - å være så opptatt av å få til noe umiddelbart at ikke nok hensyn blir tatt til midlene. «End-gaining» faller naturlig for oss. Innsats blir høyt verdsatt, og innsats er bra. Men noen ganger er det vi lar være å gjøre noe en nødvendig del av prosessen for å nå et mål. 

A plane to be reached

Alexanders prinsipielt indirekte form for kontroll tror jeg kan være grunnen til at konseptet «kontroll» i Alexanderteknikken ofte blir misforstått. Vi forbinder gjerne kontroll med direkte detaljstyring. Men det er også et problem at Alexander brukte ordet kontroll i så mange ulike sammenhenger. Dr. Ernst Jokl skrev i sin kritikk av Alexander: 

Alexander uses the term ‘control’ so vaguely that he is able to make an almost unlimited variety of claims as to the alleged efficacy of his ‘method.’ (Jokl 1944).

For eksempel skriver Alexander dette i to av sine bøker:

In this connexion I wish it to be understood that throughout this book I use the term conscious guidance and control to indicate, primarily, a plane to be reached rather than a method of reaching it. (Alexander 2000b, s. 8, Alexander 2004, s, 12)

Hva mente han egentlig med det? Det er jammen ikke godt å si. Kanskje visste han det ikke selv heller. Jeg har noen forslag, men det skal jeg ta en annen gang. 

Relaterte blogginnlegg 

Et mørkt kapittel 

Kontroll

Mirakelmekanismen 

Litteratur

Alexander, F.M. 1996 (1918). Man's Supreme Inheritance. Mouritz. 

Alexander, F.M. 2000a. Aphorisms. Mouritz. 

Alexander, F.M. 2000b. The Universal Constant in Living. Mouritz

Alexander, F.M. 2004. Consctructive Conscious Control of the Individal. Mouritz 

Jokl, Ernst. (1944). Quackery versus Physical Education. (Editorial) Manpower (Volkskragte), vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–26. 

Loram et al. (2017). Proactive Selective Inhibition Targeted at the Neck Muscles: This Proximal Constraint Facilitates Learning and Regulates Global Control. EEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering Vol. 25, Issue: 4, April 2017. Page(s): 357 – 369.