The Primary Movement

What is ‘the primary movement’?

If you are an Alexander Technique teacher you probably know, or at least think you do. It is quite possible you have got it wrong.

A precursor

Alexander writes about the primary movement in his 1907 article ‘The Theory and Practice of a New Method of Respiratory Re-Education.’(1)The article was later incorporated with only minor changes in the 1918 edition of Man's Supreme Inheritance and forms the third and last section of that book.

In a note to the text Sean Fischer writes:

“True primary movement” is the movement which precedes other movements and which therefore provides the controlling factor in influencing subsequent movements. It can be regarded as the precursor of the term “primary control” (Fischer ed. 1995, p.281).(2)

Like many Alexander Technique students I was taught during my teacher training that ‘the primary movement’ was the beginnings of the concept of primary control. I remember believing at the time this movement to be the ‘forward and up’ of the head. In the latest issue of the Alexander Journal, Alexander Technique teacher Malcolm Williamson writes:

Most Alexander practitioners understand the true primary movement as ‘going up’ (lengthening of the spine) … (Williamson, 2021b, p.81).(3)

Williamson also writes:

We shall probably never know for sure exactly to what Alexander was referring when he wrote: ... a proper knowledge and practical employment of the true primary movement in each and every act (ibid).

I think we can find out what Alexander meant, if we study what he wrote.

The Theory And Practice Of A New Method Of Respiratory Re-Education

To understand Alexander's ‘true primary movement’ in his article from 1907, we have to include the sentence preceding the phrase:

At the outset let me point out that respiratory education or respiratory re-education will not prove successful unless the mind of the pupil is thoroughly imbued with the true principles which apply to atmospheric pressure, the equilibrium of the body, the centre of gravity, and to positions of mechanical advantage where the alternate expansions and contractions of the thorax are concerned. In other words, it is essential to have a proper mental attitude towards respiratory education or re-education, and the specific acts which constitute the exercises embodied in it, together with a proper knowledge and practical employment of the true primary movement in each and every act (Alexander 1996, p.200; Fischer ed. 1995, p.57; Fischer ed. 2022, p.95).

‘In other words’ points back at the preceding sentence. This means that the last part of the first sentence corresponds with the last part of the second sentence. The ‘true primary movement in each and every act’ has to do with ‘the alternate expansions and contractions of the thorax.’(4)

This is the most obvious and simplest interpretation. That this is the correct one becomes evident if we study the rest of the article. Alexander uses the expression primary movement not once, but three times in the same article(5), and twice directly related to breathing!:

Most people, if asked to take a "deep breath," will proceed to—I use the words spoken by thousands of people I have experimented upon—" suck air into the lungs to expand the chest," whereas of course the proper expansion of the chest, as a primary movement, causes the alae nasi to be dilated and the lungs to be instantly filled with air by atmospheric pressure, without any harmful lowering of the pressure (Alexander 1996, p.200-201; Fischer ed. 1995, p.58; Fischer ed. 2022, p.96 ).

Then follows due increase in the movements of expansion and contraction of the thorax until such movements are adequate and perfectly controlled. Further, these expansions are primary movements in securing that increase in the capacity of the chest necessary to afford the normal oscillations of atmospheric pressure, without unduly lowering that pressure … (Alexander 1996, p.208; Fischer ed. 1995, p.64; Fischer ed. 2022, p.102).

The above quotations should be sufficient for anyone to conclude that what Alexander was referring to when writing about the ‘true primary movement’ was not the head going forward and up, or lengthening, but the expansions and contractions of the thorax.(6)

Each and every act

Teachers claiming the primary movement to be a precursor for the primary control argues that ‘each and every act’ must mean ‘each and every act in life,’ not ‘each and every act of breathing.’ Which is it? Let's have a look at what Alexander actually says in the text.

Alexander uses the word ‘act’ multiple times in the 1907 article. The word are most times used related to breathing. More specifically he uses the expressions ‘act of breathing’ (Fischer ed. 1995 p.56; Fischer ed. 2022, p.94; Alexander 1996, p.196, p.199) and ‘the inspiratory act’ (Fischer ed. 1995, p.64; Fischer ed. 2022, p.102; Alexander 1996, p.207). But most importantly he uses the phrase ‘each and every respiratory act’:

… a proper mental attitude towards respiration is at once inculcated, so that each and every respiratory act in the practice of the exercises is the direct result of volition, the primary, secondary, and other movements necessary to the proper performance of such act having first been definitely indicated to the pupil (Fischer ed. 1995, p.63; Fischer ed. 2022, p.101; Alexander 1996, p.206).

When Alexander writes ‘the true primary movement in each and every act’ he means the true primary movement in each and every act of breathing, in other words, the movement of the thorax in every breath.(7)

Authorised Summaries Of F.M. Alexander’s Four Books

The above arguments are based on the original article published in Articles and Lectures (Fischer ed. 1995; Fischer ed. 2022) and Man's Supreme Inheritance (Alexander 1996). But there is a third version of ‘The Theory And Practice Of A New Method Of Respiratory Re-Education,’ the abridged version in Authorised Summaries Of F.M. Alexander’s Four Books by Ron Brown (Brown ed. 1992).

The journalist Ron Brown wrote the summaries in the late 1940s.(8) Alexander read and approved the draft himself, signing each page (Brown ed. 1992, p.9). Considering the importance Alexander put on the primary control at this stage in his career, (Alexander used the term ‘primary control’ more than one hundred times in The Universal Constant in Living), it is interesting to see what the abridged version of the article says about the primary movement(s).

Brown kept this sentence almost unchanged from the original:

At the outset let me point out that respiratory education or re-education, will not prove successful unless the mind of the pupil is imbued with the true principles which apply to atmospheric pressure, the equilibrium of the body, the centre of gravity and to positions of mechanical advantage where the alternate expansions and contractions of the thorax is concerned (Brown ed. 1992, p.31).

But the next sentence, containing ‘the true primary movement in each and every act’ is cut! If ‘the true primary movement’ indeed was the ‘precursor’ and first sign of what was to become ‘the primary control,’ it is very unlikely it would have been omitted.

One of the other passages, saying the primary movement is the proper expansion of the chest, was kept:

Most people, if asked to take a "deep breath," will "suck air into the lungs to expand the chest," whereas, of course, the proper expansion of the chest as a primary movement causes the nostrils to be dilated and the lungs to be instantly filled without any harmful lowering of the pressure in the nasal passages (ibid, p.32). [‘in the nasal passages’ added to the original MSI text].

Primary motive power

Alexander's ‘true primary movement’ is thoracic movement in breathing. Alexander uses closely related descriptions in earlier articles. (The emphasis in the quotations below are mine).

Introduction To A New Method Of Respiratory Vocal Re-Education (1906)

In a future work I hope to deal more fully with the scientific aspect of practical respiratory re-education. At present I simply state the great principle to be antagonistic action, perfect employment of which is the forerunner of that control which ensures the correct use of the muscular system of the thorax in its fullest sense as the primary motive power in the respiratory act, also adequate muscular development, non-interference with the larynx and nasal dilation (Fischer ed. 1995, p.43, Fischer ed. 2022, p.81).

… the student who is taught from the very beginning of his respiratory re-education to convert the air exhaled into whispered tones (consciously employing the true motive power) and the proper vowel or vowels will have learnt what should always be one of the simplest forms of vocal effort … (Fischer ed. 1995, p.47, Fischer ed. 2022, p.85).

.

Mr F. Matthias Alexander's New Method Of Respiratory And Vocal Re-Education (January 1906)

… in re-education there must first be conscious employment of the mechanism governing the respiratory act and the control of the motive power in vocalization; … (Fischer ed. 1995, p.37; Fischer ed. 2022, p.73).

“Disciplinary Singing And Heart Disease” (12 January 1906)

… voice production from the earliest age with proper control of the respiratory mechanism is one of the best possible things, and any one trained to use correctly the true motive power in voice production could not injure the heart and would be in the same position reared in the colonies, where, from early age, they live mostly in the open air and shout and sing from morn till night (Fischer, ed. 1995, p.37; Fischer ed. 2022, p.67).

A Respiratory Method (c. 1905)

The employment of Mr Alexander's method, under medical supervision, has shown that it restores the control over the true thoracic mechanism; … secures the maximum of thoracic mobility ...prevents thoracic rigidity in physical effort … and renders a rigid thorax adequately mobile, … (Fischer, ed. 1995, p.27-28; Fischer ed. 2022, p.61-62).

Such erroneous ideas [about nasal breathing] are cherished by those who conceive them, simply because there is a sad lack of practical knowledge concerning the all-important subject of nasal breathing and the true motive power in respiration. …
Mr Alexander's method secures that absolute control over the thoracic mechanism which enables the student to secure an adequate air supply through the nostrils in physical effort, in singing, speaking, and during sleep, and also in ordinary conversation, and the founder of the method has proved these facts to the satisfaction of many members of the medical profession of London (Fischer, ed. 1995, p.29, Fischer ed. 2022, p.63-64).

The Prevention And Cure Of Consumption (12 December 1903)

Many theories have been advanced in explanation of the cause of causes of the prevalence of the lung disease known as consumption, but there can be no doubt whatever that it is due chiefly to the decay in the breathing power of mankind, … . The decay referred to may be described as an almost complete failure of the thoracic mechanism, which causes the motive power in breath-taking to be thrown almost entirely upon the throat muscles; … (Fischer ed. 1995, p.20; Fischer ed. 2022, p.52).

Such defects [bad habits associated with poor breathing] could not exist if the thoracic mechanism performed the functions ordained by Nature. The motive power for the respiratory act belongs solely to the thorax; and the existence of this natural action ensures that the throat and neck muscles, the larynx and the shoulders remain passive; the breath will pass noiselessly into the lungs, while those passages will be dilated instead of being contracted (Fischer, ed. 1995, p.20; Fischer ed. 2022, p.53).

We see in these quotations from Alexander's early writings the ‘primary motive power’ having a similar function as ‘primary movement,’ He even uses the expression ‘true motive power’ as in ‘true primary movement in each and every act;’(9) and he says explicitly that ‘The motive power for the respiratory act belongs solely to the thorax’.

To a modern Alexander Technique teacher it is striking how great importance Alexander put on the free movement of the thorax. In the early part of his career it was the thorax, or ‘thoracic mechanism’ that was the focal point of his work, not the head-neck-back relationship. It is no wonder he defined thoracic movement as being ‘primary’.(10)

The Lady of the Deep C

Having identified the true meaning of Alexander's ‘true primary movement,’ and looked at the use of similar concepts in Alexander's early writings, we can find even earlier references which can throw light on the matter. Alexander is quoted in a newspaper article published in the Daily Express, October 1904, only months after Alexander arrived in London:

The primary movement of breathing must be thoracic, that is, the thorax or chest-box must be expanded naturally without drawing in any breath by suction. The thorax must be made as mobile as possible. (Daily Express 1904). (See also Staring, 2018, p.109).(11)

Alexander is explicitly clear: in breathing, the ‘primary movement’ is not lengthening, it is the movement of the thorax.

The true precursor(s)

The ‘true primary movement’ is not the precursor to ‘the primary control’. What are the true precursors can be detected in Alexander's early articles.

In his 1906 article he reveals ‘… the great principle to be antagonistic action, perfect employment of which is the forerunner of that control which ensures the correct use of the muscular system of the thorax in its fullest sense …’ (Fischer ed. 1995, p.43; Fischer ed. 2022, p.81). In his 1907 article he mentions ‘positions of mechanical advantage where the alternate expansions and contractions of the thorax are concerned’ (Fischer ed. 1995 p.57; Alexander 1996, p.200; Fischer ed. 2022, p.95).

These concepts are about the relationships of parts, just as the primary control ‘becomes a something in the sphere of relativity’ (Murray 2015 p.124; Vineyard/Fischer eds. 2020, p.404). It is antagonistic action and positions of mechanical advantage that are the organising principles in Alexander's early work.(12)

Even if we give ‘the true primary movement’ the benefit of doubt, (which should be non-existent at this point), and defines it as ‘lengthening,’ it is still not the precursor to the concept of the primary control.(13)

The first movement

‘The primary movement of breathing must be thoracic’, according to Alexander. But what about other activities than breathing?

Alexander's very first mention of primary movement might give a clue. When still in Australia he planned to publish a book. (Breathing, Vocalisation, and Physical Culture) which was never finished (Fischer ed. 2022, p.346). In the prospect for the book he writes about its contents:

Physical Culture and Body Building

3.(A perfect system of physical development, having a correct and natural primary movement for each exercise) (Fischer ed. 2022, p.347)

That this does not relate directly to breathing is borne out of the fact that Alexander's preceding points are ‘1. The Treatment of Disease’ and ‘2. The Cultivation and Development of the Human voice’ (ibid).

What is the 'correct and natural primary movement for each exercise'? If the primary movement was lengthening, then it must have been lengthening also for the act of breathing. But as we already have seen, this is not the case. Which movement, or movements, is Alexander referring to? We get a better understanding by looking at how Alexander uses the phrase later on.

Later movements

We have so far looked at the use of the phrase ‘primary movement’ in Alexander's earliest texts, but he used the phrase also after his 1907 article In Man's Supreme Inheritance (MSI) he writes:

The whole physiology of walking is, indeed, perfectly simple when once these fundamental principles are understood. It is really resolved into the primary movements of allowing the body to incline forward from the ankle on which the weight is supported and then preventing oneself from falling by allowing the weight to be taken in turn by the foot which has been advanced (Alexander 1996 p.172), Alexander 2021, p.235).

The quote is from the chapter Notes and Instances. It appears first in the Addenda to MSI, written 1911 and integrated into the 1918 edition. We see that ‘primary movement’ is used about the initial stages of the process of walking. As in his 1903 book prospect, it is not directly related to breathing. 

The last instance where we find ‘primary movement’ in Alexander's writings is in Constructive Conscious Control (CCC). Here it is used in connection with a ‘technical evolution’. The most well-known example of a technical evolution in Alexander's books is the description of ‘hands on the back of a chair’ which we can find in another chapter of CCC (Alexander 2004, pp.112-122).

Those who are fortunate, or unfortunate, enough to undertake to act as teachers are well aware of the difficulty of finding an adult who can, as we say, think of more than one thing at a time, or perform satisfactorily any evolution requiring the co-ordinated use of even two parts of the organism. Co-ordinated use of the different parts during any evolution calls for the continuous, conscious projection of orders to the different parts involved, the primary order concerned with the guidance and control of the primary part of the act being continued whilst the orders connected with the secondary part of the movement are projected, and so on, however many orders are required (the number of these depending upon the demands of the processes concerned with a particular movement). Ordinarily, in attempts to use two or more parts in remedial work, the primary projection ends with the correct or incorrect use of the parts concerned with the primary movement. This applies to all other projections concerned with other parts of the movement, and is another instance of concentrated effort connected with a procedure based on the " end-gaining" principle. The projection of continued, conscious orders, on the other hand, calls for a broad, reasoning attitude, ... (Alexander 2004, 170-171, my emphasis).

We see that ‘primary movement’ relates to ‘the primary part of the act’ in the preceding sentence. Primary movement does not mean lengthening, It simply means the first part of the movement or activity. This is similar to the quote from MSI describing walking, but this time Alexander is not describing any specific activity. He is writing about ‘technical evolutions’ in general. But the most important difference is that the main point here is giving directions, the ‘projecting of orders’, not the movements themselves. The quote from CCC is from the chapter Concentration and the Sustained (Continuous) Projection of Orders.(14)

The meaning of ‘primary movement’, then, depends on the activity. In breathing, it is thoracic movement, in walking it is allowing the body to incline forwards from the ankles. In other activities it could be a different movement. We can assume that other moments than the ‘correct and natural primary movement’ are unecessary and unwanted and should be inhibited.(15)

Brown revisited

Above I compared Alexander's 1907 text with corresponding passages in the abridged version in Ron Brown's Authorised Summaries. Can we find additional information about the quotes from MSI and CCC by looking at Brown's version?

There us no sign of the description of walking in Brown . This is understandable as the theme in this section of MSI is 'the correct standing position' (Alexander 1996, 168-175, Brown ed. 1992, 27-28). The example of walking is an elaboration on this theme.

Brown's version of the quote from CCC reads:

Teachers are familiar with the adult who says that he cannot think of more than one thing at a time, or perform satisfactorily any evolution requiring the co-ordinated use of even two parts of the organism. Such co-ordinated use calls for the continuous, conscious projection of orders to the different parts involved, the primary order, concerned with the guidance and control of the primary part of the act, being continued while the orders connected with the secondary part are projected. This calls for a broad reasoning attitude ... (Brown ed. 1992, 66).

We see that the ‘primary movement’ is omitted. As mentioned above, the main point in this passage is the projecting if orders. ‘Primary movement’ has no particular meaning beyond what it says. It is the ‘first part of the act’. It does not mean lengthening. This leaves us with only one case of ‘primary movement’ in Authorised Summaries, namely the one where it is explicitly linked with thoracic movement.

Where did it come from

Alexander never linked ‘primary movement’ with ‘lengthening’, ‘head forward and up’, or ‘primary control’, so who did? The source for these misinterpretations is probably Walter Carrington.(16) In Explaining the Alexander Technique he has this exchange with Sean Carey:

SC: So the term 'primary control' is simply a later version of the 'primary movement'? 

WC: Yes, absolutely. … (Carrington/Carey 1992, p. 109).(17)

In two other instances he explains ‘the primary movement’ to be ‘up’. This could be where Williamson's ‘lengthening’ comes from.(18)

[...] since the force of gravity perpetually operates in a downward direction, the primary movement required is a counteractive force in an upwards direction (Carrington 1996, p. 225).(19)

In Man’s Supreme Inheritance, F.M. talks about the primary movement, and the primary movement is, of course, up. I remember so well being struck by it when I first read it. The primary movement is up. You initiate the movement by undoing the catch, by taking the brake off (Carrington 1994, p. 32).

It is a bit strange that Carrington gives two different explanations for ‘primary movement’. If he had asked Alexander himself, he would very likely have stuck to the one explanation he got, and he would very likely have quoted Alexander. He never does. This indicates that these are Walter Carrington's own misinterpretations of Alexander's books. Note that he says: ‘... when I first read it’.

Many Alexander Technique teachers have contributed to spreading misinformation about primary movement being the forerunner to the primary control, or that it means lengthening. I'm afraid I will have to include myself on that list.(20)

These misterpretations have become widely accepted in the Alexander Technique community. How could this happen? We can read, can't we?

How we got here

I believe there are several reasons for the current situation. The Alexander technique is a skill handed down from person to person. We come to rely on tradition, and the teachings of senior teachers. We are not in the habit of questioning these teachings.

Alexander himself is regarded with reverence, in some quarters almost as infallible. Most people today would think of the diaphragm, not the thorax as having the ‘motive power’ in breathing. That Alexander had another view is not even considered.

Senior teachers have admonished us to ‘read the books!’ I have the impression that most teachers don't, and if we do we have great difficulties avoiding reading the text through the lens of a modern understanding of the Alexander Technique. This goes especially for Alexander's early writings.

Last but not the least there has generally been a lack of scientific and critical thinking in the Alexander Technique community. We like to say that the Alexander Technique is scientifically sound, but our thinking and our professional discussions are not.

Conclusions

Alexander's ‘true primary movement’ is thoracic movement in breathing. In other activities, other movements can be regarded as ‘primary’. As far as we know, Alexander never said or wrote that the primary movement was lengthening or the head going forward and up. Neither did he indicate that primary movement was the precursor to primary control. The organising principles in Alexander's early work were ‘antagonistic action’ and ‘positions of mechanical advantage’. ‘Primary movement’ is unlikely to have played a role in the evolution of the concept of ‘primary control’.(21)

Defining ‘lengthening’ as ‘the primary movement’ is logical, and makes sense when explaining the Alexander Technique. But attributing this definition to Alexander is wrong. We Alexander Technique teachers should stop doing that. Unless new evidence occurs we should also refrain from claiming ‘primary movement’ to be the precursor to ‘primary control’.(22)

This article was extended and re-edited in July 2022, and updated 26 July 2024.

With time I have come to disagree with some of my conclusions. My view now is that ‘primary movement’ could be regarded as one of the forerunners (but not “the” precursor) to Primary Control, together with concepts like ‘positions of mechanical advantage’ and ‘antagonistic action’. I tend to agree with Sean Fischer who points out that the primary movement could be seen as having a controlling influence on subsequent movements (Fischer 2022, p.387).

Related blog articles

A Dark Chapter

The Lost Element

An Advantageous Position

The Nobel Disease

Notes

1) The Theory and Practice of a New Method of Respiratory Re-Education was republished in Articles and Lectures (Fischer ed. 1995, p.51; Fischer ed. 2022, p.89).

2) In the third edition of Articles and Lectures, Fischer moderates his comment by introducing a caveat, adding ‘if’ and ‘then’. 

If the "primary movement" is the movement which precedes other movements and which therefore provides the controlling factor in influencing subsequent movements, then it can be regarded as a precursor for the term "primary control" (Fischer 2022, p.387).

3) A few examples of other Alexander teachers who have defined primary movement as ‘lengthening’ or ‘going up,’ or as ‘primary control’ are: Walter Carrington (Carrington 1994, p.32); John Nicholls (Nicholls/Carey 1991, p. 67, p.69; Marjean McKenna (McKenna 2017, p.85); Cris Raff (Raff 2001, p.13); Bob Lada (Lada 2019, p.149).

4) Williamson writes in the Alexander Journal 28 that: ‘Despite a degree of ambiguity, however, the words ‘together with’ most likely indicate that the‘specific acts’ in breathing are to be combined with the ‘true primary movement’’ (Williamson, 2021b. p.81). Williamson disregards the preceding sentence.

He is right that there is a degree of ambiguity. Alexander connects ‘a proper knowledge and practical employment of the true primary movement in each and every act,’ not only to the alternate expansions and contractions of the thorax, but also to the ‘positions of mechanical advantage’ which facilitates the movements. Another potential source for ambiguity is Alexander's use of primary movement in singular. A possible interpretation is that the contraction and expansion of the thorax can be seen as elements of a single cyclic movement. Alexander is not consistent as he uses primary movement in both singular and plural in the article. Another possibility is that only one of these, ‘the proper expansion’, is the ‘true primary movement’ (Alexander 1996, p.200-201; Fischer ed. 1995, p.58; Fischer ed. 2022, p.96 ).

5) Actually four times, if we count the listing of ‘the primary, secondary, and other movements necessary to the proper performance of such act …’ (Fischer 1995, p.63 Alexander 1996, p.206).

6) Based on the quotes from the article it could be argued that Alexander means only one of these to be the true primary movement: the expansion of the thorax.

7) Williamson writes in the Alexander Journal 28 that: ‘Alexander’s meaning at the end of this passage might be considered ambiguous. Does he mean ‘the true primary movement in each and every act [in breathing]’ or the true primary movement in each and every act in general? Wider reading of his books brings us to the conclusion that he most probably means the latter’ (Williamson 2021a, p.12). Williamson gives no references to back his claim.

Jeroen Staring has also misinterprets ‘each and every act’. In an article from 2018 that directly addresses the issue of interpreting ‘the primary movement,’ he has this poetic, but still erroneous paragraph: ‘People breathe in and breathe out during each and every activity, they inhale and exhale since birth and keep on breathing in and out till their final breath. They inhale and exhale while sitting, while sleeping, while walking, while driving a car, while singing, etc., and yes: people even breathe while being in an inverted position or when scuba diving, in other words, they breathe “in each and every act” of life’ (Staring, 2018, p.108).

8) The summaries were meant to be included in a book titled Alexander and the Doctors, detailing the South African libel case that Alexander recently had won. The book was never published. I wonder whether the book was planned in the euphoria after the verdict, but dropped when it was realised it was not entirely positive. The judgment contains for instance this passage: ‘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.’ Supreme Court of South Africa (Witwatersrand Local Division). Frederick Matthias Alexander versus Ernst Jokl, Eustace H. Cluve, Bernard M. Clarke. 19th February 1948, p.31-32.

https://www.mouritz.co.uk/Mouritzpdfs/judgmentalexandervsJokl1948.pdf

9) Fischer in his comment in Articles and Lectures argues that ‘… “true primary movement” is different from “primary movement”: the former denotes the primary control, the movement which precedes other movements irrespective of our attempts to move other parts first; the latter denotes what we “do” first …’ (Fischer (ed) 1995, p.282). I can't find any arguments in favour of this claim in the text. Alexander's use of the word ‘true’ does not seem to imply a change of meaning of the term it precedes. We have for instance no reason to believe that ‘true motive power’ is different from ‘motive power’. [The argument is omitted in the third edition of Articles and Lectures (Fischer 2022, p.386-387)].

10) In the article ‘Theory and Practice of a New Method’ there is this sentence which the head of my teacher training, John Nicholls; often cited: ‘There is such immediate improvement in the pose of the body and poise of the …’. Here John would stop and ask the students for the next word. Invariably the answer would be ‘head,’ while the correct answer is of course ‘chest’ (Fischer 1995, p.64; Alexander 1996, p.207, Fischer ed. 2022, p.102). 

11) The quote seems to contradict one of Staring's main points about Alexander's early work presented in his biography on Alexander (Staring 2005).

12) It is important to note that these principles seem primarily to relate to the functioning of the thorax and the act of breathing. There are indications that the rest of the body was indirectly involved. How and to what degree is an interesting question. Frank Pierce Jones regarded the term  ‘position of mechanical advantage’ as the precursor to primary control:

In The Use of the Self, the term position of mechanical advantage” is replaced by “primary control,” a different concept altogether (Jones 1997, p. 46)

13) Alexander's ‘true primary movement’ is most closely related to ‘widening of the back’:

THE PUPIL WILL NOW BE ASKED TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE TORSO IN THIS WAY, CONTINUING TO REHEARSE HIS ORDERS, whilst the teacher so adjusts the torso that the large " lifting " muscles of the back will be employed co-ordinately with the other parts of the organism in bringing about such use of the respiratory mechanisms that they will function to the maximum at the particular stage of development reached from day to day. Success in this part of the evolution will bring about a change in the condition of the back which would be described by the ordinary observer as a " widening of the back." 

These orders are the means whereby such use of the mechanisms may be brought about, associated with a satisfactory readjustment of the back, as will cause the floating ribs to move freely, and also tend to develop the maximum intra-thoracic capacity and to establish the most effective use of the respiratory mechanism during the sleeping as well as the waking hours (Alexander 2004, p.120).

14) Another interpretation of the quote from CCC is possible if we allow ourselves some interpretative freedom. In CCC, ‘primary movement’ means the first part of an ‘evolution’. What if we say that Alexander's preventive orders constitute an evolution? In the chapter Illustration containing the description of ‘hands on the back of a chair’ Alexander gives the orders as: 

‘... order the neck to relax, to order the head forward and up to lengthen the spine ...’ (Alexander 2004, p.115). It seems that ‘head forward and up’ is the first movement, but the two first orders could be seen as a means to achieve lengthening, Alexander writes in the same chapter: ‘... in the place of ordering his [the pupils] neck to relax, his head forward and up, in order to secure the necessary lengthening, he will actually throw his head back, stiffen his neck, and tend to shorten his spine by unduly curving it ...’ (Alexander 2004, p.116).

If we allow ourselves some interpretative freedom, we can find material in Alexander books for

arguing that ‘lengthening’ can be seen as the primary movement. A bit contrived, maybe, and not what Alexander meant, but possible.

15) Moshe Feldenkrais has a very fitting name for these unwanted movements, calling them ‘parasitic’.

16) Another source could be Louise Morgan's 1955 book Inside Yourself. She quotes Alexander's Man's Supreme Inheritance, but inserts new text without indicating the change. I have put the added text in square brackets.

The whole physiology of walking is, indeed, perfectly simple when once the fundamental principles are understood. It is really resolved into the primary movements of [keeping one's length ("spine lenghtening") and] allowing the body to incline forward from the ankle on which the weight is supported and then preventing oneself from falling by allowing the weight to be taken in turn by the foot which has been advanced (Morgan 2010 p.136; Alexander 1996 p.72; Alexander 2021 p.235)

George Trevelyan, more or less a contemporary of Carrington, also believed primary movement was what later became the primary control, but he most probably had this from Edvard Maisel since he inserts ‘and’ between true and primary, a misquotation committed by Maisel, (see note 18). 

He knew that he had found the true and primary movement for each and every act. He came to call it the "primary control". (Trevelyan 1991). 

17) In The Act of Living, Carrington talks about the primary movement in more general terms, but the meaning here also seems to be that it means the primary control.

In Man’s Supreme Inheritance, if you comb through it very carefully, you will find that Alexander uses the phrase “the primary movement.” Alexander wasn't concerned with the anatomy or physiology of the primary movement, but he was very much concerned with the practical reality that if a primary movement wasn‟t taking place, then his breathing was interfered with, his voice interfered with, and all sorts of things were going wrong. (Carrington 1999, p. 79).

18) Edward Maisel, in the foreword to his anthology of Alexander's writings, The Alexander Technique: The Essential Writings of F. Matthias Alexander, (originally titled The Resurrection of the Body), states that the ‘true and primary movement’ is ‘vertebral lengthening in activity’ (Maisel, 1990, p.xxvii). It is not unlikely that Walter Carrington was the inspiration for this misinterpretation. Maisel misquoted Alexander by inserting an ‘and’ between true and primary, a mistake picked up by George Trevelyan. Alexander Farkas is another Alexander Technique teacher who repeatedly makes this mistake (Farkas 2019, p.48, p.82.) (See also Staring 2005 p.377 and Staring 2018, p.113, note 4).

19) Carrington is not physically correct.  We have to push down to go up against gravity. 

20) Jeroen Staring points to teachers trained by Carrington. He is probably right, I am from that lineage myself. 

It is a fact that Alexander Technique teachers trained by Carrington are indeed actively propagating those views in their own writings ... (Staring 2018, p.111).

21) An indication of this is the exclusions of the term in Brown's abridged versions of Alexander's books.

22) People perhaps believe ‘primary control’ comes from ‘primary movement’ because both contain the word primary. But Alexander used the word about almost anything. Skimming through Alexander's books, this is some of what he labels primary:

Argument, activity, appeal, application, assumption, causation, cause/causes, congenital difference, control, desire/desires, experiences, factor/factors, functions, idea, importance, impulses, influence, law, misconception, movement/movements, need, object, order/orders, part of the act/process, part played [by the head-neck relationship in activity], point [of article], principle/principles, procedure, projection [of orders], psycho-physical factors, reflexes, response, responsibility, sense,  understanding. 

Literature

Alexander, FM. 1985 (1932). The Use of the Self. Victor Gollancz.

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

Alexander, FM. 2004 (1923). Consctructive Conscious Control of the Individual. Mouritz.
Alexander, F.M. (2021) Man’s Supreme Inheritance (1910), Addenda (1911), Conscious Control (1912): Facsimile of First Editions of Books on the F. M. Alexander Technique. Mouritz.
Brown, Ron (ed). 1992. Authorised Summaries of F.M. Alexander's Four Books. STATBooks.

Carrington, W.; Carey, S. 1992. Explaining the Alexander Technique. The Sheildrake Press.

Carrington, Walter. 1994. Thinking Aloud. Mournum Time Press.
Carrington, Walter. (1996). Beyond Words. In J. Sontag (ed.), Curiosity Recaptured: Exploring Ways We Think and Move (pp. 223-228). San Francisco: Mornum Time Press.

Daily Express. (1904. October 19). The Lady of the Deep C, p.5.

https://www.mouritz.co.uk/Mouritzpdfs/ladydeepc.1904.pdf

Fischer, Sean (ed.). 1995. Articles and Lectures. Mouritz.
Fischer, Sean (ed.). 2022. Articles and Lectures. (Third edition). Mouritz.

Jones, Frank P. 1997. Freedom to Change. Mouritz.

Lada, Bob. 2019. ‘Teaching Alexander from 'Yes'.’ In P. Marsh, (ed.), The Congress Papers: Advancing Global Perspectives. 11th International Congress 2018, Chicago. STAT Books.

Maisel, Edward (ed). 1990. The Alexander Technique: The Essential Writings of F. Matthias Alexander. Thames and Hudson.

McKenna, Marjean. 2017. Your Natural Up. Selfpublished.
Morgan, Louise (2010) Inside Youself: A New Way to Health Based on the Alexander Technique. Mouritz.
Murray, Alex. 2015. Alexander's Way. Alexander Technique Center, Urbana.

Raff, Chris. 2001. First steps to Alexander Technique. Axiom Publishing.

Farkas, Alexander. 2019. Alexander Technique: Arising from Quiet. Hite Books.

Staring, J. 2005. Frederick Matthias Alexander 1869-1955: The Origins and History of the Alexander Technique. Nijmegen: Integraal.

Staring, Jeroen. 2018. ‘Frederick Matthias Alexander, Born 150 Years Ago, on January 20, 1869. A Fierce Comment Regarding Interpretations of Alexander’s Texts by Alexander Technique Teachers.’  Case Studies Journal. ISSN (2305-509X) – Volume 7, Issue 12–Dec-2018.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330158936_Frederick_Matthias_Alexander_Born_150_Years_Ago_on_January_20_1869_A_Fierce_Comment_Regarding_Interpretations_of_Alexander's_Texts_by_Alexander_Technique_Teachers

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

https://www.mouritz.co.uk/Mouritzpdfs/judgmentalexandervsJokl1948.pdf

Trevelyan, George. 1991. Exploration into God. Online version: https://www.sirgeorgetrevelyan.org.uk/books/thtbk-ExplGod00.html

Vineyard, M (ed). & Fischer (ed), S. 2020. F. M. Alexander: Letters, Volume II, 1943-1955. Mouritz.

Williamson, Malcolm. 2021a. ‘How did the concept of 'primary control evolve during Alexander's lifetime?’ In Alexander Journal 28, spring 2021. STAT.

Williamson, Malcolm. 2021b. ‘Lengthening and widening and Alexander's 'secret'.’ In Alexander Journal 28, spring 2021. STAT.

Mine første Alexanderteknikk-timer

 I disse dager er det tretti år siden jeg hadde mine første alexandertimer. Det er ingen overdrivelse at timene forandret livet mitt. 

Jeg hadde hørt om Alexanderteknikken noen år tidligere. Første gangen tror jeg var i en artikkel i kveldsutgaven av Aftenposten i 1988. Det var et intervju med Nigel Hornby som skulle bli min første Alexanderteknikk-lærer. Av en eller annen grunn gjorde intervjuet inntrykk på meg. Jeg studerte musikk og spilte fiolin og var opptatt av å kunne koordinere og kontrollere bevegelser. I artikkelen i Aftenposten ble det sagt at balansen av hodet hadde stor innflytelse på kroppens bevegelser. Det hadde jeg aldri tenkt over. 

Året etter leste jeg Tension in the Performance of Music. I boken er det en artikkel av Alexanderteknikk-lærer og pianist Nelly Ben-Or, «The Alexander Technique and Performance». Der leste jeg om «primary control» - hvordan forholdet mellom hode, nakke og rygg påvirker funksjon og bevegelse. 

Så, i 1990 begynte en medstudent på Barratt Due med Alexanderteknikk-timer. Han spilte fløyte og hadde fått vondt i armene. Han fortalte begeistret om timene. Nå ble jeg enda mer interessert. Jeg gikk rett på Deichman bibliotek og lånte ei bok om Alexanderteknikken. Boka var Body Learning av Michael Gelb. Den er ei god introduksjonsbok. Jeg tror jeg begynte å skjønne prinsippene for teknikken. 

Det jeg ikke forstod var hvordan Alexanderteknikken ville fungere i praksis, hva den ville ha å si for meg. Men jeg innså at jeg ikke kunne lære teknikken fra ei bok. Jeg måtte finne en lærer.
Min historie er egentlig ganske typisk. Det tar gjerne flere år fra noen hører om Alexanderteknikken til de kommer så langt som til å ta timer. 

De første timene

Det jeg husker best fra de første timene var hvor avspent jeg ble, men samtidig hvor lett og bevegelig. Jeg svevde når jeg gikk. Til å begynne med hadde jeg to timer i uken. Etter et par uker begynte jeg å innse hvor fryktelig anspent jeg egentlig var. Det var en tankevekker. Jeg hadde gjort avspenningsøvelser daglig i årevis og trodde jeg hadde rimelig kontroll på hva jeg gjorde.

Det kan oppleves som et paradoks. Du blir mer avspent, men av den grunn blir du også mer følsom for spenninger. «I feel like an invalid», utbrøt jeg en gang i en time. Nigel svarte, mest på spøk: «Oh, but you are». Forbedringspotensialet var stort. 

Jeg husker det gjorde stor forskjell å begynne å tenke på at jeg hadde ei ryggsøyle. Ryggsøyla kan vi ikke kjenne direkte. Men bevisstheten om hvor den var, hvor lang den var, gjorde at jeg begynte å bli oppmerksom på hva jeg gjorde med meg selv. Jeg ble generelt mer oppmerksom og våken. 

Jeg ble også mer oppmerksom på når jeg var trøtt. Jeg tror dette har å gjøre med at jeg var mer avspent. Hvis du har mindre spenning i nakken og holder mindre fast på hodet til daglig vil du lettere merke når du har lyst til å duppe av. Fordelen var at jeg ble flinkere til å ta pauser når jeg trengte det. Dermed kunne jeg jobbe mer effektivt.

Etter omtrent ti timer la jeg merke til endringer i fiolinspillet. Forholdet til instrumentet føltes nærmere og mer intimt etter hvert som jeg ble mykere i kroppen. Klangen ble friere. 

Jeg tror jeg hadde bare én time med instrumentet i løpet av de første månedene. I denne fasen gjorde jeg ikke noe bevisst arbeid for å integrere teknikken i fiolinspillet. Forbedringene skjedde av seg selv. Hadde jeg hatt flere timer med instrumentet kunne jeg kanskje gjort mer. 

Etter tretti år er det begrenset hvor mye jeg husker. Jeg gjorde dessverre ikke notater fra de første timene. Jeg kan huske Nigel fortalte om hvor mye et hode veier, og så sa han at han hadde et hode i rommet ved siden av. Han gikk ut mens jeg ble sittende å lure på hva han hadde å vise fram. Til min lettelse kom Nigel tilbake med en stor stein med vekt tilsvarende hodet til et menneske.  

Jeg husker også en time der jeg følte jeg stod bakoverlent. Jeg nevnte det for Nigel. Han ba meg ta en kikk i speilet ved siden av meg. Jeg kunne se at jeg stod helt rett opp og ned. Sannsynligvis var jeg så vant til å synke sammen at jeg hadde feil oppfatning om hva det vil si å stå rett. 

Jeg opplevde flere fysiske forandringer da jeg begynte med Alexanderteknikken. Ei jakke jeg pleide å bruke ofte, og som jeg hadde hatt i flere år, ble for trang over skuldrene. Jeg har en tvillingbror. Vi er omtrent like høye, men han hadde pleid å være et par centimeter høyere enn meg. En gang vi målte viste det seg at jeg var høyere enn ham. Det gjorde forskjell at jeg hadde sluttet å trykke meg sammen. 

Misforståelser

I denne første tiden hadde jeg egentlig ikke veldig god forståelse for det vi kaller «directions», å tenke retning. Jeg tenkte mest på nakken, å ikke spenne nakken, eller å ha en «fri» nakke; det vil si - egentlig tenkte jeg mest på å slappe av. Å slappe av er ikke er det samme som å tenke retning.  Avspenning kan være en konsekvens av å tenke retning. Jeg hadde gjort avspenningsøvelser i så mange år at det påvirket sterkt hvordan jeg tenkte. 

Jeg følte jeg hadde god nytte av å ligge i semisupine eller «aktiv hvilestilling». Det var noe jeg kunne gjøre uten å vite eller kunne så mye. Men kanskje også dette ble for mye avspenningsøvelse og ikke så konstruktivt som det kunne har vært. 

Jeg begikk også den andre vanlige feilen, å tenke i form av «riktig» posisjon. Jeg hadde etter hvert forstått at det som kalles «primary control» ikke handlet om riktig posisjon av hodet, at det var noe mer subtilt og dynamisk. Men jeg husker godt at jeg tenkte mye på å sitte rett. Som nevnt gjorde det stor forskjell for meg å bli bevisst på at jeg hadde ei ryggsøyle. Det gav meg en slags forståelse for konseptet om å ha lengde. Men jeg hadde ikke kommet så langt at jeg forstod dynamikken i kurvene i ryggsøyla. 
Jeg tenkte mest på å være rett og forsøkte å sitte rett opp og ned selv i den mykeste sofa. Det tyder på en snever forståelse av teknikken og lite fleksibilitet i anvendelsen. 

Oase

På tross av min begrensede forståelse av Alexanderteknikken hadde jeg stor nytte av den. Jeg begynte å gradvis å oppdage meg selv, oppdage at det fantes flere muligheter, og ikke minst utviklingsmuligheter. 

Å komme inn i Nigels undervisningsrom var som å komme til en oase der det alltid var tid nok, tid til å oppdage de små øyeblikkene der du kan velge å reagere eller ikke. Det var som å få et glimt inn i en annen verden, en kontrast til verden utenfor og til musikkstudiet der vi måtte prestere hele tiden. 

Nigels følsomme hender kjentes uendelig store. Det var som de visste akkurat hvor jeg holdt fast på spenning jeg ikke trengte. De fortalte meg om meg selv på en måte som ikke kan beskrives med ord.

Jeg hadde antagelig seks timer før jul den høsten jeg begynte med Alexanderteknikken. I løpet av vinteren og våren hadde jeg ytterligere 20-25 timer. Det blir vanligvis regnet for å gi et godt grunnlag. Men jeg hadde langt ifra fått nok. Jeg ville lære mer.
Jeg hadde avsluttende eksamen på Barratt Due den våren og fikk min første jobb på kulturskolen i Flekkefjord. Planen var å komme tilbake til Oslo for å ta flere timer. Hvordan det gikk skal jeg fortelle om en annen gang. 

Relaterte blogginnlegg

20 år

Hodebalansens hemmelighet

Hva jeg trodde jeg visste

Tilbake til start

I disse dager er det 20 år siden jeg gav mine første timer som Alexanderteknikk-lærer. Et par måneder tidligere hadde jeg flyttet tilbake fra England etter å ha fullført tre års utdanning. 

Å begynne som Alexanderteknikk-lærer kan være ganske tøft. De færreste lærere er ansatt noe sted. Mange institusjoner og skoler for utøvende kunst har ansatt egne lærere i Alexanderteknikk, men dette gjelder bare en brøkdel av verdens alexanderlærere. Underviser du i Alexanderteknikk må du skape jobben selv.

Da jeg var ferdig utdannet hadde jeg nok en ganske naiv forestilling om hvor lett det ville være å starte min egen virksomhet. Under utdanningen hadde vi trent på å kunne forklare og beskrive teknikken på en enkel måte, men vi hadde nesten ingenting om markedsføring og salg. I begynnelsen var jeg mest fornøyd med å ha klart å fullføre utdannelsen. Jeg gikk rundt og sa til meg selv: «Nå er jeg alexanderlærer!». Heldigvis hadde jeg en deltidsstilling som fiolinlærer på Asker kulturskole. Dermed hadde jeg noe fast inntekt og kunne jobbe i ro og mak med å bygge opp en praksis i Alexanderteknikk.

Markedsføring

De første årene hengte jeg opp en masse plakater i butikker og andre steder over hele Oslo. Jeg hadde ikke bil og brukte sykkel eller kollektivtransport. Det var egentlig ganske fint å reise rundt på den måten og bli kjent med nye deler av byen. Jeg satte også annonse i lokalavisene noen ganger. Jeg fikk en og annen elev av dette, men jeg anså det mest som generell markedsføring, en måte flere kunne lære at det fantes noe som het Alexanderteknikk.

Jeg leide lokaler og holdt foredrag med jevne mellomrom. Det kom alltid en god del folk, og det var alltid noen som skrev seg opp på liste for å prøve en time. Et par ganger var jeg på alternativmessa sammen med noen kolleger. Ett år hadde vi stand hvor vi delte ut informasjon og gav mini-timer. Interessen var god, men jeg følte meg ikke hjemme mellom engler og krystaller.

Det mest mislykkede forsøk på markedsføring jeg prøvde ut var å bruke flere tusen kroner på å annonsere på gule sider på nettet. Jeg fikk to henvendelser i løpet av året. Begge var forespørsler om tarmskylling Slik kan det gå når Alexanderteknikk blir kategorisert som alternativ behandling. Jeg måtte fortelle dem som ringte at jeg dessverre ikke kunne hjelpe.

Nå er det mange år siden jeg har hengt opp plakater. I dag foregår alt på nett. Jeg var antagelig den første Alexanderteknikk-læreren i Norge som fikk egen hjemmeside i 2001. I noen år hadde jeg domenenavnet alexanderteknikk.no. Jeg gav det videre til NFLAT, Norsk Forening for Lærere i Alexanderteknikk, i 2003. Da var jeg med på å gjenopplive foreningen som hadde vært uvirksom i flere år.

I tillegg til hjemmeside er jeg også tilstede på twitter og facebook. Sosiale medier er fint å bruke for å holde kontakten med kolleger og holde seg orientert om nyheter i profesjonen. Men jeg kan ikke si jeg har helt fått taket på bruken av sosiale medier i markedsføringen. Jeg har brukt muligheten på facebook til å «fremme» innlegg. I tillegg annonserer jeg på google adwords. Denne bloggen har også fungert som markedsføring, selv om jeg sjelden skriver i den hensikt.

Metoden jeg har benyttet mest av de siste årene for å komme i kontakt med nye potensielle elever er å ha introduksjonskurs for små grupper. Ei gruppe på 2-4 personer får plass på kontoret. I løpet av et par timer går vi gjennom de viktigste prinsippene i teknikken og jeg får gitt hver enkelt noe individuell undervisning. Deltagerne får et godt grunnlag for å bestemme seg om Alexanderteknikken er noe de vil lære seg, og begynner de å ta timer har de allerede fått med seg det grunnleggende. Nå under korona-epidemien må jeg dessverre vente med å ha nye introduksjonskurs.

Etter å ha prøvd «alt» for å markedsføre praksisen gjennom 20 år er det klart at den beste kanalen for å få nye elever er gjennom jungeltelegrafen. Flertallet av de som tar kontakt for å prøve en time har hørt om Alexanderteknikken gjennom noen de kjenner. Markedsføringen som skjer gjennom at elevene forteller om teknikken har antagelig større innvirkning enn det jeg kan gjøre selv.

Interessen

Gjennom årene har jeg fra tid til annen blitt spurt hvordan det går med interessen for Alexanderteknikk. Det er vanskelig å svare på. Jeg har inntrykk av at det er flere som har hørt om teknikken, men ikke nødvendigvis flere som vet hva den går ut på.

Utøvende kunstnere - musikere, dansere, skuespillere - er den gruppen som oftest både har hørt om teknikken, og vet hva den går ut på. Mange har hatt noe Alexanderteknikk i utdannelsen. Blant denne gruppen har interessen vært stabil.

Den andre store gruppen som kan interessere seg for Alexanderteknikk er de som søker løsning på et helsemessig problem. I 2008 opplevde jeg et oppsving i interessen da British Medical Journal publiserte en studie som viste effekten Alexanderteknikk har på ryggsmerter. Slike forskningsresultater er selvfølgelig kjærkomne for oss som lever av å undervise i Alexanderteknikk. Forskning koster mye penger, og det er ikke så ofte slike studier på Alexanderteknikken publiseres. Samtidig er det litt synd at teknikken assosieres så sterkt med terapi. Det gir et feil inntrykk av hva Alexanderteknikken har å tilby.

Alexanderteknikken blir regnet som en form for alternativ behandling. Fjernsynsserien Folkeopplysningen og bøker som Bløff eller behandling, Snåsakoden og Placebodefekten har gjort folk mer skeptiske til alternativ behandling. Dette er veldig bra. Men skepsisen mot alternativ behandling har kanskje gjort at interessen for Alexanderteknikk ikke har økt så mye som den kunne ha gjort.

Folk som er skeptiske er også skeptiske til å prøve. Folk som har tro på at noe kanskje kan hjelpe er lettere å overtale til å prøve en time. Men skeptikerne blir bedre elever. De bærer ikke med seg urealistiske forestillinger.

Vi Alexanderteknikk-lærere har selv mye av skylden for at folk tror teknikken er en form for terapi. I markedsføringen fokuserer vi ofte på helsemessige effekter. Folk flest er nemlig ikke egentlig interessert i Alexanderteknikk, men interessert i å få løst ett eller annet problem. Problemet kan være helsemessig - som for eksempel rygg- eller nakkesmerter; eller de vil utvikle ferdigheter - som for eksempel å spille et instrument.

Da jeg begynte som Alexanderteknikk-lærer hadde jeg som nevnt urealistiske forestillinger om hva som skulle til for å markedsføre teknikken. Jeg tenkte at bare mange nok hørte om Alexanderteknikken ville folk komme for å ta timer mer eller mindre av seg selv. Jeg tror dette dessverre er en forestilling som er vanlig blant Alexanderteknikk-lærere. Slik fungerer det ikke. Skal vi få opp interessen for Alexanderteknikk må vi gi overbevisende argumenter for hvorfor teknikken kan være verdt å prøve for hver enkelt person.

I løpet av 20 år har jeg opplevd mange ganger hvordan Alexanderteknikken kan være til hjelp. Noen ganger på helt uventede måter. Det er ikke alltid mulig å si på forhånd hvilket utbytte Alexanderteknikk-timer vil gi. Mye avhenger av eleven selv. Det som er helt sikkert er at du vil lære noe du har praktisk nytte av.

Korona

Nå under korona-epidemien er forståelig nok folk skeptiske til å prøve Alexanderteknikken. De som har tatt timer tidligere fortsetter, men det er få nye som vil prøve. Fysiske Alexanderteknikk-timer innebærer nærkontakt. Antall nærkontakter bør begrenses, derfor er det naturlig at mange synes at dette ikke er tiden for å prøve. Alternativet er timer på nett. Timer på nettet kan være et godt sted å begynne uansett korona eller ikke.

Nå som det er mindre å gjøre enn normalt føles det nesten som om jeg er tilbake der jeg var for 20 år siden. Jeg må begynne på nytt igjen. Forskjellen er at jeg denne gangen har fordelen av 20 års erfaring. 

Relaterte blogginnlegg

20 år 

20 år

I disse dager er det 20 år siden jeg gav mine første timer som Alexanderteknikk-lærer. Et par måneder tidligere hadde jeg flyttet tilbake fra England etter å ha fullført tre års utdanning.

Jeg hadde allerede gitt noen korte timer til folk jeg kjente. Det var viktig å holde «hands-on»-ferdighetene ved like. Da jeg begynte for alvor var min første betalende elev en venn. Han fikk time til en veldig god pris. Litt etter litt kom flere elever. Mange av de første elevene hadde musikerbakgrunn, Det kan ha å gjøre med at jeg er selv utdannet musiker. Etter hvert kom det flere mennesker med vanlige problemer som rygg- og nakkesmerter. Etter et halvt års tid var jeg godt i gang med undervisningen.

Undervisningen

Utdanningen i England hadde gitt meg et godt grunnlag for å bruke hendene i undervisningen. Jeg hadde gode rutiner og var trygg på det jeg gjorde. Det gav utgangspunkt for utvikling. Bruken av hendene er noe som utvikler seg hele tiden. Selv om jeg tilsynelatende gjør mye av de samme tingene som jeg gjorde for 20 år siden har berøringen fått nye dimensjoner. Jeg både kjenner mer, forstår mer og kan gjøre mer.

Å undervise Alexanderteknikk er mer enn å bruke hendene. Vi må forklare og kommunisere verbalt også. Da jeg var ferdig utdannet hadde alt jeg hadde lært av Alexanderteknikk foregått på engelsk. Nå måtte jeg finne en måte å forklare på norsk, på en god måte. Jeg tror det gikk et år eller to før jeg begynte å få taket på det. Senere begynte jeg å skrive denne bloggen, som har gitt god trening i å formulere idéene i Alexanderteknikken.

Min utdanning var svært tradisjonell, med stor vekt på det som kalles «stolarbeid» som nesten utelukkende dreier seg om at eleven reiser seg og setter seg. Dette er enkle og nyttige bevegelser å bruke i undervisningen. Etter som årene har gått har jeg fått mer og mer erfaring i å anvende andre bevegelser og aktiviteter. Jeg har funnet ut at det er best om eleven selv foreslår en aktivitet han eller hun er interessert i å jobbe med. Alt kan brukes. Jeg har jobbet med alt fra yoga til bleieskift, kampsport og meditasjon, sjonglering og strikking; og spill på alle mulige slags musikkinstrumenter, inkludert klokkespillet i Oslo rådhus.

Jeg tror og håper at jeg etter 20 år er blitt bedre til å tilpasse undervisningen til eleven, og til å lytte til eleven. Den største feilen ferske alexanderlærere gjør er å prøv å forklare for mye. Ofte er det bedre om eleven kan finne ting ut på egen hånd, og at jeg som lærer legger til rette for eksperimentering. Samtidig tror jeg at jeg er blitt flinkere til å svare på spørsmål. Vi alexanderlærere har rykte på oss for å være nærmest mystiske fordi svarene kan bli vage. Det tror jeg kommer av at vi gjerne vil gi et så grundig og korrekt svar som mulig. Men i undervisningssammenheng er det enkle absolutt det beste. Jeg tror jeg er blitt flinkere til å gjøre ting enkelt.

Å undervise betyr å lære. Å ha undervist Alexanderteknikken i 20 år har gjort at jeg har lært mye. Jeg kan ikke tenke tilbake på de 20 årene uten å føle takknemlighet overfor alle elevene som har gjort meg til en bedre Alexanderteknikk-lærer. Jeg ser fram til å lære mer de neste 20 årene.

Relaterte blogginnlegg

10 år

Hender på stolrygg (del 1)

Denne bloggartikkelen er skrevet for Alexanderteknikk-lærere og viderekomne elever. 

Vi sier gjerne at vi ikke har noen øvelser i Alexanderteknikken. Delvis er det fordi Alexanderteknikken kan brukes i en hvilken som helst aktivitet. Hva som helst kan derfor brukes som «øvelse». En annen grunn er at vi Alexanderteknikk-lærere misliker ordet. Vi er skeptiske til alt som kan lede til tankeløs repetisjon av bevegelser. Men vi har øvelser i Alexanderteknikken. En øvelse, eller «prosedyre» som vi foretrekker å kalle det, som har spilt en sentral rolle i teknikken både historisk og praktisk er «hender på stolrygg», den merkverdige aktiviteten som går ut på å holde i toppen av en stolrygg med fingrene.

Første spor

I 1908 beskrev Frederick Matthias Alexander sin metode i et lite hefte med tittelen «Re-Education» of the Kinæsthetic Systems». I 1910 utgav han et tillegg, hvor en tidlig versjon av hender på stolrygg er en av to øvelser som er omtalt. Begge artikler er å finne i Articles and Lectures (Alexander 1995).

På denne tiden hadde Alexander lenge samarbeidet med Dr Spicer, en lege som hadde vært en av de første Alexander gav timer til da han ankom London i 1904. Men etter hvert ble de uvenner. Alexander mente seg plagiert av Dr. Spicer.(1)

I Articles and Lectures skriver redaktør Jean Fischer i en kommentar til «Supplement to Re-Education of the Kinæsthetic Systems»: 

These descriptions of two teaching procedures may well have been written (and copyrighted) in order to establish Alexander's prerogative in regard to his technique, and to counter Dr Spicer's attempts to usurp him. They appear to have been written with a certain urgency as, unlike Alexander's other writings, they do not contain the usual preliminary introductions or qualifying clauses.

… Like the original, the supplement is concerned with giving examples of procedures for obtaining a position of mechanical advantage to “bring into use the proper muscular coordinations.” 

… The first procedure, “Chair Exercise” is the earliest description of what is more commonly known as “hands on the back of the chair,” i.e. The procedure of being in a position of mechanical advantage, whilst taking hold of the back of a chair (Alexander 1995, s.102). 

Forhistorie

Alexander fant ikke på denne øvelsen helt av seg selv. Den bygger på en styrkeøvelse som ser ut til å ha vært populær på denne tiden: 

He got the idea at an early stage in his teaching when he was working with a group of students in Australia. One of the group had picked up the idea that a good way to expand the chest – the thorax – was to take hold of the back rail of a chair with the hands and then pull on the rail. Alexander observed this and I'm sure tried it out for himself. However, he came to the conclusion that the way most people did it had exactly the opposite effect to the one intended. People didn't widen the thorax but rather narrowed it, raised the chest and hollowed the back. But he also recognised there was a possibility carrying out the procedure in quite a different manner and one which would, indeed, be useful (Carrington/Carey s.91).

Øvelsen kan være inspirert av datidens superkjendis bodybuilder: 

The precise origins of hands over the back of a chair remain somewhat mysterious. The most likely explanation is that while living in Australia someone showed Alexander a 'strongman' exercise that aimed to increase chest size, breathing capacity and upper body strength. That person might have been one of his students, a friend or even his brother AR, who one time developed a keen interest in the physical culture system propagated by the legendary Prussian-born bodybuilder Eugen Sandow. 

… The basis of this particular strongman particular strongman exercise involved taking hold of the top rail of a conventional, straight-backed chair with both hands with what is now known as a 'power grip', in which the palm, fingers and thumb are flexed, and then trying to pull the chair apart. … Apparently Alexander observed others performing the chair-pulling exercise and tried it for himself before concluding that although the size of someone's chest could be significantly increased because of the bulking up of the chest musculature, the overall effect was often to reduce their respiratory capacity because the increase in muscle mass of the torso (and arms) caused significant rigidity and interference in the movement of the rib cage (Carey 2017, s.118-9). 

Første versjon 

Alexander observerte at øvelsen hadde negativ effekt på koordinasjonen av pustesystemet, men skjønte også at en modifisert versjon kunne ha potensiale. Han endret tre faktorer. For det første sørget han for koordinasjon av hele kroppen ved å kombinere «retninger» med at eleven lente seg forover fra anklene slik at hele kroppen fikk elastisk tonus.(2)

For det andre endret han grepet til et «pinsettgrep» der fingrene er strake og vertikale (Langford 2004, s.138). (Fordelene med dette skal jeg skrive om i en egen artikkel). For det tredje gjorde han øvelsen mye mer finstemt ved å erstatte det meste av kraftbruken med det å tenke retning. I stedet for å forsøke å dra øverste del av stolryggen fra hverandre skulle eleven dra oppover «som om i forsøk på å løfte stolen», og samtidig skulle albuene sendes fra hverandre. Armmusklene ble aktivert, men med lengde og dermed økt følsomhet.

Alexanders skriver i «Supplement to Re-Education of the Kinæsthetic Systems»:

Chair Exercise (Standing) 

… Ask the pupil to stand at the back of the chair in such a position that he (the pupil) will be able easily to reach the top of the back of the chair with his hands. … The orders referred to being given, the teacher will cause the pupil's body to incline forward and upward in the direction of the chair and then cause the pupil to place his hands, some distance apart, upon the back of the chair. The hands are to be so placed that the four fingers are kept quite straight on one side of the back of the chair and the thumb on the other side of the back of the chair. Then the pupil should be told to order or desire relaxation of the muscles of the arm and to grip the back of the chair gently but firmly. Then the pupil must be asked to pull the top of the chair as if endeavouring to lift it and at the same time allowing the right elbow to point directly towards the right and the left elbow towards the left. This pulling movement is employed in the support of the body in such a manner as to bring into use the proper muscular coordinations and to prevent the defective use previously employed (Alexander 1995, s.103).

Alexander benyttet øvelsen selv:

Hands over the back of a chair is something that gradually evolved. I know from talking to FM when he started teaching full-time he found that by the evening he wasn't able to straighten his arms because of all the work and the tension he had produced in himself. So he had to stop doing whatever it was that he was doing (Barlow 2011, s.121).

Og han benyttet den i undervisningen av viderekomne elever:

Now he didn't teach it to pupils when they first started lessons, but he did when they had got somewhere with the work (ibid).

Historien gjentar seg

Gradvis utviklet Alexander «hands on the back of the chair» til en stadig mer subtil øvelse. I 1923 publiserte han en ny beskrivelse. Også denne gangen ser foranledningen ut til å være et tilfelle av plagiering.

Alexander hadde en elev ved navn Gerald S. Lee. Han var en amerikansk prest og forfatter av selvhjelpsbøker. Etter et lengre opphold i London hvor han hadde timer hos Alexander i 18 måneder skrev han begeistret om Alexanders metode i boken The Ghost in the White House.

 To år senere skrev Lee på nytt. Denne gangen ei selvhjelpsbok, Invisible Exercise, med øvelser tydelig inspirert av Alexander, men uten at Alexander ble nevnt. Lee skrev som om han hadde funnet ut alt på egen hånd. (Se for eksempel side 49-50).

Alexander ble rasende. En av Alexanders senere elever forteller i boken Freedom to Change:

Incensed at this travesty of his technique, Alexander threatened the publishers (ironically they were the same as his) with legal action unless they withdrew Lee's book. Without waiting for this to happen, he decided that he must prove to the public there was something more to his technique than “invisible exercises.” Accordingly, he wrote out a long description of what he did with a pupil in a lesson. He chose the hand-behind-the-chair procedure (which he had been using, he said, since 1910) and went through it step by step, explaining fully what part the teacher played and what the pupil, what the “orders” meant and how they were related to the manipulation of the teacher. Where Lee had been content with half a page of description, Alexander used sixteen. Satisfied that the account was accurate and complete, he looked for a way to have it patented. Since this was not practicable, he incorporated it into his new book, where it was protected by copyright. (Jones 1996, s. 38-39). (Carrington/Carey 1992, s.60).

Boken det er snakk om er Alexanders andre, Constructive Conscious Control of the Individual. Fjerde kapittel i bokens andre del har tittelen «Illustration». Her finner du den mest utførlige beskrivelsen Alexander ga av «hands on the back of a chair». Dette kapitlet, i tillegg til det foregående, «Imperfect Sensory Appreciation» og de to første kapitlene av boken The Use of the Self, er antagelig det viktigste Alexander skrev med tanke på praktisk teknikk.(3)

Andre versjon

Alexander åpner med å liste opp og beskrive Alexanderteknikkens grunnleggende retninger eller «preventive orders». Alexander var ellers svært restriktiv med å gi eksempler på spesifikke instruksjoner. Deretter beskriver Alexander en situasjon der læreren veileder eleven gjennom øvelsen. Til forskjell fra 1910-versjonen er eleven sittende. Bruken av muskelkraft er så og si borte. I stedet blir stor vekt lagt på at eleven hele tiden tenker «preventive orders». Læreren på sin side sørger for med sine hender å bidra til å « put them into practical effect».

Her følger en forkortet versjon der jeg stort sett har utelatt Alexanders kommentarer slik at teksten som gjenstår viser den praktiske utførelsen av øvelsen. Bruken av store bokstaver er Alexanders egen:

When he is seated, his body being supported by the back of the chair on which he is sitting, another chair is placed before him with its back towards him. THE PUPIL IS THEN ASKED TO GIVE THE FOLLOWING PREVENTIVE ORDERS. In the way of correct direction and guidance, HE IS ASKED TO ORDER THE NECK TO RELAX, TO ORDER THE HEAD FORWARD AND UP TO LENGTHEN THE SPINE. … In the present instance, it is explained to him that the order given is to be merely preventive -- a projected wish without any attempt on the pupil's part to carry it out successfully. 

THE TEACHER REPEATS THE ORDERS AND WITH HIS HANDS HE PROCEEDS TO BRING THE PUPIL'S BODY GENTLY FORWARD FROM THE HIPS. 

… At every step in the work it is essential that the pupil should rehearse his orders from the beginning, because these earlier orders constitute the means whereby a further step may be successfully taken. In giving himself orders, the pupil must on every occasion begin with the primary orders before going on to the secondary orders, and so on. 

THE PUPIL MUST NOW AGAIN ORDER THE NECK TO RELAX, THE HEAD FORWARD AND UP, WHILST THE TEACHER WITH HIS HANDS SECURES THAT POSITION OF THE TORSO IN WHICH THE BACK MAY BE SAID TO BE WIDENED. These orders should be repeated several times and be continued WHILST THE TEACHER TAKES THE PUPIL'S RIGHT ARM WITH HIS HANDS, AND MOVES IT FORWARD UNTIL THE PUPIL'S HAND IS ABOVE THE TOP RAIL OF THE BACK OF THE CHAIR. THE PUPIL SHOULD THEN BE REQUESTED TO REPEAT THE ORDERS SET DOWN AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PARAGRAPH, AND THEN TO TAKE THE WEIGHT OF THE ARM ENTIRELY, AS THE TEACHER DISENGAGES HIS HANDS FROM THE SUPPORTED ARM. Great care must be taken to see that the pupil has not interfered with the mechanism of the torso in the effort to take the weight of the arm.

… If the pupil has not interfered with the mechanism of the torso in the effort to take the weight of the arm, HE SHOULD NEXT BE REQUESTED TO GRASP THE TOP RAIL OF THE BACK OF THE CHAIR GENTLY AND FIRMLY, KEEPING THE FINGERS AS straight AS POSSIBLE AND QUITE FLAT AGAINST THE WOOD OF THE FRONT PORTION OF THE TOP RAIL OF THE CHAIR, THE THUMB ALSO TO BE KEPT AS STRAIGHT AS POSSIBLE, BEING CALLED UPON TO DO DUTY ON THE BACK PORTION OF THE TOP RAIL OF THE CHAIR, WITH THE WRIST CURVED SLIGHTLY INWARDS TOWARDS THE LEFT. The teacher will, of course, as far as possible, assist the pupil with these hand movements. 

… THE PUPIL MUST THEN BE ASKED AGAIN TO ORDER THE NECK TO RELAX, THE HEAD FORWARD AND UP, AND THE TEACHER WILL REPEAT HIS PREVIOUS EFFORT TO ESTABLISH THAT CONDITION OF THE TORSO AND BACK ESSENTIAL TO SATISFACTORY ARM WORK, WHILST HE REPEATS WITH THE PUPIL'S LEFT ARM THE EVOLUTION JUST PERFORMED WITH THE RIGHT, SO THAT THE PUPIL WILL BE GRASPING THE BACK OF THE CHAIR WITH THE LEFT HAND IN THE SAME WAY AS HE HAS BEEN HOLDING IT WITH THE RIGHT, 

… When the teacher is satisfied that his pupil has succeeded up to this point, he may go on to give him the additional guiding orders, and proceed to help him to put them into practical effect during the completion of the evolution. The following are the new directive orders. The pupil is asked: -- 

(1) TO CONTINUE TO HOLD THE TOP OF THE CHAIR BY KEEPING THE FINGERS QUITE STRAIGHT FROM THE FIRST JOINTS OF THE FINGERS TO THEIR TIPS, WITH THE THUMBS AND FINGERS KEPT FLAT AGAINST THE TOP RAIL OF THE CHAIR AS PREVIOUSLY INDICATED. 

(2) TO ALLOW THE WRIST OF THE LEFT ARM TO BE CURVED INWARDS TOWARDS THE RIGHT, AND THE WRIST OF THE RIGHT ARM TO BE CURVED INWARDS TOWARDS THE LEFT. 

(3) TO ALLOW THE ELBOW OF THE LEFT ARM TO BE CURVED OUTWARDS TOWARDS THE LEFT, AND THE ELBOW OF THE RIGHT ARM TO BE CURVED OUTWARDS TOWARDS THE RIGHT. 

… The teacher's aim is now to give the pupil the experiences necessary to a gentle, forearm pull from the fingers, and to this end HE WILL TAKE HOLD OF THE PUPIL'S ELBOWS AND DIRECT THEM OUTWARDS AND SLIGHTLY DOWNWARDS, and, following this, will give the sensory experiences required in DIRECTING THE UPPER PARTS OF THE ARMS (ABOVE THE ELBOW) AWAY FROM ONE ANOTHER (THE RIGHT ARM TOWARDS THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT ARM TOWARDS THE LEFT), IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE PUPIL WILL BE SUPPORTING THE TORSO WITH HIS ARMS. THE PUPIL WILL NOW BE ASKED TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE TORSO IN THIS WAY, CONTINUING TO REHEARSE HIS ORDERS, whilst the teacher so adjusts the torso that the large "lifting" muscles of the back will be employed co-ordinately with the other parts of the organism in bringing about such use of the respiratory mechanisms that they will function to the maximum at the particular stage of development reached from day to day. Success in this part of the evolution will bring about a change in the condition of the back which would be described by the ordinary observer as a "widening of the back." (Alexander 2004, s.114-120).

I store trekk er det slik hender på stolrygg blir praktisert den dag i dag. I en undervisningssituasjon vil det variere hvor mye læreren hjelper eleven, og i dag ville neppe en lærer bruke ordet «relax». Alexander sluttet selv å bruke ordet med tiden. Ellers finnes det mange varianter av hender på stolrygg. Den vanligste i forhold til Alexanders beskrivelse her er å gjøre den stående i «monkey». 

Forunderlige egenskaper

Hva er det som er så spesielt med denne øvelsen at Alexander gjentatte ganger bruker den som eksempel når han skal dokumentere sin teknikk? Alexander var antagelig i utgangspunktet interessert i denne type øvelse fordi han var opptatt av pustens funksjon. Øvelsen bidrar til å frigjøre pusten gjennom å koordinere hode, nakke, armer og rygg.

Men den har selvfølgelig også å gjøre med bruken av hendene. Du oppnår en dynamisk kropp og et følsomt grep. Øvelsen inntar en sentral rolle i prosessen med å utdanne Alexanderteknikk-lærere i det å bruke hendene i undervisningen.

Ser vi nærmere på denne snodige øvelsen viser den seg å stimulere visse iboende dynamiske egenskaper. Dette skal jeg fortelle mer om i de neste artiklene i denne serien.

Noter

1) Spicer var hals-spesialist og hadde allerede før han møtte Alexander gjort seg tanker om sammenhengen mellom pustevaner og fysiske symptomer. Han lånte ideer fra Alexander, men ser ikke ut til å ha fullt ut forstått Alexanders metode.

2) Carey hevder i Think More, Do Less at øvelsen beskrevet i «Supplement to Re-Education of the Kinæsthetic Systems» utføres i «monkey», dvs. med bøyde knær. Dette er en feiltolkning. Det er ingenting i beskrivelsen som skulle tilsi dette. Øvelsen utføres uten å bøye knærne. Men det er rom for å anta at eleven muligens er ment å lene overkroppen forover fra hoftene.

3) Med praktisk teknikk mener jeg ikke undervisningsmetodikk. Den pedagogiske modellen som underbygger Alexanders eksempler på undervisning er snever, utdatert og avleggs.

Relaterte blogginnlegg

Frederick Matthias Alexander

Arven etter Alexander

Litteratur 

Alexander, Frederick Matthias. 1995 Articles and Lectures Articles. Mouritz.

Alexander, Frederick Matthias. 1996. Man's Supreme Inheritance. Mouritz.

Alexander, Frederick Matthias. 2004. Constructive Conscious Control of the Individual. Mouritz.

Barlow, Marjory. 2011. The Ground Rules: Marjory Barlow in Conversation with Sean Carey. Hite Books.

Carey, Sean. 2017. Think More, Do Less: Improving your teaching and learning of the Alexander Technique with Marjory Barlow. HITE Books.

Carrington, W; Carey, S. 1992. Explaining the Alexander Technique : The Writings of F. Matthias Alexander. The Sheildrake Press.

Jones, Frank Pierce. 1996. Freedom to Change: The Development and Science of the Alexander Technique. Mouritz.
Langford, Elisabeth. 2004. Only Connect: Reflections on Teaching the Alexander Technique. Alexandertechniek Centrum vzw.