http://forums.livster.net/ Livster Forums » Recent Posts en-US Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:46:46 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://forums.livster.net/search.php http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=47#post-264 Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:14:05 +0000 Mike 264@http://forums.livster.net/ <p>Great Forum. I really love it.</p> <p>Just wanted to let people know that thanks to the Alexander Techniuqe I am able to play professional football again. I recently moved to Israel and after an injury heard about a woman teaching in Netanya which is my new home.. :-) Anyway thanks to the lessons I was able to avoid surgery and can play without any pain again.</p> <p>I promissed her to tell people about it to make the technique more popular. If you wonder who she is you can find her website at <a href="http://www.irithlanger.com/alexander-technique">Alexander Technique Israel</a></p> <p>Peace out.. ;-) </p> http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=47#post-136 Sat, 14 May 2005 09:35:01 +0000 dodman 136@http://forums.livster.net/ <p>The Alexander Technique part of this forum is now closed and a new, separate Alexander forum is now open at :</p> <p><a href="http://at.dodman.org">http://at.dodman.org</a></p> <p>Please visit and contribute! </p> http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=46#post-135 Sat, 13 Nov 2004 07:55:30 +0000 dodman 135@http://forums.livster.net/ Hello,<br /> <br /> <br /> I'm puzzled by the implication that the Technique instructs us to not interfere (with the right employment of the Primary Control), but not to stop current interference; largely because stopping something we are already doing smacks of releasing, which isn't considered a valid part of Alexander work.<br /> <br /> "I've noticed that I get into an undesirable pattern a lot: I've learned to "release tension" without necessarily increasing my freedom."<br /> <br /> "It isn't really possible to know why your recent lesson experience gave the impression that the Technique is concerned with 'releasing' or 'freeing.'"<br /> <br /> "I certainly had difficulties for some time with the paradoxical activity of 'doing' releasing or thinking that this was required - wrong conception of course, and definitely not what is required!"<br /> <br /> The suggested order of events would seem to be:<br /> <br /> 1. Becoming conscious.<br /> <br /> 2. Recognising a stimulus.<br /> <br /> 3. Deciding to not interfere while responding.<br /> <br /> Generally, whenever we become conscious we will, on some level, be interfering. If this wasn't the case - if our default, unconscious mode was one of not interfering - there would be little purpose in learning the Technique.<br /> <br /> Assuming we are aware of interfering, we have the option of stopping it. If we're unaware, we don't have that option. If we don't stop it, we can't then 'not do it', since not doing something we are already doing depends on our stopping doing it first. This is a crucial point. If we don't stop current interference, all we can do, in the name of 'not interfering', is 'not interfere more'.<br /> <br /> Not interfering, or not interfering more, requires that we know how we have interfered in the past, just as stopping interfering requires that we know how we are interfering in the present. We can't consciously stop doing, or not do, something we have, or have had, no kinesthetic knowledge of.<br /> <br /> This means that in any decision to not interfere, we either:<br /> <br /> a. Recognise we are already interfering as a result of our reaction to a preceding stimulus, cease that existing interference, and don't re-start similar interference. <br /> <br /> b. Recognise we are already interfering, don't cease existing interference, but don't interfere more. <br /> <br /> c. Fail to recognise we are interfering, while desiring not to interfere. <br /> <br /> These three possible ways of responding depend on the level of our awareness. For a beginning student, comprehension of interference, whether current or potential, will be slight, as in (c). As our knowledge of ourselves increases, so will our awareness of how we actively and potentially interfere. I would consider (a) an appropriate and (b) an inappropriate Alexandrian response.<br /> <br /> Much of our time, any new stimulus we face will be virtually identical to the one we're already responding to. In other words, on becoming conscious, we will find ourselves doing much the same thing, still sitting at the desk, continuing with the washing up, the walk, the swim, actively eating, talking, etc. The only difference will be our awareness of what we're doing.<br /> <br /> If we don't recognize we are interfering, any decision to 'not interfere' will be meaningless, since the unchanged stimulus is unlikely to demand any major change in our behaviour, which already excludes interference we are familiar with. If we do recognize we are interfering, however assiduously we may decide to not interfere, unless we actively stop existing interference, we will again be doing nothing new. In both cases, there will be little scope for 'not interfering more', given the unchanged stimulus.<br /> <br /> If the new stimulus we are confronted with is different to the one we are currently responding to, as in the doorbell ringing, being accosted in the street, learning something unexpected, getting out of a low chair, etc, we face a potential increase in interference. If we are unaware of existing interference, any decision on our part to 'not interfere' will actually mean 'not interfere more than we are already, without knowing it'. Our ability to do that will depend on what potential interference we are familiar enough with to be able to recognize. I would call this beginner's inhibition.<br /> <br /> If we are aware of existing interference, we have the choice of whether or not to stop it. Stopping existing interference, and not restarting it, effectively inhibits any possibility of 'interfering more'. However, any deliberate decision to not interfere, and to not interfere more than - but without stopping what - we are already doing, will result in far less of a change to our habitual response. Since we can't not do what we haven't stopped doing, we will be limited to 'not interfering more than we are already, knowingly'. This would amount to partial inhibition, at best.<br /> <br /> Effective, full inhibition is the process of becoming conscious, ceasing existing interference - as far as we are able to recognise it - and not restarting it. Naturally, for as long as we don't restart interference, there will be no need to cease anything more, beyond the initial stopping; but in order to begin 'not re-starting', we have no choice but to cease existing interference first.<br /> <br /> This ceasing will feel like, and in fact, will be, a release. Such releasing could happen many times a minute or once in half an hour, depending on how conscious we are. If we don't perceive such a release, the odds are we haven't successfully stopped anything. In all likelihood, if we're aware of interfering, but not of releasing, we're stuck.<br /> <br /> Since ceasing existing interference requires us to perceive, kinesthetically, both its presence and its absence, the question then becomes, not whether releasing is appropriate, but whether our recognition of what leads up to it is accurate.<br /> <br /> Personally, I would discount the possibility that we can be much mistaken in whatever we perceive as existing interference. This is because the main purpose of the Technique is to increase the reliability of our kinesthetic sense; and it would be absurd if we went from a position of knowing nothing about interfering in an Alexandrian context to being wrong about how we were interfering, as a direct result of the learning process.<br /> <br /> However, much does depend on what an individual - whether teacher or student - understands by Alexander's words, "interfering with the right employment of the Primary Control". A mistaken understanding could result in piecemeal releasing of particular tensions rather than a general reduction of unnecessary (or redistribution of necessary) effort. A far greater risk, though, than over indulging in releasing, would be hanging on to existing interference out of fear of misinterpretation.<br /> <br /> As a simple example, let's say someone is driving, while thinking about next yearÃŒs holiday. In an Alexandrian sense, they are operating unconsciously. Then, they remember the Technique and become conscious. They notice immediately that their neck is tight and their head is being pulled backwards and down. This is unlikely to be a rare occurrence, though it might be more or less severe. Meanwhile, the stimulus of driving (with holiday thoughts supplanted by thoughts of use) is not greatly changed from moments earlier. The only real difference is they are now conscious of it.<br /> <br /> They determine to not interfere, as they understand it, from this point on, and for as long as they remain conscious. This might last for any number of seconds or minutes. The question is, since they are already interfering, as a result of their prior unconscious reaction primarily to the stimulus of driving, how do they now not interfere while responding to the same stimulus?<br /> <br /> The simple answer is that they stop interfering and they don't restart. I can't conceive how the effect of this could be construed as other than a release, if their neck untightens and their head is no longer pulled backwards and down. The alternative scenario is that they do nothing. In other words, they don't stop interfering. Since they can't not do something they're already doing, they carry on driving, in an unchanged state, save for being conscious of it.<br /> <br /> Let's then say they lapse back into unconsciousness, and, a few miles up the road, the more demanding stimulus of a police car appears in their rear view mirror. Having sufficient presence of mind to remember the Technique prior to responding to this new stimulus, they again notice that their neck is tight and their head is being pulled backwards and down. This time, their choice is between stopping (and not restarting) existing interference, or not interfering more than they are already. In other words, they can either release their neck and not tighten it again, or they can maintain an existing tight neck but not tighten it any more.<br /> <br /> For me, there is something absurd about setting out to not interfere, or not interfere more, while still knowingly interfering. It is the idealised act of refusing to do something we're already doing, without stopping doing it first. To my mind, stopping interfering is as inseparable a part of inhibition as not interfering. The experience of release is simply the result of ceasing to send existing messages from the brain to the muscles.<br /> <br /> This has nothing to do with (or at least, is a separate issue to) the sending of new messages, through direction; although directing might (or might not) appear to have a similar effect. That is because Alexandrian inhibition depends on kinesthetic feedback, utterly; whereas direction doesn't, remotely.<br /> <br /> <br /> Nicholas http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=45#post-134 Sat, 13 Nov 2004 07:45:31 +0000 dodman 134@http://forums.livster.net/ Hello,<br /> <br /> At <a href="http://www.forwardandup.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.forwardandup.com</a>, recently, under the heading 'Narrowmindedness', Maaike talked about receiving the<br /> latest quota of emails from AlexTech and how:<br /> <br /> "The AT teachers on the list are so absorbed in defending their views<br /> that everything that is not AT is seen as heretical. Or at least,<br /> that's what some contributors fear.<br /> <br /> Jeez. There are millions of people out there who lead happy, healthy<br /> and spiritually fulfilling lives without ever having heard of<br /> Alexander technique. And if I ever meet an AT teacher who tells me<br /> that AT is the only way, I run."<br /> <br /> I agree, there are loads of approaches to happiness, health and spiritual fulfilment apart from the Alexander Technique. However, none of them utilises inhibition and direction in the very specific way Alexander taught. Although some teachers believe that the world and its ills wonÃŒt be solved until everyone has learned ÃŽconscious controlÃŒ, the apparent narrow mindedness of people who champion the Technique before all else is more often a reflection of their conviction that it is unique in application rather than representing the next rung of evolution. Their fervour probably reflects their fear of this uniqueness becoming diluted.<br /> <br /> IÃŒm always surprised at how often the Technique is compared with predominantly physical approaches to well being. For me, the Technique is primarily mental. The more I consider it, the more obvious it becomes that the way we are physically is entirely dependant on how we think. Alexander talks a lot about this, but his apparent solution is not the somewhat simplistic, blanket prescription of replacing - or supplementing - our thoughts with ÃŽdirectionsÃŒ. If the ideal physical ÃŽuse of the selfÃŒ, as described by these ÃŽdirectionsÃŒ, is the natural state for humans, it is primarily dependant on our not thinking in ways that interfere with this. In other words, on inhibition. <br /> <br /> Humans think differently to other species. Much of the time, we think ÃŽaboutÃŒ things. This tends to separate our minds from our bodies. We can be in our back gardens, while being ÃŽmiles awayÃŒ. As we fantasise, our bodies remain unguarded, with ÃŽusÃŒ none the wiser what is happening. The way out of this, it seems to me, is either to stop ÃŽthinking aboutÃŒ things, even if only briefly, to allow our ÃŽnatural stateÃŒ to temporarily reassert itself; or to work at causing our ÃŽthinking aboutÃŒ to be of the sort that interferes with that state least.<br /> <br /> Stopping ÃŽthinking aboutÃŒ things is a tricky business. IÃŒve been asked why serious mediators often have what appears to be poor use - or are in physical pain. I suspect a subtle form of force may be employed in such cases, with ÃŽthoughtÃŒ being subjugated rather than allowed to stop of its own accord. At any rate, because of this danger, and because thought is such a fundamental requirement for living, it makes greater sense to me to address the way its nature can be changed. <br /> <br /> It is for this reason that I find more parallels between the Alexander Technique and Cognitive Therapy than anything else. I often recommend people read the works of George Pransky or Dale Carnegie - specifically, How to Stop Worrying and Start Living - in order to fully understand how our thoughts affect us. LearningMethods, David GormanÃŒs offshoot of Alexander work, covers much the same ground.<br /> <br /> Why do we think the way we do? Some people believe thereÃŒs an energy system underlying us that determines our thinking, which in turn determines our physical state. If our energy body is out of tune, so will everything else be. I find the concept of an energy body difficult to come to terms with, let alone work on; whereas the power and influence of thought on every aspect of our beings stands out starkly, as soon as it is brought into focus.<br /> <br /> This is just my view, of course! <br /> <br /> <br /> Nicholas http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=44#post-133 Wed, 30 Jun 2004 01:05:36 +0000 decoy 133@http://forums.livster.net/ Well, it's up to No 3 in the most watched list! http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=44#post-132 Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:32:47 +0000 decoy 132@http://forums.livster.net/ Everybody should watch and vote for Dodman's quality "one minute movie": <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/oneminutemovies/watch/nine.shtml">http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/oneminutemovies/watch/nine.shtml</a>. http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=40#post-131 Wed, 10 Mar 2004 14:31:36 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 131@http://forums.livster.net/ kick this idiot off!<br /> right, where's that child! }:-) }:-) }:-) http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-130 Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:59:17 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 130@http://forums.livster.net/ the tongue story has it:<br /> <br /> as it would happen, kitty had a supple and limber body but it could not heave itself from underneath the creature's rapidly undulating tongue.<br /> the vast goat had been created for many subversive acts, yet this was surely the last act of depravity, of whacked-out weirdness and of livestock neglect an individual could concieve of...<br /> <br /> continue please http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-129 Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:52:47 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 129@http://forums.livster.net/ you have just cured my addled mind... wait, no. you just make me sound sane with your comely and 'forsooth' brand of phraseology. 8) is 'forsooth' 'to Forsyth' as in 'g-g-g-g-g-g-good game!'? <br /> i am approaching the planet of the strong, fit and virile, about to settle into a gentle orbit, after having meandered through the black void of diahorrea-induced deliruim and enforced starvation that has indeed rendered my belly receptive to nothing but rice boiled over a period of days, the milk from the tender breast of an incipient mother and the gelatinous marrow of a fresh foetus. anything thing else will mean spontaneous and horrific necrosis across my interior entire.<br /> i have made my way back to the ennui of southampton and have decontaminated all surfaces, indents, alcoves, parabolas, tangents, protrudences, excresences, promontories and jetties. i've also launched biological compounds into the neighbouring rooms that will render the respective vicinity sterile down to the nearest picometre, although this will have the side effect of annihilating the occupants anatomy, reducing them to collections of rudimentary protoplasmic globules that gibber pathetically in the fading light.<br /> i hope you've had the best week. i will endeavour to return on the fifth day in this week. if i have to stay, pray that i might refrain from building an allotment for sub-tropical vegetables in my room out of despair.<br /> Good day. ;-) http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-128 Thu, 05 Feb 2004 15:45:23 +0000 solid 128@http://forums.livster.net/ GODSPIT!<br /> <br /> clearly tom, like a thick scab weeping pus, will protrude a story into the ether, of such potentual foulness and twisted, mucus exuding, vomit inducing decrepitude that our degraded, nay, decedent brains will find succulence and nourishment.<br /> <br /> verily and forsooth. http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-127 Tue, 03 Feb 2004 16:03:50 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 127@http://forums.livster.net/ do i need to spell it out? :x <br /> <br /> just don't, Okay... :? :x http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-126 Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:48:05 +0000 decoy 126@http://forums.livster.net/ begin what? making sense? ;-) http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-125 Mon, 02 Feb 2004 20:03:36 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 125@http://forums.livster.net/ VOTE! }:-@ }:-@ }:-@ <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ARE YOU SITTING COMFORTABLY?<br /> THEN I'LL BEGIN... :o http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-124 Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:19:57 +0000 decoy 124@http://forums.livster.net/ What in the name of all things unholy is going on? http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-123 Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:09:41 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 123@http://forums.livster.net/ Oh yeah, and there's Top Gun with budgies! 8) <br /> <br /> 'rattatatat!'<br /> 'incoming!'<br /> 'Cheep!'<br /> <br /> hence the need for seed thing. yeh? oh... :? http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=43#post-122 Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:03:32 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 122@http://forums.livster.net/ <strong>There she was, trapped beneath its rapidly undulating tongue...</strong> }:-) <br /> <br /> maybe not! ahem..<br /> <br /> <strong>The creation of the Earth, assuming it was created, started with a vast lump of hair being spat out by the vast Astrocat that passes through...</strong><br /> :? <br /> ok, third time lucky...<br /> <br /> <strong>Gerti fell off of her motorised cart into the path of oncoming traffic.</strong><br /> <br /> i give up. any one will do... http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=40#post-121 Sun, 01 Feb 2004 15:51:28 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 121@http://forums.livster.net/ Well Groomed...Fresh Snow... GENIUS!<br /> it's the greatest line of English i've read on the net for the last ten minutes!<br /> :) <br /> As for Lee, well i suppose he likes it 'in your face' being a beast of the suburban sprawl known as Kingston, or Kinz'tarn me Juli' Oh! <br /> :-// :-// :-// <br /> that was bad.<br /> <br /> i'm in favour of the subtle, furtive approach myself; a hint of cleavage, a slither of thigh, a vaseline smear over the lens and a stetson. what more could a man ask for? }:-) http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=41#post-120 Sun, 01 Feb 2004 15:36:27 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 120@http://forums.livster.net/ <strong>Just imagine the bleedin' budgie perhaps?! </strong><br /> Oooh Betty! it's my fault i cant do a thing with this compwuter.<br /> in the meantime, i'll serenade you with this ditty;<br /> <br /> imagine all the bud-gies,<br /> i wonder if you can...<br /> no more time for peck-ing<br /> etc etc. :-// <br /> <br /> yeah well i never said i was a songwriter, or a lyricist.<br /> wait, i might be one of those... judging by the ache in my wrist and the awful mess over the lingerie page that i keep bookmarked in the Littlewoods catalogue<br /> i detect 'schadenfreude' in progress!<br /> stop giggling! :x <br /> <br /> rather than the karachi story with its reams of dickensian annotation lets cater for the MTV/ picosecond-attention spans of Joe Average by limiting story posts to one-line sentences! i'm starting it off: (really bored!) <br /> <br /> Tomweststreamofconsciousnessbullshit@bigfun dot com http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=41#post-119 Sat, 31 Jan 2004 11:22:26 +0000 solid 119@http://forums.livster.net/ right dude, this is what you have to do:<br /> <br /> resize the image on your computer using photoshop or something simmilar, sign up to this website: <a href="http://www.villagephotos.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.villagephotos.com</a> and uplaod the pic onto the online album provided. then you simply link it from there.<br /> <br /> indeedy http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=41#post-118 Sat, 31 Jan 2004 02:42:40 +0000 decoy 118@http://forums.livster.net/ hehehehe http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=41#post-117 Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:15:49 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 117@http://forums.livster.net/ TOO BIG! how to compress? http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=41#post-116 Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:07:44 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 116@http://forums.livster.net/ is it here now? http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=39#post-115 Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:56:07 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 115@http://forums.livster.net/ so i guess that means none drawn by me or... Szevish the budgerigar!<br /> NOOOO!<br /> <br /> :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( <br /> <br /> i had my hopes pinned to that feathered deity! http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=39#post-114 Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:02:35 +0000 solid 114@http://forums.livster.net/ holy mucus sacks batman!<br /> <br /> what manner of decedance is this?<br /> <br /> and NO dodgy avatars! deviants will be expunged. http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=40#post-113 Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:58:59 +0000 decoy 113@http://forums.livster.net/ a townie eh. perhaps he could be the subject of the next comic... http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=40#post-112 Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:49:47 +0000 solid 112@http://forums.livster.net/ Lee has problems. i suspect he may be a townie, so the next time we see him i think we should burn him.<br /> <br /> the pictures of me are as clean as fresh snow on a well groomed face.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> avaunt! http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=40#post-111 Fri, 30 Jan 2004 06:08:47 +0000 decoy 111@http://forums.livster.net/ some would say that some of the pictures of solid on <a href="http://ltj.livster.net">http://ltj.livster.net</a> are filth.... http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=39#post-110 Fri, 30 Jan 2004 06:06:16 +0000 decoy 110@http://forums.livster.net/ yeah, seems like we're having problems with avatars... I've changed it so you have to link to a picture.<br /> <br /> If you don't have somewhere to put it. let me or solid know. http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=40#post-109 Thu, 29 Jan 2004 19:45:32 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 109@http://forums.livster.net/ a little won't hurt.<br /> <br /> SLUTS FILTH PORN WHORES GUNS SEX WEASELS FISH! ;-) <br /> }:-) }:-) }:-) }:-) }:-) <br /> Really dodgy and degrading, like the stuff Lee was on about! http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=39#post-108 Thu, 29 Jan 2004 19:37:28 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 108@http://forums.livster.net/ Wait, i went on a forum exactly like this one earlier and it had all these rude pictures of ladies with big boobies.<br /> so i'm thinking you are PORN KINGS! 8-O <br /> <br /> You say you're children are safe? as Anneka would say, 'MOUTTI MIEN HERR!' <br /> <br /> No naughty smilies then tssk tssk, blff blff!<br /> <br /> i'm a total arse. http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=39#post-107 Thu, 29 Jan 2004 19:27:42 +0000 Tom Sex Bomb 107@http://forums.livster.net/ help! wanna put an avatar on profile. cant.<br /> its 6k jpeg. whats the deal? :-? :x <br /> <br /> IT WILL ROCK YOUR TINY GAY WORLDS! http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=38#post-103 Wed, 31 Dec 2003 07:35:45 +0000 decoy 103@http://forums.livster.net/ Seems faintly ludicrous. Almost sounds like something out of monty python: Nine Silent Ones, not five, not two, but Nine! http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=38#post-102 Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:10:03 +0000 dodman 102@http://forums.livster.net/ Indeed, the fountainhead from which the ECK writings spring is the Ancient Gospel compiled by the Nine Silent Ones, whose main duty it is to gather up and sort out the unchanging laws that enfold every ripple in life. <br /> <br /> The library alongside the main Wisdom Temple at Sahasra-dal-Kanwal on the Astral Plane is an enormous place of many roomy departments. <br /> <br /> In the archival warehouse rests a manuscript drawn from the main text of the Shariyat, which is closely guarded in the nave of the Temple of Askleposis. Paul, myself, and certain appointed writers do research from this archival material when they are writing their own books. In fact, PaulÃŒs firm hand has dotted the left margin of this source manuscript with voluminous notes. http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=36#post-101 Fri, 12 Dec 2003 04:37:14 +0000 dodman 101@http://forums.livster.net/ Hello Jon,<br /> <br /> <br /> I agree, it's not easy at the best of times. Books aren't that much help, mainly because they concern themselves with explaining what the Technique is, rather than how to put it into practice. In reality, though, that 'practice' is disarmingly simple. So simple, in fact, it's <br /> hard not to wonder, often, 'is this it?'<br /> <br /> Elsewhere <br /> <br /> <a href="http://alexandertechnique.com/articles/brockbank2" rel="nofollow">http://alexandertechnique.com/articles/brockbank2</a> or <br /> <a href="http://web.dodman.org/files/alex/correspondance/beforeandafter.htm" rel="nofollow">http://web.dodman.org/files/alex/correspondance/beforeandafter.htm</a><br /> <br /> I've written at length about my first lesson. I was in a similar situation to Steve, living where there were no Alexander teachers. I visited London, had two lessons, then didn't have another for more than a year. Before that first lesson, I was clueless. I had read about the Technique, and thought I understood it, but I had no practical knowledge. After my lessons, I felt I had a good kernel of understanding. However, I ought to add that the teacher did very little with her hands. <br /> <br /> Almost all the useful imput came from her observing me and talking me through movements. I believe it is the absence of sight rather than hands that particularly impedes 'distance learning'. However, I have had a sufficient number of fascinating and mutually beneficial dialogues with people in similar situations to Steve to know that progress of a sort can be made. <br /> <br /> I have a suspicion much of it has to do with people putting in the time. When someone pays to have a lesson, not only do they have the undivided attention of their teacher, they also have their own attentiveness to the process almost guaranteed. It would be rare for someone to pay for a forty minute lesson and spend it thinking of something else. Granted, their attention is directed by their teacher, so it is harder for their mind to wander; but, nevertheless, if someone made a regular forty minute space in their lives for Alexander self practice, and stuck to it, I'm convinced some useful learning would take place.<br /> <br /> The main requirement, over and above time and attention, would be some means of obtaining objective feedback. This could be by using mirrors, or, more probably today, video, or, as I often suggest, our own hands. Our hands can feel movements, particularly in the neck, that can't (or won't, initially) be sensed kinesthetically. The purpose of this would not be to wander around the place with our hands clutching our necks; but, for the duration of forty minutes, to use them, sparingly, possibly in conjunction with seeing ourselves in a mirror or screen, or using the flat surface of a a wall or floor, to guage what exactly we are doing with ourselves, and more specifically, how and where this fails to tally with what we feel we are doing.<br /> <br /> This is the key point that all teaching leads to: the moment when we realise what we feel we are doing is not what we are actually doing. The next step is to learn to sense, kinesthetically, what we are actually doing that is harmful, so we can stop doing it. This requires, above all else, repetition and awareness. Over time, previously subconscious behaviour, that at first could not be sensed kinesthetically, but could be felt with our hands or seen in the mirror or on the screen, enters into our field of awareness. From there, we can learn to inhibit (ie, not do) it. That way, so long as we inhibit often enough, it will lose its hold over us, enabling further habit patterns to surface in its wake, and for them to be inhibited in turn.<br /> <br /> This is easy to say and relatively easy to do; but not so easy to put into practice on an enduring basis.<br /> <br /> Nevertheless, I would say to Steve, take heart! If possible, have a lesson or two. But whether or not you have a lesson, make time for yourself, at least equivalent to the time a lesson would take, to look into how you do things. You certainly won't lose anything by doing this; and you may gain a lot. <br /> <br /> <br /> Nicholas http://forums.livster.net/topic.php?id=14#post-100 Fri, 12 Dec 2003 03:59:02 +0000 dodman 100@http://forums.livster.net/ Hello Jon,<br /> <br /> Great to hear from you. I, too, hope more people will join in any disussions. <br /> <br /> Soon, I plan to update the links at my site, and put up some more articles. <br /> <br /> Nicholas