Do I keep it, or let it go?
I’ve taught a fair few introductory Alexander Technique lessons recently. They tend to go like this:
- Student comes and sits. They tell me about what is bothering them.
- I ask some pertinent questions, and do some Alexander ‘hands-on’ work.
- Student feels better. Their face brightens.
- I ask if they have any questions. They look at me earnestly, and ask this:
- “It feels great. But how do I keep it?”
The dark underbelly of ‘how do I keep it?’
The question on the surface seems like a fair one. The student has had a good experience, and wants it to continue. This is completely understandable, especially if the student has been troubled by discomfort, and as a result of the lesson experience the discomfort has gone.
But ‘how do I keep it?’ is a question with a dark underbelly, and the easiest way of teasing this out is with this simple question: “What would happen if you didn’t keep it?”
The classic answer to this question is, “I’d revert to how I was before.” The subtext of this answer is this: I have to work at it for my body to feel like it is working well, and if I stop keeping it up, it will work poorly. In other words, the dark underbelly of wanting to ‘keep it’ is the hidden belief that our bodies work poorly unless we make them do otherwise.
Put that baldly, it is a fairly depressing thing to believe, isn’t it? And yet many of us, whether we realise it or not, work as if that’s the truth.*
But what if it isn’t?
You see, if our bodies are essentially poorly functioning, then we’re always going to have to work hard to keep them working well. But if the reverse is true – if our bodies are basically fine and designed to function well – then we wouldn’t have to do anything to keep them going. All we would need to do is to get out of our own way, cut the extraneous and unhelpful, and learn how to use our amazing bodies to best advantage.
In the words of actor Bruce Lee:
It’s not the daily increase but the daily decrease. Hack away at the unessential.
* FM Alexander, Constructive Conscious Control of the Individual in the IRDEAT ed., 382-3.
Photo by Jennifer Mackerras