Feldenkrais and Rotation

[lostinidlewonder]

You can only initialize movement.

Incorrect, I can for instance stop myself once I have initialized a movement thus you can control action after you have initialized it.

When looking at videos of keyboardclass playing I do not notice any efficient technique which relates to ultimate relaxation (in fact the technique is amateur), so all of what is written in this thread is hot air because it is not used in practice. Post videos of your relaxation while playing because so far you have not shown us and all you are saying are words which we also have pointed out does not stand up to scrutiny.

[keyboardclass]

You see what you want to see.

[lostinidlewonder]

I have seen hundreds of people play piano, it is what I see as a professional piano tutor and educator. So I see what you produce through the eyes of a professional musician. So if you are happy with what you are doing and think that you play more relaxed than most people, then you have merely the delusion of grandeur condition. You are yet to prove yourself in both text or video, your videos do NOT highlight anything about relaxation that you speak about, and the pseudo-technique you describe does not exist in your videos of your playing either.

[mike1127]

You can only initialize movement.  The body schema does the rest so the thing is not to interfere.  If you are in the habit of interfering, which nearly everyone is, you need to go slowly - you (the body image) can help by sensing the impact of gravity on your body whilst your body schema is also doing the same.  Help it concentrate - sing from the same hymn sheet! (gravity)  They interact.  Trouble is body image is a poor listener while body schema is too obedient - anything for a peaceful life!

Are you familiar with how Alexander teachers say "get out of your own way"?

Can you clarify how the idea that one can "only initialize movement" relates to ongoing movement without pause?

lostinidlewonder: there is a possible relationship of what he says about "interfering" to techniques like Alexander and Feldenkrais

[lostinidlewonder]

lostinidlewonder: there is a possible relationship of what he says about "interfering" to techniques like Alexander and Feldenkrais

But to say you merely start the action then it does the rest naturally is a wrong way of considering what you do, he even goes further to say if you do anything it is interference, baloney! I could consider for instance, a pivot point for my hand while I play a passage, you would certainly feel this point while you are playing, if you merely caused an action when you entered the phrase and then let it go on its own accord you will have lesser control. The flowing movement of large arpeggio runs as well do not exist on merely an initial movement but a constant controlling flow.

I really don't care if there is a small connection between this and that, I want specifics and if generalisations are said at least they should be crafted in such a way that they make sense most of the time! To say you can only initialize movement is a VERY short sighted ideological stance of technique. Keyboardclass never elaborates on his generalisations so they might impress those who know little about technique but really they are saying nothing.

He also admits he gains a lot of relaxation and posture ideas through yoga, there is no connection between yoga and piano playing relaxation, I taught a master disciple of yoga who did it for over 60 years and she struggled with piano playing, and did you know what, it wasn't relaxation that hindered or sped up her progress. There are plenty more other important aspects of piano playing than the posture your body takes or the relaxation that you might think is occurring in another persons body.

[keyboardclass]

Are you familiar with how Alexander teachers say "get out of your own way"?

Can you clarify how the idea that one can "only initialize movement" relates to ongoing movement without pause?

If Alexander was right, then it's no coincidence that we come to similiar conclusions.  I haven't heard the Primary Control described in this way, I quite like it.  Grindea Technique is so, so, similar.   Problem was when I 'allowed' or 'ordered' my spine to lengthen nothing happened!  Once you are a certain wrong distance down the road you need help in person to turn around.   But I'm quite obstinate.

I disagree with Alexander that the head balances on top of the atlanto-occipital joint - it's too front heavy.  A small amount of research shows that it hangs from the nuchal ligament so for me it's head 'back and up'.   Armed with the correct physiological knowledge I think a person can bring themselves back.

Ongoing movement without pause is achieved by the mutual engagement of both body image and body schema in the act of sensitizing to gravity.  Have you ever done kinhin?  That's the basic practice for all action.

Once you're upright, place your hands close in front of your chest, with your left hand in a fist and your right hand resting on it, your right palm and fingers covering your left fingers and back of your hand. Let your elbows stick out naturally. Keeping your eyes half open or a bit more, begin to walk around the room — very, very slowly.

The object is awareness. Be aware of the complexity of movement in simple walking. When the weight transfers from your trailing leg, the heel of your leading leg touches the ground, your weight comes down on this leg, the ball of your foot and toes lower, you press down on this leg and prepare to lift your trailing leg. Then you balance on the leading leg, bend the knee of your trailing leg, lift that heel, and swing it forward into the air. You're committed then; you're falling, and the ground is there to catch you every time. Each step is like this: trust and embrace, your balance, your foot, the ground, gravity, a dance.

[mike1127]

keyboardclass: I can see that you have a framework for understanding and practicing efficiency of action, but you seem to think that yours is the only correct framework.

I have done kinhin, which is an interesting idea to bring up, because I practice Buddhism informally. Zen Buddhism is full of deep concepts and paradoxes. No matter how much I think I understand enlightenment, I can always benefit from studying someone else's perspective... and people who seem to operate 180 degrees opposite of me actually have something to teach me.

Now, in this thread we are talking about efficiency of action, which would seem to be a more mechanical concept than enlightenment. Curious, I find it to be just as full of paradoxes, and just as rich an area. And just as much potential to integrate 180-degree-opposite ideas.

I could answer your comments about Alexander technique by explaining what appears to be a misconception on your part, but are you even interested? You seem to think that everyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

[mike1127]

But to say you merely start the action then it does the rest naturally is a wrong way of considering what you do, he even goes further to say if you do anything it is interference, baloney!

Interpreted in a conventional way, it does seem like nonsense. But doesn't that pique your interest to find out what it might mean in a deeper sense? When I encounter a statement like that, coming from a guy who is obviously intelligent (intelligent doesn't automatically make him right, but based on his writing, he is clearly intelligent), it makes me wonder what new perspective is possible.

There are experiences in Alexander technique and Zen Buddhism that cast some light on this idea.

[keyboardclass]

I could answer your comments about Alexander technique by explaining what appears to be a misconception on your part, but are you even interested? You seem to think that everyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

How does one disagree with the anatomy?  The head is heavier in the front so therefore cannot possibly balance on the atlanto-occipital joint.  Agreed?  I can find you plenty of quotes that attest to the opposite view in the Alexander camp though.

[lostinidlewonder]

Interpreted in a conventional way, it does seem like nonsense. But doesn't that pique your interest to find out what it might mean in a deeper sense?

I personally do not believe I have to find the deeper meaning if the person talking about it cannot reveal that to me (if there indeed is anything deeper then I would be interested to see how it is related to piano playing because I can only visualise the deeper meaning outside of the piano playing  environment).

I could say that Qigong breathing techniques are extremely beneficial to your relaxation so to breath incorrect while playing piano will be detrimental to your playing and thus you are not totally relaxed. Total and utter rubbish, breathing has little to do with piano technique, so too does this idea of an ideal of body posture to maximize relaxation. They are weaker pianistic controlling factors, there are many other things that command our ability a huge amount more. It might help one to breath correct, or have an ideal posture, but it is not going to improve your playing very much, if you think it does then you don't have much piano capability to begin with!

[mike1127]

How does one disagree with the anatomy?  The head is heavier in the front so therefore cannot possibly balance on the atlanto-occipital joint.  Agreed?  I can find you plenty of quotes that attest to the opposite view in the Alexander camp though.

That would frame the question this way shows you don't understand Alexander Technique. Are you interested in having the issue explained?

[keyboardclass]

I have a good enough understanding of Alexander.  Does or does not the head balance on the atlanto-occipital joint?

[mike1127]

Clearly you have no understanding of Alexander, based on what you've written on this thread about trying out the orders and thinking that the primary question is the weight distribution of the head.

[keyboardclass]

One of the primary questions for me is the 'weight distribution of the head'.  Whether or not it's primary to Alexander practitioners isn't that relevant (and I can assure you I've done plenty of research).  That they state as a fact the head is balanced is and I can't help thinking it has some relevance to their work.  Do you think it is?  What gives me the feeling there's a bit of a squermish going on here?

Here's George Bowden a student of Alexander:

It may also be suggested that the relation of the head to the neck seems a trivial thing on which so much hangs or depends.  But our life itself hangs as it were on that relation!

Here's Alexander writing in the Lancet:

When I was experimenting with various ways of using myself in an attempt to improve the functioning of my vocal organs, I discovered that a certain use of the head in relation to the neck and of the neck in relation to the torso...constituted a 'Primary Control' of the mechanisms as a whole.

[mike1127]

Let me put it this way. Anatomy as a physicist would describe it is not always the same thing as anatomy as experienced subjectively.

[keyboardclass]

As an avowed phenomenologist I can't agree more but experiencing a sand dune as water is not going to save you from dehydration.

[mike1127]

Okay, so it is possible to experience the head as floating or resting lightly on the top of the spine. My understanding is that the extensor muscles that keep the head from flopping forward can be operated via deep reflexes, so the conscious experience is one of effortlessness. I've experienced this state of affairs very strongly after Alexander and Feldenkrais Function Integration lessons, and can practice it via Feldenkrais Awareness Through Movement lessons.

[keyboardclass]

But it is also possible to experience the head hanging from the nuchal ligament - which is what actually happens.  The splenius group is certainly not deep at all!  I think we're each caught on a preferred perception.  You seem to want rid of the body, I want to access all of it.

[mike1127]

Where on earth do you get that "you seem to want rid of the body"?

[keyboardclass]

The floating stuff.  The head doesn't float, why would you want to feel it floating?  Why not feel it hanging which it actually does do?

[mike1127]

My experience points to the idea that the most functional state of affairs is one in which the conscious experience is one of balancing, taking support from the spine, and to some extent, floating. The experience doesn't always match the physics.

I do believe that the human nervous system is rich enough to allow for multiple organizations, so it's possible that you have an alternative which is just as functional. But your photos and video of yourself doesn't look anything near as light and alive as, say, a good Alexander teacher.

[keyboardclass]

Looks can be deceiving.  

You need to understand the feelings we are refering to are only messages.  Your body is not something you can actually feel any more than you can feel the murder you read about in the newspaper, so feeling your body light or heavy has little to do with anything.  Trying to get in touch with the mechanics opens up a very different route and one that, I feel, gets closer to the truth.

[mike1127]

If you think looks are deceiving, why do you post photos and videos? Your posture photo does not look like those kids, and in your video, you appear to be very cautiously maintaining a constant relationship between head, shoulders and back--- rather than allowing that relationship to emerge spontaneously and contribute to "alive" movement.

[keyboardclass]

Well lets just say you are deceived.  Why do you want to feel your head floating?

[mike1127]

I don't want to feel my head floating. By the way, "floating" alone does not describe it. There can be a sense of floating at times, and also a sense of taking support from the spine.

What I want to do is find the teachers who have the best quality of movement and whose teaching gives me the most revolutionary experience of freedom and functionality.

[mike1127]

I personally do not believe I have to find the deeper meaning if the person talking about it cannot reveal that to me (if there indeed is anything deeper then I would be interested to see how it is related to piano playing because I can only visualise the deeper meaning outside of the piano playing  environment).

I would agree with you that keyboardclass can't demonstrate that--- I think he has done enough work to have an intellectual understanding of certain concepts, but hasn't gone very far in the implementation of it, plus is burdened by an aversion to certain subjective experiences. But there are teachers who have gone far with this idea.

I could say that Qigong breathing techniques are extremely beneficial to your relaxation so to breath incorrect while playing piano will be detrimental to your playing and thus you are not totally relaxed. Total and utter rubbish, breathing has little to do with piano technique

If your pattern of breathing adds a tension load to your movement, then I think breathing will affect all activity, piano included.

[keyboardclass]

Still searching for a teacher?  Hmm.  Maybe it would be nice to discuss interpretation with someone knowledgeable or perhaps an external guide on my posture but...
So you don't see repose here?

[mike1127]

I would agree with you that there is a limit to what one can see in pictures... I don't claim to have any absolute certainty about what I see. But what I see in that photo is bracing.

The video is more enlightening. I don't see as much bracing there, but I see a sort of "carefulness" rather than aliveness and alertness.

I would agree with you that one cannot be 100% certain about what's going on.

[keyboardclass]

I'm not sure what video you mean.  Are you sure you're not a modern day Icarus?  Trying to escape gravity in vain?

[mike1127]

The videos here, of an Alexander teacher, demonstrate aliveness and alertness and freedom and spontaneity.

https://reviews.pianotechnique.org/barbara-lister-sink-freeing-the-caged-bird.php

[keyboardclass]

Not old Barbie!  I went to one of her workshops - not too impressed but better than nothing.  She got a bit of an ear bashing from my teacher!

[mike1127]

I'm not sure what video you mean.  Are you sure you're not a modern day Icarus?  Trying to escape gravity in vain?

First of all, you are hung up on the word "floating." I said a lot more than that. And you never responded to my post about taking support from the ground.

By the way, movement is an area filled with paradoxes just as much as Zen Buddhism, so often it involves the integration of ideas that seem superficially contradictory.

Suppose I lie on the floor and try to relax. Parts of me will contact the floor, and parts of me won't. There may be differences between the left and right sides; for instance, my shoulder blades my lie differently. Maybe the right one lies flatter. There will be a space under my neck and under my lower back. Lying on the floor should require zero tension, and perhaps I feel relatively relaxed.

Now suppose I do a movement-awareness lesson. During this lesson, I experiment with different ways of coordinating my shoulders, torso, pelvis and so on. I do some basic movements such as folding of the trunk. During the course of the lesson, these movements get easier and smoother.

Now I lie flat on the floor again. Most likely, I will lie flatter. My shoulder blades will be more flat. There will be less space under my neck and under my lower back.

I will feel supported by the floor. That is the language we use frequently: we speak of the ability to take support from the floor. Even if I felt relaxed the first time and didn't perceive that any effort was required to lie there, most likely I will be awakened to the contrast. I will be aware that previously I was actively holding parts of myself away from the floor.

I learn a little bit each time I do a lesson like this, and over time my ability to take support from the floor improves.

You may wonder what the relationship of lying on the floor is to sitting upright at the piano. The ability to take support from the floor is directly related to the ability to balance upright with a lightness and readiness for action. Improve one and you improve the other.

[keyboardclass]

Suppose I lie on the floor and try to relax. Parts of me will contact the floor, and parts of me won't. There may be differences between the left and right sides; for instance, my shoulder blades my lie differently. Maybe the right one lies flatter. There will be a space under my neck and under my lower back. Lying on the floor should require zero tension, and perhaps I feel relatively relaxed.

Now suppose I do a movement-awareness lesson. During this lesson, I experiment with different ways of coordinating my shoulders, torso, pelvis and so on. I do some basic movements such as folding of the trunk. During the course of the lesson, these movements get easier and smoother.

Now I lie flat on the floor again. Most likely, I will lie flatter. My shoulder blades will be more flat. There will be less space under my neck and under my lower back.

I will feel supported by the floor. That is the language we use frequently: we speak of the ability to take support from the floor. Even if I felt relaxed the first time and didn't perceive that any effort was required to lie there, most likely I will be awakened to the contrast. I will be aware that previously I was actively holding parts of myself away from the floor.

I learn a little bit each time I do a lesson like this, and over time my ability to take support from the floor improves.

You may wonder what the relationship of lying on the floor is to sitting upright at the piano. The ability to take support from the floor is directly related to the ability to balance upright with a lightness and readiness for action. Improve one and you improve the other.

Done that too, in a Feldenkrais session.

[mike1127]

Done that too in a Feldenkrais session.

The question is not whether you've done it. The question is whether you are paying attention to what I've written.

Another thing you never responded to is my pointing out that movement is an area just as paradoxical as Zen Buddhism.

[keyboardclass]

Life is an area just as paradoxical as Zen Buddhism!  You fire too many questions at once!  Which would you like my opinion on first?

[mike1127]

I mention Zen paradoxes because you seem to be trying to pen my ideas into an oversimplified box.

I find that there is a kind of paradoxical weaving-together of the experience of floating and the experience of taking support from the ground.

By the way, the phrase "hangs from the nuchal ligament" makes little sense. It implies that the proximal attachment of that ligament is ABOVE the head, which it is not. By the Lever Principle the head must also be resting on the atlano-occiptial joint, so this doesn't change the basic idea that the head can take support from the spine.

EDIT: oh, and if one interprets your statement about hanging as meaning that no sense of effort is required to keep the head upright, this actually meshes exactly with my experience that any muscular effort to keep the head upright is unconscious and not experienced as effort.

[keyboardclass]

Of course it takes muscular effort!  That is my point.  A good posture takes effort - no strain, no gain.  In the head's case the splenius group extend the neck - this tightens the nuchal ligament - which holds the weight that isn't on the atlanto-occiptial joint.

[mike1127]

You know, I ask at most two or three questions per post. You're not able to respond to two or three questions? Why don't you just get in the habit of responding to each point made in a post. Otherwise you look like you're dodging questions.

I explained that you are distorting my points and putting them in a box. You remain silent on this matter. Are you dodging it?

Effort comes in different qualities or flavors. Is this idea part of your worldview?

[lostinidlewonder]

Still searching for a teacher?  Hmm.  Maybe it would be nice to discuss interpretation with someone knowledgeable or perhaps an external guide on my posture but...
So you don't see repose here?

You posted this weak photo in another thread and it still has not improved. It demonstrates nothing but how to sit with your hands on your lap and stay there like a statue. It demonstrates nothing to do with piano playing as piano playing is not a stagnant position and piano is not played on your lap.

No good piano teacher would EVER teach their student to sit as flat as you do in this photo, lets ignore your head and shoulder as you believe you are a grandmaster expert in that field.
Your ass is suffocating that chair, you need to sit closer to the edge, this is a fundamental beginners seating position at the piano and you have ignored it completely.

I would agree with you that keyboardclass can't demonstrate that--- I think he has done enough work to have an intellectual understanding of certain concepts, but hasn't gone very far in the implementation of it, plus is burdened by an aversion to certain subjective experiences. But there are teachers who have gone far with this idea.

I think you have given keyboardclass enough respect and patience with your questions, I am also yet to find a response from him which answers any of your questions. He answer question with questions in an effort maybe to conceal his musical ideology but for me as a musical educator his questions do not provoke any interesting ideas or concepts, perhaps they do outside of piano playing but then as I said before this thread should have been in the anything but piano, because keyboardclass still has not demonstrated how anything about his posture improve or aids piano. I have come across some people on pianostreet who also avoid questions, I simply ask the same question over and over again, if you start to follow their mad question lines and let them avoid your questioning you just end up with a thread like this where nothing is answered and stupid question are just thrown randomly around the place with no context.

If your pattern of breathing adds a tension load to your movement, then I think breathing will affect all activity, piano included.

Yes, but my point was that the improvement that it causes is very small compared to changes made to your pianistic approach directly. It is an indirect improvement, so too would losing some weight or eating the correct food, but it is not a commanding issue, just as considering your head and shoulders is looking at piano the wrong way around if you hope that from there you learn to develop your technique.

[mike1127]

for me as a musical educator his questions do not provoke any interesting ideas or concepts, perhaps they do outside of piano playing but then as I said before this thread should have been in the anything but piano, because keyboardclass still has not demonstrated how anything about his posture improve or aids piano.

...

<re breathing> Yes, but my point was that the improvement that it causes is very small compared to changes made to your pianistic approach directly. It is an indirect improvement, so too would losing some weight or eating the correct food, but it is not a commanding issue, just as considering your head and shoulders is looking at piano the wrong way around if you hope that from there you learn to develop your technique.

I think that methods like Feldenkrais and Alexander are directly relevant to playing piano. I've discovered through those methods that breathing is a "commanding issue", central to how one's whole self is organized. And the head-neck-back relationship is profoundly important. I don't know what your experience with them is. If you were to take lessons with a good teach (good is the operative word here) I think you would experience the relevance to piano.

And Feld/Alex. stuff is more general than piano; that is, piano is not mentioned in a general lesson. You could say that makes it irrelevant to piano. Well, my experience is that there are central issues in how one organizes action that are relevant equally to any activity, but particularly relevant to a complex physical, mental, and spiritual activity such as playing piano.

[keyboardclass]

I mention Zen paradoxes because you seem to be trying to pen my ideas into an oversimplified box.

I find that there is a kind of paradoxical weaving-together of the experience of floating and the experience of taking support from the ground.

Putting things in boxes is what you need to do if you're going to share them, unfortunately.  Saying something is everything is saying nothing.  The Tao that can be talked about is not the real Tao.

[keyboardclass]

Effort comes in different qualities or flavors. Is this idea part of your worldview?

Yes, including no effort!

[mike1127]

Yes, including no effort!

Uh... since you just said that good posture takes effort, even "strain", referring now to "no effort" seems irrelevant.

So describe some of the flavors of effort in your experience.

Some concepts from Alexander and Feldenkrais include:

"doing"

"non-doing"

"end-gaining"

"allowing"

"sub-cortical control"

"inhibition"

"direction"

[keyboardclass]

Uh... since you just said that good posture takes effort, even "strain", referring now to "no effort" seems irrelevant.

I can go with all the Feldenkrais/Alexander flavours.  Have I my own?  I believe a person must search for their own, but not necessarily verbalize them. 

Pretty much my only contention with any of these schools/methods what-have-you is when they get the anatomy wrong because there is a way the body's evolved to operate, you mustn't go against that (as in knuckles facing forward).  I think Rolfing gets closest to the natural. 

[mike1127]

I think Rolfing gets closest to the natural. 

I've done Hellerwork, and it's okay, but it does not address organization of action at all. It's a static view.

Pretty much my only contention with any of these schools/methods what-have-you is when they get the anatomy wrong because there is a way the body's evolved to operate, you mustn't go against that (as in knuckles facing forward). 

Studying anatomy will tell you a little about organization for action, but not much. As far as I can tell, you apply a relatively simplistic idea like "make sure you move through the neutral point" to a static view of anatomy.

[keyboardclass]

The one caveat, which I don't see in any of these systems, is fitness.  I've said above somewhere that healthy posture is all about agonist/antagonists relationships.  You have to be reasonably fit to have a healthy posture - I don't mean visiting the gym but I do mean this as the element of effort involved.   The agonist must be stronger than the antagonist.   Add that to anatomical knowledge and your posture's sorted.

[mike1127]

Coordinating agonist and antagonist is something you shouldn't pay any conscious attention to. Your sub-cortical nervous system can take care of that just fine, thank you.

[keyboardclass]

Yes, but if they are not in the right balance strength wise i.e. if the antagonist is too strong or agonist too weak, they can't be coordinated.

[mike1127]

I find that implausible. It's probably a view you've developed from paying too much attention to agonist/antagonist relationships. I was taught that most muscles are operating at about 1 to 2% of full strength. Improving organization makes latent strength available. It's primarily in the nervous system.

In the olden days, when they treated mental illness by inducing insulin seizures, they didn't use paralytics. Muscles convulsing at near their full strength can break bones, tear off the spinal processes, tear off tendons.

[keyboardclass]

There is a natural agonist/antagonist balance.  Muscles are not both, they've evolved to specialize as one or the other.  You can reverse the roles but agonists are always stronger than antagonists - that's why we're not so good at walking backwards.