Feldenkrais and Rotation

[lostinidlewonder]

So now after 100 replies this thread till ignores the issues about PERFORMANCE in piano since you posted this in that section don't you think that finally you should start talking about something relevant to the topic and section you posted in?

[mike1127]

Exercise is always good. We evolved to exercise. But that's conventional knowledge. As far as the thing that is revolutionary, that gets to a true lightness and freedom, the nervous system is the key. I practice Buddhist mindfulness meditation and I think I "get" most of what you are saying. I guess Feldenkrais and Alexander don't appeal to you, but for me they were the most the revolutionary thing. The key is organizing action, and the special indirect methods by which that is developed. There is certainly a relationship to mindfulness and body awareness, but there are also differences. One difference is that a practitioner is there to give you hands-on feedback. Another difference from walking meditation is that the movements used are systematic and arranged in useful pattern.

I think you are throwing away something that could be of great value, based on misconceptions.

[keyboardclass]

One difference is that a practitioner is there to give you hands-on feedback....I think you are throwing away something that could be of great value, based on misconceptions.

My answer is spend five, or even ten years, working with a genius teacher of anything (I did in piano).  That equips you for life.  If I had the time or money sure, Alexander/Feldenkrais, why wouldn't I have a go?  My resources are limited though - this year I hope to start teacher training in yoga.

[mike1127]

I've found that I needed to integrate wisdom from different sources. I've worked with three genius teachers in three different disciplines (one of them for 21 years and one of them for 15 years) and there's no way I could have gotten to this point with only one of them. For me, integration of varied sources is key. Each of them was most effective in a certain area. I don't think any teacher can be all things, and yet I think that all areas of life are relevant to piano (or anything), thus a variety of teachers is extremely useful.

[keyboardclass]

I think you miss my point about agonist/antagonist.  Take the finger flexor/extensor.  I was told by a famous hand transplant surgeon that the extensors are only 10% of the mass of the flexors.  If you imagine it the other way round your fingers would be in permanent extension - it's all mechanical, not neurological.  In the same way the muscles in the upper back must be bigger in mass than those in the front - otherwise you get rounded shoulders.  The splenius group must have a mechanical advantage over the sterno-mastoids, the lower abdominals over the psoas, etc.  That's what I call fitness.  You're right, Feldenkrais/Alexander work on the nervous energy side - surely they fail on the mechanical side? 

[mike1127]

The fingers would only be in permanent extension if you assume that the extensors never let go.

Given how powerful the flexors are, how do you think someone can extend their hand at all with those puny extensors?

Let's say a five-year-old child and an NFL linebacker play tug-of-war. The child is perfectly capable of winning, if the linebacker doesn't pull very hard. I know you'll probably say something about how a minimum of co-contraction is required for stability. Okay, so the linebacker pulls just hard enough to keep the rope in the air.

The obvious reason the flexors are larger is that gripping movements necessary for survival require far more force than any required opening of the hand.

What do you mean by Feldenkrais and Alexander "fail" on the mechanical side?

They aren't weight-lifting or aerobics, so you still need to do those. There are good trainers and books and so forth on that stuff. Easy to find.

In many cases the missing link, for a person---whether that be escaping from chronic pain, improving performance, or whatever---is in the organization of the nervous system. That's why it interests me more.

[mike1127]

I'll make a separate post because it's a somewhat separate point that I think I can make more clearly.

Feldenkrais teachers like to say that most people are driving around with one foot on the pedal, and one foot on the brake. By habit we are working against ourselves. Muscles co-contract, meaning they do more work then necessary, impairing preformance and ultimately creating pain. Joints get pulled tight, increasing friction. Tendon sheaths get compressed. Internal organs get compressed.

I see at the least levels to address this:

Level 1: you know you are tense. you get a good massage or sit in a warm bath.

Result 1: you feel better. then you go back to your life and, if nothing has changed in the meantime, get tense again

Level 2: you relax in some way that provides much deeper insight into patterns of tension, and use a technique that allows a much greater release, such as Hellerwork or Yoga

Result 2: you feel a lot better. You begin to move around, and find that the experience is different in quality than, say, a massage. It's not just that you feel "more relaxed." That would be merely a quantitative distinction. You feel, instead, a qualitative. Perhaps something you never expected to find.

Level 3: you gain awareness into dynamic organization for action. It's not just that you relax. It's not just that you relax specific static patterns. It's that you retrain your actions so the built-in tensions are not needed.

Result 3: this is a further qualitative shift from Level 2. At this level, one encounters concepts like "non-doing," referring to a change in something so primal as the way that one conceives of an action and carries it out. Conception of action is freer and makes more potent use of the imagination; carrying out the action is more automatic and makes greater use of the sub-cortical nervous system.

By level 3, you're not "good old you, but more relaxed." You start to wonder if you didn't know yourself that well.

• And yes, my understanding is that some co-contraction is necessary for stability, but probably astonishingly little. I would be suspicious of any studies done about this because they study ordinary people, which we somatic-aware people know co-contract a lot more than they need to. I would be suspicious that any significant co-contraction is needed in the voluntary muscles. We we have complex ligament systems and deep stabilizer muscles in all the major joints. Piano may be a novel situation, not anticipated by evolution... drumming your fingers and needing to keep an arch. I suspect that keeping that arch, and getting good tone from it, has far more to do with a well-trained nervous system than with strong co-contraction.

[keyboardclass]

An interesting read.  May I call myself a somatic-aware person?  Maybe get the t-shirt, or the mug.  That reminds me, you know Peter Feuchtwanger and I share the same tea cup coordination?  Both requiring a tea cup not a mug?  What's more we came to it independently!  How's that for somatic awareness?

I still think you don't quite follow the imbalance of having antagonist pulling around agonist instead of vice versus.  It's all very well to say it's dealt with pre-cortex but it is still extra work and surely we're looking to acquire the quietest nervous system we can?  Is it good to start out with a mechanical disadvantage?

[keyboardclass]

The fingers would only be in permanent extension if you assume that the extensors never let go.

Given how powerful the flexors are, how do you think someone can extend their hand at all with those puny extensors?

Where do you think the natural curve of the fingers come from?  It's the tonus of the flexors.  If the extensors had the advantage in tonus then your fingers would be permanently bent back.  The nervous effort taken to then smooth any movement by the flexors would certainly be counter productive. 

[mike1127]

You can call yourself anything you want.

Glad my writing is interesting to you. I wouldn't want you to get bored.

My main point is that the resting tonus can be less, and coordination of movement can become transformed in quality. In my own experience, it's not quite true to say, "I'm more relaxed, I can move with greater relaxation."  There is a qualitative change.

[keyboardclass]

My main point is that the resting tonus can be less, and coordination of movement can become transformed in quality. In my own experience, it's not quite true to say, "I'm more relaxed, I can move with greater relaxation."  There is a qualitative change.

That was Edmund Jacobson's point who started the relax industry.

[mike1127]

That was Edmund Jacobson's point who started the relax industry.

Which point? That resting tonus can be reduced, or that there is a qualitative change in movement? From what I've read of Jacobson, there's nothing about organization for action.

I thought the ancient Indian culture started the relax industry.

[keyboardclass]

Which point? That resting tonus can be reduced, or that there is a qualitative change in movement? From what I've read of Jacobson, there's nothing about organization for action.

I thought the ancient Indian culture started the relax industry.

Surely the one follows the other?  Yoga could be seen as the original Progressive Relaxation. 

[mike1127]

Surely the one follows the other?  Yoga could be seen as the original Progressive Relaxation. 

If you are saying that a qualitative change in movement follows a reduction in resting tonus, yes to some extent it does. But for me, a practice that addresses organization for action results in a more revolutionary change. Without changing the organization for action, one tends to get tense again quickly once they engage in activity.

[keyboardclass]

Without changing the organization for action, one tends to get tense again quickly once they engage in activity.

I wouldn't say that follows.  I would replace 'organization for action' with knowledge of the required coordination (anatomy based), which begins with posture.

[mike1127]

I wouldn't say that follows.  I would replace 'organization for action' with knowledge of the required coordination (anatomy based), which begins with posture.

Well, the phrase "knowledge of the required coordination" is one distinction from Feldenkrais. In my work, we can only think we "know" the required coordination, and "knowing" the required coordination can only result in inefficient cortical control. Instead, it's better to allow the sub-cortical brain to learn indirectly to re-coordinate action, by use of structured movement experiences with patterned use of awareness.

[keyboardclass]

Well, the phrase "knowledge of the required coordination" is one distinction from Feldenkrais. In my work, we can only think we "know" the required coordination, and "knowing" the required coordination can only result in inefficient cortical control.

Does that go for physiotherapists as well?  On one level it makes perfect sense on another you've got to wonder what you do with the already acquired poor 'cortical' routine.  It would be easy enough to say just forget it but the brain doesn't work that way.  It doesn't have the capacity to forget.  Like mistakes in piano playing you need to go over them with the correct coordination and know that's what you're doing or the mistake comes back. That is Alexander's inhibiting.   From the internet:

Got an extra third of a second or so?  You could use it well by doing nothing. Not doing anything. Not doing the thing you were going to do, and instead doing something different. Or not that either.  Your choice. It’s your choice, if you stop your habitual, automatic response and choose. Mind the gap.

The thing you want to do is to pause; chill, think. You’re in control. You may want to stay back, notice, observe. On the ‘body side’ of things, see what could be freer. Possibly your neck, your shoulders, your lower back? Just let go. How? By using your mind; your thinking, to send messages to the muscles to let go of excess tension.  It’s no big deal. We do it all the time.  That’s how we raise and lower our arms. This is very down to earth. Really ordinary if we could stay out of the way. Just pause to stop the stopping of the flow as we pause to stop the stopping of full, natural breathing.

If you don’t stop, your habit continues.

You can't just live in the subcortical (which I think may roughly equate with Shaun Gallegher's body schema).  The body image is real, deal with it!

Here's the beginning of a paper I'm just finishing up.  I'll probably edit the wording a bit but it's just what we're talking about (prenoetic is subcortical).  

Perhaps unique amongst species the human being can gain access, if quite limited, to the pre-noetic.  Is this a boon?  Or is the ability to meddle with nature a Pandora’s Box?  Its role in evolutionary advancement has yet to surface.  Its disadvantages are all around us – jutting heads, stooped shoulders, pelvic tilts, poor feet placements not to mention the pains that often come with these.  

You're saying leave the cortical out of it; I'm saying it's too late!  The real question is - Was there ever a noble savage?

[mike1127]

Aside: At this point I think we can say with confidence that this thread has mostly left piano, so if the moderator wants to move it, I don't object.

Does that go for physiotherapists as well?  On one level it makes perfect sense on another you've got to wonder what you do with the already acquired poor 'cortical' routine.  It would be easy enough to say just forget it but the brain doesn't work that way.  It doesn't have the capacity to forget.  Like mistakes in piano playing you need to go over them with the correct coordination and know that's what you're doing or the mistake comes back. That is Alexander's inhibiting.  

I don't think most Alexander teachers would use those words to describe inhibiting.

Let me get to my punch line first. Okay, my understanding is that the cortex, or ego, or conscious thought process, or whatever you want to call it, is good at forming goals and creating vivid images of what we desire to do. The rest of the brain, most of which evolved before we got thinking, is good at carrying out all the details to get to the desired place.

Regarding inhibition, there are as many ways of understanding it as there are Alexander teachers. I had three Alexander teachers, and I keep my finger on the pulse of the Alexander world by subscribing to a mailing list. It seems like most teachers would describe inhibiting as a way of stopping your habit so that the "right thing does itself" (in F.M. Alexander's words). The conscious skill, the conscious choice, is simply one of stopping. As far as the correct coordination, that takes care of itself.

You could say, "Piano won't take care of itself. You have to pay attention to what you are doing." Let me clarify.

If we consider an activity such as walking, we acquired that in childhood mostly through play and exploration. It's possible for "right walking" to do itself because we already have enough experience with walking that at some level in the nervous system there is sufficient acquired skill.

Piano won't "do itself" until we practice. And yes, if a passage is giving trouble, we must go over it carefully, exploring possible ways of coordination. But, my philosophy suggests that it's most efficient to think of it as exploration, and leave the final decision about how to execute something to the unconscious. The unconscious can figure out how to coordinate it way better than my ego can.

So what does my ego do? Vividly imagine the sound I want. Vividly imagine the quality of movement.

Your quote from the internet is just one way of describing inhibition. Some Alexander teachers consider it to be primarily "stopping", while it can also be regarding as boldly going forward. As far as using one's thinking to send messages, that's the idea of imaging the desired result, but letting the subcortical nervous system figure out how to get there. For instance, I could imagine my back as softening rather than trying to do anything about it. And, if I'm inhibiting well, then I'm likely to be surprised by the quality of sensations and the changes that take place.

If you want to relax and improve your coordination, and the result of doing so is exactly what you expected, then you probably aren't inhibiting in the Alexandrian sense.

Here's the beginning of a paper I'm just finishing up.  I'll probably edit the wording a bit but it's just what we're talking about (prenoetic is subcortical).  

I think you have a good point in this quote; that nature gave us this conscious mind, this ability to think sequentially, and it seems often to put us at odds with the rest of our nature. A way to cooperate can be found. I think that's what Buddhism is all about. When I listen to talks by really good Buddhist teachers, what I think is: these guys don't force anything, don't really try to control anything, but they so vividly imagine the possibilities for lovingkindness, compassion, equanimity. It seems a prerequisite to conjure up the possibility in the imagination (which is a way of describing what happens when we meet a great teacher). When I first started meditating, I had no sense of the possibilities, and not surprisingly, my meditation just led me around in circles.

[keyboardclass]

Let me get to my punch line first. Okay, my understanding is that the cortex, or ego, or conscious thought process, or whatever you want to call it, is good at forming goals and creating vivid images of what we desire to do. The rest of the brain, most of which evolved before we got thinking, is good at carrying out all the details to get to the desired place.

You seem to have some very fixed ideas re: precortical.  Is that healthy?  You certainly seem to be describing body image vs body schema but you seem to be entering into a rehash of the mind/body problem. 

. It seems like most teachers would describe inhibiting as a way of stopping your habit so that the "right thing does itself" (in F.M. Alexander's words). The conscious skill, the conscious choice, is simply one of stopping. As far as the correct coordination, that takes care of itself.

That's all very well but how do you know what to stop?  i.e. what is the habit?

If we consider an activity such as walking, we acquired that in childhood mostly through play and exploration. It's possible for "right walking" to do itself because we already have enough experience with walking that at some level in the nervous system there is sufficient acquired skill.

I disagree.  The child walker is buried too deep.  You've got to search it out.  I's an active process.

Got to go, more later.

[mike1127]

You seem to have some very fixed ideas re: precortical.  Is that healthy?  You certainly seem to be describing body image vs body schema but you seem to be entering into a rehash of the mind/body problem. 

What is the fixed part? How does this relate to mind/body?

That's all very well but how do you know what to stop?  i.e. what is the habit?

A Buddhist teacher likes to say that enlightenment is a many-faceted jewel.

That's a good question, and in the Alexander view, which I think is one valid facet of the jewel, habit is understood as something generally preceded by compressing or bracing the neck, shortening and narrowing the back, etc. So you could be in any number of button-pushing situations, with potential to stimulate a habit. Inhibition is the skill of stopping the compressing of the neck, etc. (i.e. interference with the primary control) even before you get to the stage of acting. In one sense you don't know what you are stopping.

You can't even say you are stopping this interference with the primary control because that would imply too much fixation on it. It just happens. You learn to do it (or "undo it") via Alexander lessons (or other methods) and it's a skill that is reliably there for you.

People can control their brainwaves with the help of biofeedback. If you learned to control your brainwaves, can you imagine trying to explain to someone else how to do it? You would have no words for it. Yet it is a real skill.

Inhibition is like that. There aren't adequate words to describe it, or how to do it. But a good teacher could demonstrate it immediately.

I disagree.  The child walker is buried too deep.  You've got to search it out.  I's an active process.

I think you have a point here. And Alexander teachers have a point. There are many facets to this jewel.

If you found a good Alexander teacher, you would probably be astonished by the spontaneous emergence of graceful walking. I think you don't realize the extent to which it's there already.

But there is another facet. Of course you can improve action via more exploration and more awareness, such as Feldenkrais provides. I wouldn't word it by saying "search it out." I would say do systematic exploration and "allow graceful coordination to emerge." Searching implies you know what you are searching for, and as I've said repeatedly, I think we don't know. Thinking we know only gets in the way.

[keyboardclass]

What is the fixed part? How does this relate to mind/body?

The fixed part are your ideas of precortical/cortical which are starting to appear to me as Cartesian.  The mind/body problem is only a problem for the mind (which you seem set on delimiting - which in turn delimits the body). 

In one sense you don't know what you are stopping.

In that case it'll just run through your fingers. (kinda Zen story - Little girl wees herself in class, teacher asks - "why didn't you put your hand up" girl answers "I did but it ran through my fingers")

You can't even say you are stopping this interference with the primary control because that would imply too much fixation on it. It just happens.

It!?

People can control their brainwaves with the help of biofeedback. If you learned to control your brainwaves, can you imagine trying to explain to someone else how to do it?

Moving your arm is controlling your brainwaves.  You couldn't tell someone how to move their arm but you'd have to tell them to move their arm if that's what you want them to do.

There aren't adequate words to describe it,

but yet you attempt?

If you found a good Alexander teacher, you would probably be astonished by the spontaneous emergence of graceful walking.

I very much doubt it with some pretty specific directions.  Just as I doubt playing the piano well will happen without some very precise direction and some simple knowledge of physiology.

I wouldn't word it by saying "search it out." I would say do systematic exploration and "allow graceful coordination to emerge." Searching implies you know what you are searching for, and as I've said repeatedly, I think we don't know. Thinking we know only gets in the way.

Agreed, knowing what we're searching for just gets us lost.  Knowing it when you find it is the key and for that you need knowledge.  'Systematic exploration' sounds like the Circumlocution Office to me. 

[nyiregyhazi]

What was the point here supposed to be? That you shouldn't playing piano with palms that face down?

[keyboardclass]

What was the point here supposed to be? That you shouldn't playing piano with palms that face down?

Maybe you should try reading the thread.

[nyiregyhazi]

I read the thread but couldn't find a single issue of consequence or a single specific implication about piano technique. Could you explain what it was, if I missed something? If you are not suggesting there's no need for the palms to face down at a piano, what are you suggesting?

[keyboardclass]

Look mush, you got both of us permanently banned from PW.  Wasn't that enough for you?

[nyiregyhazi]

Well, it's certainly a good start that you can no longer dole out "advice" to members there. Sadly, I see that you're now coming up with such wonderfully dangerous advice as to suggest that someone with wrist problems that the only way to keep the wrist level is to work it harder. Regarding this thread however, I'm just bemused at what your point is. Yet another tirade against Alan Fraser, but I cannot discern a single practical issue of relevance to piano playing there. What is your point here?

[mike1127]

Moving your arm is controlling your brainwaves.  You couldn't tell someone how to move their arm but you'd have to tell them to move their arm if that's what you want them to do.

No one told you how to move your arm when you were an infant learning to control your movements. You had to discover that gradually.

At the piano, we care not just whether someone moves their arm, but how they coordinate that movement, and a true change in organization cannot be explained directly. It can be discovered by that person under the right conditions.

I very much doubt it [graceful walking] with some pretty specific directions.  Just as I doubt playing the piano well will happen without some very precise direction and some simple knowledge of physiology.

Find a good Alexander teacher and doubt no longer.

Fux counterpoint practice is an example of systematic exploration.

You just aren't going to understand inhibition by finding quotes on the internet. I think your habit of criticizing ideas via searching the internet for text and pictures is counterproductive.

[keyboardclass]

Find a good Alexander teacher and doubt no longer.

That's rather a poor argument.   We're more or less done here.  It's been interesting.
In view of recent developments send me a private message if you want to continue.

[lostinidlewonder]

Lock this thread already, its just two people talking to each other something that could be done in PM's and it has nothing to do with performance in piano.

[hmpiano]

Wow, what an intense thread! Thanks Google.  If good posture seems to involve good muscle tone, can it be developed by targeting the appropriate muscles and developing them?  Or, as the Feldenkraisers seem to say, is it all in the mind?   Did caveman do exercises?  Was his posture actual any good?  Hmm.

[j_menz]