the alexander technique The Alexander Technique is often misunderstood so it is best to start by stating what it is not. It is not a form of relaxation or a set of exercises to improve posture. Neither is it an alternative therapy, although radical it is entirely consistent with orthodox medical science and educational in nature. Put most simply, The Alexander Technique is a practical method for preventing interference with free movement and thought. Alexander made three vital observations with regard to human nature and fundamental to behaviour that methods designed to train and develop athletes must take into consideration. I am not aware of any other method that make allowances for all three of these basic factors of the human condition. These are:-
psycho-physical unity The
mind and body are
inseparable. No single voluntary act is purely physical or mental. Every
pathway from the brain eventually leads to a muscle via the thalamus.
The thalamus is part of the mid-brain that
performs a function similar to a telephone exchange by sending signals
from the sensory organs to the sensory cortex and
relaying messages back. This highly complex region is involved in
emotion, memory
and sleep, directing hormone production
in the hypothalamus
in preparation for the body’s
reaction. What we think does influence the outcome of an act through
modification of the signals passing through. In spite of this we tend to
think of the mind and body as distinct entities. We do physical exercise
to enhance fitness and mental work such as positive thinking to improve
the mind. Many of the 'mind-body' techniques emphasise
the importance of the unity between mind and body whilst maintaining the
concept of a split that needs to be brought together! Alexander referred
to the ‘total organism’ and used the term ‘self’ to prevent a
dualistic approach. Daily
experience reminds us that we are what we think as thoughts translate
into chemical reactions through the production of hormones. When we get
nervous we get ‘butterflies’ in the stomach and if we get angry
our
muscles tighten, heart rate increases
and blood pressure
rises.
A training programme has to acknowledge the individual as a whole and not define exercise as either mental or physical as to do so reduces the benefit of an activity. In the gymnasium many perform exercises listening to music or even reading the newspaper. It appears to be worse for swimmers and runners who comment on the boredom of completing the distances required to keep fit. I know many runners who give themselves a problem to solve during the time. It seems that whilst the ‘body’ is being worked out the ‘mind’ can be doing something more worthy of its ability. This separation means psycho-neuro-muscular integration is rarely accomplished thus limiting the real benefits that mindfulness to activity can bring. Optimum performance is not achieved by separating the organism in two. If we can accept that repetition of good movement improves performance then we must recognise that the opposite is also possible. Training whilst injured, tired or even just pre-occupied can lead to poor quality movement and new inefficient movement patterns.
use affects functioning Use
refers to the whole organism
and the process of how we control our actions, how we choose to react to
stimuli. Functioning
relates
to the automatic actions of the body that we generally don't control
such as breathing, digestion
and
circulation. Functioning also relates to how the organism operates as a
whole. Alexander
discovered
that the standard of our use has a constant influence, for good or ill,
on functioning. Following
an ankle injury
while the joint feels painful,
the knee, hip and other leg will have to compensate. Within a short
period the adjustments we make to cope become a subconscious habit. This
pattern, if undetected, lowers the standard of use in the individual.
One of Nature’s strengths can also be a weakness as the ability to
compensate can mask the problem. Everything seems normal until one of
the substitute parts begins to suffer from performing a function for
which it is not intended. This new problem becomes the focus of
attention and receives separate treatment, leaving the initial cause
untouched. This process is repeated each time that a new symptom
appears. The constant influence of poor use will continue to lower
functioning and ultimately reduce the level of performance. Athletes
know that the type of training conditions the characteristic of a
muscle. Different sports put different demands on muscle, for example a
cross-country runner uses
the slow white fibres
of
a muscle
whereas
the short bursts of activity in football
rely on the faster red fibres
for action. When we train in a
particular activity the demands placed on the muscle will condition it
for that purpose. An experiment by Buller
(1960), proved that the nerve
‘tells the muscle fibre not only what to do, but also what to be’.
When he switched the nerves attached to slow
and fast fibres, the
characteristic of both muscles changed to that of the muscle previously
served by the nerve. The frequent firing patterns that occur in
endurance training slow down
the muscle increasing aerobic function (using
oxygen). Short burst activities in sport increase the muscle’s
anaerobic capacity (using
glycogen, blood sugar, stored in the muscle). Even when standing, if the
‘movement’ muscles are held habitually tight, the frequent firing
pattern will slow down a muscle intended for short burst activities.
Poor conditioning will cause muscle to perform functions not originally
intended by nature. What has become normal is not necessarily natural. Alexander stressed the constant factor of the influence we have on our well being. By improving our manner of use the influence will be beneficial. Repetition of a movement with good use ensures all parts of the organism are functioning in a way suitable to their design, that is, as a player in the total pattern. faulty sensory appreciation Struggling
to overcome the problem that threatened his career, Alexander
observed
an inconsistency between what he wished to do and what actually
occurred. In his book ‘An Introduction to Kinesiology – The Science
and Practise of Physical Activity’, Michael Wade
describes:
- “Skill
is
that which minimises the discrepancy between intent and outcome.” This
‘credibility gap’ is evident at coaching sessions. There will be a
discrepancy between the acts of the coach and
that of the pupils carrying out the instructions. Verbal instructions
are interpreted according to individual conditioning and executed with
varying ability, depending on their standard of use. Faulty sensory appreciation or debauched kinaesthesia (our sense of movement) was the term Alexander used to describe a condition that due to its nature we do not know we have. If our sensory mechanisms are unreliable, how are we to know? In the Hamburg Tennis Masters 2001 competition Tim Henman, ranked in the top ten, was beaten by German outsider Lars Burgsmueller ranked 96th in the world. After the match Henman said “I couldn’t have felt better coming into this match and I couldn’t have played much worse. I am staggered, it was appalling.” A classic example of not trusting what you think your senses are telling you. Just
as eyesight
can gradually decline without
our knowledge the same is possible with muscle sense. What we sense may
not be an accurate picture due to a number of conditions. The more an
over-worked muscle adapts to an habitual contracted state, the more it
suppresses the muscle sense
by
preventing activation of the stretch reflex
thus
reducing sensory input. The signal coming from the originating nerve can
be modified at every synapse
(point
at which nerves connect) along the path resulting in a different message
being received - a sort of ‘Chinese Whispers’.
Everything we know and perceive
of our environment comes via
our sensory mechanisms influencing every thought, therefore the quality
and reliability of the sensory systems govern all actions. If the
reliability of these
mechanisms is in doubt, the subsequent movements are initiated using
incomplete data. For example, we may be unaware that a muscle is being
activated unnecessarily while others are hardly working at all, as a
result the body’s natural functions, such as the positive support
postural reflexes that maintain balance, are ‘overruled’ once the
new pattern becomes habitual and begins to feel right. If the head is
invariably pulled back by a tight trapezius muscle,
the new sensations received from the inner ear and eyes will eventually
be interpreted as horizontal. Movements of the head, registered against
this perceived normal position, feed corrupted information to the
nervous system. As the position of the head and visual mechanisms are
instrumental in movement, the resulting muscle activity will be
inappropriate for the given activity. What
we perceive is therefore not always an accurate account of the state of
our body in relation to the environment. We may feel we are sitting
comfortably in our armchair, when in reality the position is putting
undue stress on the spine. We believe exercise
will
improve our strength and stamina, yet we may be unaware of creating
substandard patterns of movement if our co-ordination is poor. The
feedback mechanisms do not
tell us we are using too much effort to get up from a chair so we
continue to perform the move in a way that feels right. Yet if some of
the unnecessary actions mentioned in the experiment
with the chair are present, we can conclude that our idea of right may
be wrong. We cannot trust what we feel. The majority of training disciplines have overlooked this element of the human condition when devising methods to improve performance. If we perform only the exercises that feel good and neglect others we dislike, we start to limit movement to habitual patterns that may or may not be useful. If we cannot be certain of how we carry out an act then we cannot know if it is beneficial or harmful. Alexander's solution Early
in his investigations Alexander found
he could not prevent the problem of pulling back his head by simply
putting it forward because the underlying condition causing his misuse
was fundamental to his behaviour thus influenced every act. He could not
use his existing habits to bring about a change as they were the part of
the problem, pulling back the head was just the symptom. When he tried
to do anything directly to change the position of his head he would
succeed only in doing it wrong in another way. To improve his
performance he knew that he should stop interfering with the complex
relationship of the head, neck and torso: a mechanism he called the primary
control. - see How it works The
reason he found it difficult to prevent his instinctive
(habitual) reaction to stiffen
the neck before performing was because it had become a conditioned
reflex. Just as Pavlov
had
training his dogs to salivate at the sound
of a bell, Alexander
had conditioned himself to
react in this particular manner at the thought of reciting. After many
failed attempts to correct the problem he concluded that the only way to
improve his use was to ignore what he felt he should be doing in
preparation to speak. To
overcome his reliance on habit he refused to react to the thought of
reciting and prevented the impulse to act without thinking. He referred
to this act as conscious
inhibition
(not
to be confused with Freud’s definition). In Alexander’s terminology,
inhibition is a vital function of the nervous system. All movement
requires stimulation by an excitatory neuron
to
contract the agonist (doing) muscle and at the same time release the
antagonist (opposing) muscle via an inhibitory neuron. Without
inhibition, movement is not possible as all muscles would contract
simultaneously. He
found that by recognising the stimulus that
would bring about his normal reaction he could prevent his initial,
therefore habitual, response. This allowed Alexander to consciously
intervene at the crucial moment before he would react with a conditioned
response (this can be experience in an Alexander session). He
gave directions, mental
orders to himself, to prevent habitual tension and promote the
lengthening of his stature that had previously proved to be beneficial.
By maintaining an awareness of what he did not want to do, that is, pull
back his head, he was able to prevent interference with the righting
reflexes and allow a better
balance. This
method allowed Alexander
to
achieve what Dewey
describes
as a ‘vital freedom’. He could now break the link that bound the
habitual response to the stimulus.
This is not to be confused with the method known as classical
conditioning
as
he did not simply substitute one response for another ‘hard-wired’
response. Alexander
’s method enabled him to
either; react in the usual manner; do something completely different; or
even choose not to respond to the stimulus. The main difficulty when trying to improve through training is that our habitual response to a stimulus is stronger than the wish to react differently. Yet if we cannot break the stimulus-response chain, real change is not possible, as we will continue to use the same actions to complete the same acts. A motorist does not get to work quicker by using the same route and driving at the same speed every day! In the next section we shall start to look at how Alexander’s method for change can be applied to any technique. evolution of a technique Frederick Matthias Alexander was born in Tasmania in 1869 and as a bright schoolboy developed a love of Shakespeare. On leaving school he pursued a career as a recitor and after initial success, Alexander started to experience problems with his voice that threatened to end his career. Consultations with doctors revealed that no obvious condition caused the problem and advised him to rest before an engagement. Even with complete rest for up to two weeks the problem would surface half way through a performance. Alexander observed this mainly occurred on stage and rarely with normal conversation. From this he concluded he must have been doing something different during a performance compared to what he did off stage. Using mirrors, he noticed that when about to recite he would pull his head back and down, depress the larynx and start to suck in air. His body appeared to fix the position with the effect of shortening his whole stature. This fixed position restricted movement thereby having an impact on his breathing, resulting in the audible sucking in of air. The advice from his tutor to ‘take hold of the stage with the feet’ had been done literally until it became a subconscious habit. Every time he stood in front of an audience the stimulus to recite would activate the response to pull back his head and adopt this unnatural rigid position. Now that Alexander was aware of the problem, he assumed that to put it right would just be a matter of not pulling his head back during a performance. However, when attempting to apply the solution of putting his head forward and up he observed that he was still pulling his head back and down. He had made an unreasonable assumption that we all make when attempting to address a problem. We believe that once we have found the cause it is a simple matter for us to do something in order to improve. However, what we do not ask ourselves is – if we knew what it was we had to do, then why were we not doing it in the first place? In Alexander’s case, his problem was because he was doing something he should not have been doing, that is, stiffening the neck. To correct this he had to first stop stiffening his neck before he tried anything else. When he attempted to put his head forward and up, he did it using the habitual tension in his neck he created in readiness to recite. He was never going to find a ‘cure’ if all attempts to improve included this tension. His radical solution was to learn how to stop the unnecessary habitual actions to allow a return to poise. When he succeeded in doing this he observed a marked improvement in his general stature and an end to his difficulties. In addition to these benefits, other health problems that had troubled him from an early age also improved. The change in Alexander’s performance did not go unnoticed and he began to receive requests from other actors to learn his technique. He soon discovered verbal instruction alone was not sufficient as it could easily be misinterpreted. The next important step in the development of the technique was learning how to convey the kinaesthetic (feeling) experience necessary to promote change. Alexander found the only way to achieve this was by using his hands to gently guide the pupil through movement whilst preventing the habitual muscular effort. He was surprised to find the same poor habits that had troubled him existed in all his pupils. As word spread of his technique, doctors began to send patients not responding to conventional treatment for lessons. They observed many ailments improved or completely disappeared following tuition. Encouraged by his success he came to London in 1903 and set about teaching some of the top actors of the day. His theory was generally well received but many dismissed these ‘ramblings of an Australian actor’. In 1937 eighteen doctors signed a letter published in the British Medical Journal stating that a diagnosis of an illness was incomplete unless the habitual manner the patients ‘used’ themselves was taken into account. They urged the Council to incorporate Alexander’s work in the medical curriculum. During the two world wars, Alexander traveled to the United States and gained support from the eminent educationalist, Professor John Dewey. Unfortunately, as in England, the critics who argued against the technique were both influential and unwilling to have lessons from ‘a very unconventional physician’ or ‘an Australian of original but uncultivated mind’. Dewey commented on these academic thinkers as people who adopted their position early in their careers, and then used their intellects to defend it indefinitely. This he concluded proved Alexander’s point that habits were indeed hard to change. In London the first Alexander teacher training centre was established in 1936 requiring students to complete a three-year course to qualify. Alexander continued to teach until his death in 1955. A thorough account of Alexander's life can be found in Michael Bloch's extensive biography, 'FM - The Life of Frederick Matthias Alexander: Founder of The Alexander Technique' How to treat a stiff neck - your biggest hurdle to performing at your peak could be more than just a pain in the neck. The Brighton School of Alexander Technique - traditional private practice and training course along the lines of the first schools established.
|
What is it? "a method for improving motor performance by integrating the voluntary and reflex components of a movement in such a way that the voluntary does not interfere with the reflex and the reflex facilitates the voluntary" Frank Pierce-Jones
The Alexander Technique will benefit anyone whether they are an elite athlete or whether they just wish to live life without the aches and pains that many people suffer and accept as part of life. It is a pity that these techniques are not shown to us all at an early age for I have no doubt that this would alleviate many of the causes of ill health in our communities.'
Greg Chappell
"Mr
Alexander's method lays hold of the individual as a whole, as a self-vitalising
agent. He reconditions and re-educates the reflex mechanisms and brings
their habits into normal relation with the functioning of the organism
as a whole. I regard his method as thoroughly scientific and
educationally sound"
My sport leads to an increased muscular development on the dominant side and secondary twisting strains in the spine and pelvis. I have found that Alexander lessons have enabled me to use my neuro-musculo-skeletal system more efficiently. I have fewer overuse injuries and my recovery times after hard training sessions or competitions are shorter." Jo Bowyer, Osteopath, England and GB Fencer
|