Index Next

Letter from Noam Renen to Meyer Simmonds

Dear Meyer Simmonds,

Your letter in the STAT NEWS of September 1991, stimulated me to react and not to “inilbit” my reaction to this stimulus, though my reaction is maybe not “directed” by the “Conscious Control”, therefore this reaction, maybe, is wrong because of reliant on - maybe - “faulty sensory appreciation”.

I would like to discuss with you the whole issue of the F.M.A.T., and mainly to share practical work with you. By the way, I use the word “open” in my teaching, as well as “spread”, “grow” (to all directions) and mainly “eaglize” . And yes, nature demands: Be open or die, before your natural tlme to go comes; but we manage to prolong our time here, on Earth, in spite of the demand of Nature. This by deallng with symptoms - “one after the other” - and not with the Whole, all together. Our mental attitude (F.M. deals with it a lot in his writings), which is based on and nourished by our “end-gaining” approach in life, perverts and twists our sensory appreciation, and therefore our reactions to stimuli in any sphere of life - and not only in movement and kinesthetic sense. Our, so called, progress and development in science and technology, and with it in medicine, enables us to “drag” ourselves longer in life (if one can call it real natural life), longer in spite of our habitual contraction, which is rooted in our mental attitude toward the Whole, toward Nature as it is. This mental attitude is filtered through our intellect, which produces unnatural and unnecessary fears, which cause us to create our “armour” in our bodies - the unnecessary defense against these illogical fears. Human society is a society of “End-gainers”. We lost the innocence of all animals; therefore we need the Conscious Control (Choiceless-Awareness in S.Krishnamurti's terms) to replace what Nature gave us and we lost. We can't imitate animals, and very young children (before we manage to tame them.) - it is unnatural.

When you suggest that we have: 'to understand how Nature has evolved us, and THEN GET OUT OF HER WAY (inhibition?-N.R.) NOT BY FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS (what kind of? verbal? or practical through the hands of the teacher? - N.R.) AND UNDOING THEM BY NON-DOING (??-N.R.) - by which means you convey the understanding of the issue, how do you make your pupils understand IT - by showing it with models? How can your pupils, whose sensory appreciation is faulty, unreliable, untrustworthy, get the practical experience, through which they can acquire the creative conception of the whole issue? How can they apply practically their understanding which, as a matter of fact, is no rnore than on the level of intellectual theoretical understanding? How can they stop the wrong if their habitual reactions to stimuli are not consciously inhibited? What role plays the Conscious Control (the corner-stone and the core of the F.M.Alexander Technique) in your teaching.

This business of gravity and anti-gravity has nothing to do with the real F.M.Alexander Technique. Teachers - mainly those who were trained in a certain school - tend to excuse (they call it to explain) our unnatural (therefore unnecessary and harmful) contractions and blocks in the flow af energies, by blaming the natural force of gravity. This is wrong, indeed. During the evolution, of the Human Creature, we naturally adjusted ourselves - like all living creatures - to the force of gravity of our planet. Otherwise we would be extinct. We are even with gravity. Our problem is our “Mental Gravity”- mainly the unnecessary fears which we accumulate since we acquired consciousness and developed the intellect and its “filter”. This causes us to move more and more away from the natural way of life. In order to defend ourselves from the fears we created the mental armour; we produced the illusive reality, which rnoves more and more away from the natural reality. We are in conflict and disharmony with the natural reality. We are scared of the Unknown, of the Timeless - Endless - Measureless; we try to “put it in a cage”, to confine it within the limits of the Known. This is the “gravity” that pulls us down, inwards, away from “open - spread - grow - eaglize” . We want to be safe, to feel secured, therefore we dare to look at the Whole only through the key-hole. We want to understand the Unknown by means of the Known; we want to experiece ends, borders, walls of security. This is not what the F.M.Alexander Technique (Way, Process - N.R.) is about. In order to follow and apply the Alexander Techniqve in reality - and not to adjust it to our illusive reality, we have to experience and exercise what F.M.AIexander described as Man's Supreme Inheritance - it means: The “Conscious Control”, which is a state of acute awareness of the Whole, a choiceless-unlimited awarness, a total awareness. We have to “inhibit” the limits and the “filter” of the intellect.

Concerning inhibiting habitual reactions: When your house is on fire while you are in it and you are not in a panic, you have the chance to react according to the immediate need for surviving; if you are in a panic your chance of reacting properly is nil. So what should be inhibited is the PANIC, the source of the panic which causes either to be paralized, or the choice of wrong escape. Anyhow “Inhibition” can't be measured in time; “Inhibition” is not seperated from “Directions”. They are “All together”, and within the “All together”, while IT “All together”, comes “one after the other” . The Timeless is fult of moments. The gazelle knows what to do according to the need of the moment, as long as she is in her natural environment.

How can one teach the F.M.Alexander-Technique not having the creative conception, the practlcal conception, of it? How can you evolve a conception that is already a WHOLE? And the conception doesn't belong to F.M.Alexander; he discovered and unveiled a natural process that human creatures lost and neglected through misuse of the self, following a wrong course of development of consciousness. F.M.Alexander, whose mental attitude was ripe for the adventure of discovery, breaking the frame of habits and the Known, was busy all his llfe - since he begun his exploring Journey - to go deeper and wider in the process of becoming acquainted with the Unknown, the Endless - Timeless - Measureless. He found practical means-whereby to improve the use of himself (his SELF and not his body), by improving the functioning of the Primary Control and applying the Conscious Control to deal with the source of the causes of the interference with the natural functioning of the Primary Control. He developed the manual means to convey through his hands the “Directions” he produced in himself, for his own use. He was aware of the misleading effect of spoken and written words. He realized that only pupils who are ready to be criticised can learn and follow the way he discovered. Only such people can develop and evolve themselves along the way, and not try to evolve the original concept. Being aware of what is going on in the way F.M.Alexander Technique is taught and dealt with nowadays, I can safely state that those who pretend they teach the F.M.A.T. know it “perfectly” and know how to teach it. The most they look for is new tricks of teaching, to be the best and famous. They continue the habltual “End-gaining” tradition. They don't go beyond any practical conception, that deals with the Whole, but they manage to shelter behlnd the paper walls of consititutlons, regulations, taboos and all the rest of a Society. By this they manage to secure their habitual weaknesses, shortcomings, etc., instead of “inhibiting” them....

 

Sincerely Noam Renen

 

 


Index

 

Letter to the Editor of  "STAT News"

Dear Editor,

Fran Robinson's letter (STAT NEWS May 1991) shouldn't go unchallenged. She states that the teaching method can evolve; what we are teaching does not. ['All we are talking about is a chaage in the teaching method (which can and should be in constaat evolution) as opposed to any change in the principles of what we are teaching (which is sic not).' Fran Robinson, Letters]

I have spent the last ten years working out (and still developing) why F. M's principles work. And why, with all the hands on, and Alexandrian explanation, many people fail to grasp why.

No matter how you non-do the doing, the doig is still the doing. What the directions do is substitute one set of patterns for another – yes, an improvement, but an improvemcnt. only in Alexandrian terms. Take inhibition. If your house is on fire, then inhibiting for a few seconds could kill you. Just get out of the building. Does a gazelle inhibit when confronted with a cheetah? If it did it would be dead. Ergo, inhibition is not a natural thing at all. Because - and here is the important thing – the gazelle is always open and working at top efficiency. Nature says. 'Be open or dead'. No inhibition, no directions.

If you see (as I have done) film of a gazelle being chased by a cheetah, then you will see them so open and long that their backs seem to go on for ever. In other words, being open is the absolute priority. No inhibition, no directions.

Does this concept clash with what we are teaching? No – it adds to it. In my teaching, I do a lot of explaining – as and when the pupil is ready – and cover principles of evolution: why (the physical reasons) we have evolved over the last three thousand million years; why and how we are humans, and human – shaped. And how we have evolved characteristics which no other creature has evolved (except in a very primitive way) - communication, strategy, and learning: learning from the spoken word and, recently the written word. At the other end of learning is teaching (not in our Alexandrian sense). So one of the most important attributes of mankind is teaching and thus, learning. Thus the huge progress of mankind. Learning, not Nature's rules, but man's rules. (A bird doesn't learn to fly from verbal instructions. The genes make it fly.)

So what we are taught is superimposed on our natural behaviour. We then teach to our children, who learn and teach their children. What, though, if what we have been taught goes against Nature? We pass that on to our children too. And they to their children. Now you understand why we have gone wrong. It is what has been taught to us that has sent our minds and bodies wrong. Examples abound.

So what will (has) evolved from FM's teaching is (from my point of view) that all we have to do (do?) is to understand how Nature has evolved us, and then get out of her way. Not by following instructions and then undoing them by non-doing. To understand the mechanism of the head, for instance (as I show with models), so that the natural anti-gravity system works and acts by itself upon the muscle cells to spring us up against gravity (going up). To separate evolution from learning, which most people confuse. To discard the arrogance that says, 'I know better than Nature'.

In the recent (all-too-short) seminars that I've given, I have explained my reasoning, which has been understood (or nearly understood) by most, attending, apart from two older teachers who would not accept my approach. A teacher from Europe spent days with me and has changed his methods most successfully.

So, Fran, what we are teaching will evolve; beyond FM's original concept, and certainly beyond my small contribution to its evolution.

Yours sincerely,

Meyer Simmonds