Discoveries & Techniques

I’ve been involved in studying Alexander’s work for over half a century.

You’d imagine – after all that time – that the subject would get a little stale, a little repetitive and empty. And that has certainly happened at various points along my journey.

My most vivid memory of being ‘stale’ was back in 1986, just before I met 86-year-old Marjorie Barstow. She was the first teacher to graduate from Alexander’s new teacher training school in 1932.

Marj was caused a revolution in my understanding of Alexander’s work. She never referred to it as the Alexander Technique – at least in my memory of it. Instead, she often talked about “Mr Alexander’s discoveries”. In this I know she was joined by AR – FM Alexander’s brother – and Frank Pierce Jones.

In his unique book – Body Awareness in Action* – Jones talked about the importance of distinguishing ‘technique’ and ‘discovery’ when analysing Alexander’s legacy.

This gentle distinction has continued to develop into a monumental idea within my own mindstream. It is one of the reasons that the work stays fresh, exciting and mysterious in my own evolution as a communicator.

Once I grasped that FM’s discoveries were permanent, eternal and essential - but that his teaching technique to others was impermanent, transitory and optimised for the times – my mind opened into an enormous space for creativity in the ways I could communicate the work. As long as I stuck to the principles, I could teach any damm way I liked. 

Can you feel the freedom in that?

Over the next month, I plan to share some of my teaching insights, which in turn are based on a deeper appreciation of Alexander’s three discoveries. Over the last decade, I have almost completely abandoned the vocabulary that FM used to communicate his work to others.

In their place, I have utilised more topical concepts that are emerging in neuro-science and give the work more currency, meaning and impact in today’s world. That is the thing about any technique – it must reflect the times it lives in. 

Whereas a true, universal discovery doesn’t change.

I often like to say to my trainees: “Alexander has got nothing to do with his discoveries.” It’s like saying “Einstein has nothing to do with the theory of relativity.” Yes, we credit Einstein and Alexander as being the first to articulate several universal truths, but those truths exist independently.

As the Profession of Alexander teachers stumbles about in the dark trying to define what the “Technique” is all about – the way forward seems so obvious that I wonder why it isn’t seen?

The effort to arrive at one, clear definition of Alexander’s TECHNIQUE is a huge waste of energy. Instead, let’s arrive at a definition of Alexander's DISCOVERIES. And it’s not inhibition, sorry. And it is not faulty sensory appreciation either. In fact, most definitions I have read have very little to do with Alexander’s actual discoveries, they are all about technique.

Non-doing – who even knows what that means? – perhaps comes closest to one of Alexander’s discoveries, but the term has an almost defiant and unfathomable meaning in its current usage. For the sake of scientists, educators and philosophers, can we articulate what Alexander discovered - and why is it so important – in a language that is easily understood?

I hope to shed some light on that topic over the next few weeks.

Stay tuned.

*“Body Awareness in Action: Study of the Alexander Technique” by Frank Pierce Jones. Throughout his book, Jones continuously refers to “Alexander’s discoveries and technique” and attempts a definition of both. It’s a profound book from an academic and scholar who met the work later in life.