One of Alexander’s most important discoveries was that, by using his hands, he could communicate information directly through the kinaesthetic sense to his pupils (Jones, 1976: 155), thereby greatly accelerating the re-education process. While Alexander maintained that anyone could rediscover the same principles as he had, in practise it would take the same insight, patience, determination and genius he had demonstrated, in order to “succeed in breaking the vicious circle of faulty conception and faulty experience without the help of guiding hands” (De Alcantara, 1997: 84). It was through his own frustration in trying to convey his discoveries to his pupils that Alexander developed the hands-on approach to teaching, which is one of the defining characteristics of the Alexander Technique (De Alcantara, 1997: 84).
While words cannot convey sensory information adequately (Barlow, 1973: 190), and are easily misinterpreted due to debauched kinaesthesia, Alexander found that he could better guide a pupil into an improved use (that might feel unfamiliar and ‘wrong’) through touch or manipulation (De Alcantara, 1997: 44), thereby imparting a new sensory experience. It was through “applying the inhibitory control…to the use of his hands” that Alexander learnt to make changes in a pupil “that were different from ordinary manipulation or postural adjustment” (Jones, 1976: 31). Alexander teachers typically spend many hours refining the use of their hands during their training in order to learn to use their hands in this way (De Alcantara, 1997: 44). Jones (1976: 81) believes one of the basic principles of the technique to be that the “amount of kinesthetic information conveyed is in indirect proportion to the force used in conveying it”. By using less strength to convey more sensory information, an Alexander teacher’s hands encourage a specific quality of muscle tone in a pupil,
54 which, “together with words of instruction, helps to release inappropriate tension and allows the body to become better aligned and balanced” (STAT, 1993).
The teacher has “a very acute sense of what is happening in the student’s muscles from his hands”, which helps him or her to ensure that the primary control is working well during the activity (Stevens, 1996: 53), and encourages certain favourable reactions in the pupil. The various ways of using the hands overlap, as it is not possible to touch a pupil in order to monitor their feedback without automatically also causing a change in their awareness, and consequently their use (De Alcantara, 1997: 85). An Alexander teacher’s hands are used in a healing way to soothe, reassure and help release excessive tension, as well as to guide and support the pupil through the various required movements (De Alcantara, 1997: 85).
Alexander teachers use simple gestures from daily life (such as sitting and standing) to help create awareness of habitual reactions and to teach a pupil inhibition and direction, which can, in time, be applied to all activities (De Alcantara, 1997: 87). Through bringing inhibition to the fore by actively preventing the contraction of the head into the neck (De Alcantara, 1997: 32), an Alexander teacher ensures that “rather than doing the right thing, a pupil stops doing the wrong thing”, thereby avoiding end- gaining (De Alcantara, 1997: 44). Initially a pupil is asked not ‘to do’ the desired movement (which will bring the habitual response to the stimulus for that particular action into play), but to allow the teacher to initiate the movement while the pupil observes, paying attention to the sensory feedback (Jones, 1976: 156). As the underlying feeling tone of the movement is changed, bringing about a “kinesthetic effect of lightness that (is) pleasurable and rewarding” (Jones, 1976: 2), a pupil becomes aware of the difference between the guided and habitual movements.
Jones, 1976: 156:
Ultimately a pupil must be able to make reliable kinesthetic observations of himself in activity…The purpose of the lessons is to sharpen the kinesthetic sense and to increase self-knowledge and self-control.
As the guided movements begin to feel easier than the habitual, the pupil begins to learn the technique for him- or herself. “The teacher’s hands are like a catalytic agent
55 in a chemical experiment. They release a process that goes on without them” (Jones, 1976: 156). Because the pupil had an initial experience of the improved use, the subsequent learning process is made much easier (Jones, 1976: 2). Through the directions that have been learnt in conjunction with the experience of improved use, a pupil eventually becomes able to recreate the movement pattern independently of the teacher.
3.3.6 Direction
While the guided movement gives a pupil a new sensory experience of improved use, it is self-defeating to attempt to recapture the kinaesthetic effect of lightness in itself, as it is the “indirect effect of a psychophysical process” (Jones, 1976: 10). The effect of lightness and ease1 serves primarily as evidence of improved use, and the main function of increased sensory awareness is “to provide a background of feeling tone against which maladaptive response patterns (can) be recognized for what they (are)” (Jones, 1976: 10).
De Alcantara, 1997: 192:
You should seek never to reproduce the sensations of a right action, but rather its co-ordinative processes, the sensations being but an effect of these processes. ‘The experience you want is in the process of getting it,’ said Alexander.
The “co-ordinative processes” are recreated by projecting to oneself a verbal pattern that has been linked to the new, improved use (Barlow, 1973: 132). Barlow (1973: 130) considers this directing to be the truly innovative aspect of Alexander’s approach. While the teacher uses his or her hands to guide the pupil into a more co- ordinated movement, he or she verbalises a sequence of directions that closely match the occurrences being induced in the pupil’s musculature (Barlow, 1973: 130). The pupil eventually learns to associate the experiences and sensations generated by the guided movement with their respective verbal commands (De Alcantara, 1997: 60). The directive words are not used to describe the unknown, but have become linked to the shared experience of the teacher and pupil. They assist in clarifying the pupil’s
56 thinking, by formulating “an operational definition of something that is already known” (Jones, 1976: 167).
It is important to note that words are merely an aid to organizing the kinaesthetic experiences, and not the experiences themselves (De Alcantara, 1997: 62). Furthermore, Jones (1976: 157) cautions that words can take on a ritualistic quality and can “get in the way of observing and act as a substitute for thought”: a person might be too focused on the words as an end in themselves, instead of paying attention to sensory feedback. Another difficulty is that words often carry connotations from earlier experiences that may interfere with new sensory experiences, and should therefore be used with caution (Jones, 1976: 158). However, Jones (1976: 159) does concede that any teaching device is legitimate if it facilitates learning and does not become an end in itself. Heightening awareness, observing and perceiving – i.e. “knowing objects and events by the senses” (Jones, 1976: 158) - should remain the focus at all times.
Alexander required “a minutely sensitive attention” from his pupils in order to set up “a new ordered structure” in their bodies, in which the peripheral movements of the limbs are subordinated to the central co-ordination of the head, neck and back (Barlow, 1973: 131). This structure is ordered in the sense that it is consciously projected as a command, and also ordered in that sequential attention is given to the body “in a certain 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc., order” (Barlow, 1973: 131). In this way, a standard of use is presented against which feedback from the muscles can be matched, so that “‘mis-match’ signals (can be) eliminated and muscular matching obtained” (Barlow, 1973: 132). Eventually a pupil becomes able to evoke the desired state simply by projecting the orders, or directions, to him- or herself. Barlow (1973: 191) gives a very concise summary of this process:
A sequence of such verbal directions is taught whilst a better tensional balance is obtained all over the body; the sequence is designed to scan the body in serial order…The sequence of directions thus provides a model with both spatial and temporal co-ordinates. Such a sequence fulfils the function of checking the development of too much tension and of restoring a resting state when it has been disturbed. If kept in mind during performances, it will ensure that deviations from the resting state are not excessive. (Barlow 1973: 191.)
57 This sequence of orders is not concerned with maintaining a particular physical position as such, but with the spatial orientation that exists within each position. A position is right only in as much as the interplay of directions within the position is right, and wrong when it is not (De Alcantara, 1997: 66). “Position, muscular movement, and ‘direction’ are three different activities…(and) the third activity – ‘direction’ - should go on inside the other two activities” (Macdonald, as cited in De Alcantara, 1997: 66).
The directions are expressed in phrases such as “let the head go forward and up”, “allow the heels to go down”, and “shoulders sideways and apart” (De Alcantara, 1997: 60). These phrases illustrate clearly the “syntax” to directing (De Alcantara, 1997: 61), in which three distinct elements interact in a very precise way: the desired action, the particular body part, and the required orientation in space. As different parts of the body call for different actions and orientations in space, many different possible directions can be given (De Alcantara, 1997: 61). Eventually, the directions are reduced to a shortened phrase (such as “think up”), yet conveying a depth of experiential meaning that is not easily described in a few words. “The words become a mnemonic index of sorts” (De Alcantara, 1997: 60), and are used to recall or trigger the specific experiences they have come to represent.
Directions integrate thought with action (Jones, 1976: 157), and can be described as “messages from the brain to the muscles via the nerves” (De Alcantara, 1997: 62). To learn to direct, is to “establish, cultivate, and refine the connections between what you think and what you do” (De Alcantara, 1997: 56). As every thought manifests itself as a physical reality, and every physical act is the result of a command from the brain, no act can be said to be purely physical or mental: “brain and muscle” are always connected (De Alcantara, 1997: 55). Electrical activity has been recorded in the relevant muscles in response merely to thinking about an activity, showing the close connection between the body and mind (Barlow, 1973: 122). Thinking, or directing, can therefore be defined as the act of influencing the psychophysical system through clear thought (Dawley, 2001: 8). While some thoughts cause a downward pull, muscle tension and tight joints, other thoughts result in physical release and lightness (Dawley, 2001: 3). “Correct thinking always leads to correct acting, and correct acting always ensues from correct thinking” (De Alcantara, 1997: 13).
58 Directing differs from ordinary thinking in that it has a quality of “insistent, repeated thought” (De Alcantara, 1997: 59), which involves the linking together of “a mental command, a tangible physical reality and a sensorial feedback” (De Alcantara, 1997: 60). This “triple linkage” of a thought with its resulting action and associated feedback, is the defining feature of Alexandrian directing, as it is absent in ordinary thought, positive thinking and visualization (De Alcantara, 1997: 60).
De Alcantara (1997: 60) stresses that directing in the Alexander Technique is not the same as classical conditioning, as the words do not trigger a set reaction, but presents a choice: “the quickening of the conscious mind brought about by directing and required of it ensures that reactions remain choices rather than automatic reflexes”. Directions are firstly used to break down automatic reactions by increasing an awareness of them, so that those commands that are harmful and unnecessary can be inhibited, along with the superfluous actions they entail (De Alcantara, 1997: 58). Once the will has been set free “to intend, to choose, to decide” through eliminating habitual, automatic responses, directing becomes an act of imagination and creativity, combining “thought, sensation, movement, knowledge, perception, awareness” (De Alcantara, 1997: 64).
In learning the Alexander Technique, a pupil may initially lose a measure of his or her earlier efficiency and become overly conscious of every movement. Deliberate discipline is required in order to cultivate the “carefree ease of good use” (De Alcantara, 1997: 163). The Alexander procedures ideally should be applied reflexively, “without the apparent help of the conscious mind and without stopping the flow of movement to consider its mechanics” (De Alcantara, 1997: 164), but it initially requires that one has to learn to do individual movements well for their own sake. However, direction eventually does become automatic, and therefore more efficient (De Alcantara, 1997: 58). In this way, Alexandrian directing effectively solves the problem of increasing awareness while maintaining efficiency.
De Alcantara, 1997: 58:
The automation of Alexandrian commands is different in nature from that of commands learned haphazardly. A habit acquired with good direction remains accessible to the control of the will, so that it can always be re-examined, altered, or even discarded.
59 Directing cannot function without inhibition (Barlow, 1973: 191). A pupil first has to learn not to end-gain before it becomes possible to pay attention to the directions, which are the means necessary to achieve the end (De Alcantara, 1997: 56). The stimulus to activity generally elicits preparatory tension in order to “get set” for action, and “such an anticipatory pre-set usually triggers us off into far too much effort when we initiate a movement” (Barlow, 1973: 201). One should therefore not attempt to ‘do’ the new body-pattern, but simply project it to oneself, while inhibiting the instinctive reaction that will merely bring the old, habitual response pattern into play. Giving directions is a matter of thinking, not of actively attempting to ‘do’ the directions by means of a muscular effort or control (cf De Alcantara, 1997: 35; 59). By giving oneself enough time to respond to the directions without muscular effort, a constructive change is allowed to take place in the body.
Misuse and inefficient functioning are mostly caused by a lack of inhibitory directions. Directions are therefore often rather injunctions to stop doing a wrong thing, such as contracting the spine, than to do something actively: “orders not to do and to stop doing should normally take precedence over directions to do” (De Alcantara, 1997: 57). While commands to excite as well as to inhibit action are operative in everyone all the time, “learning to direct allows (one) to change this balance of inhibition and excitation at will”, leading to increased self-awareness and improved use (De Alcantara, 1997: 56).
3.3.7 Inhibition