Alexander Technique News

Patrick Macdonald (1910–1991) was one of the foremost teachers of the Alexander Technique. He had lessons with FM Alexander from the age of 10, having been introduced to him by his father, a noted medical surgeon. He entered the first teacher training course in 1932 and upon graduation became an assistant teacher at Ashley Place. He began to train teachers at Ashley Place in 1956; his training course continued at Victoria and, in his final years, at his home near Lewes. In 1963 he gave the Alexander Memorial Lecture.1 His book The Alexander Technique as I See It2 was published in 1989. This interview with Ted McNamara on the subject of his lessons and training with Patrick Macdonald was conducted by Selma Gokcen. 

The causes of an individual’s malcoordination are many. They may be attributed to fear, to shock to imitation in youth; to instruction, to working conditions, to heredity, to malnutrition—in fact, to any number of causes stretching back into the past, perhaps for generations. All this notwithstanding, a pupil should accept personal responsibility for the mess he is in. And what is more important, he should accept responsibility for getting himself out of it.3 

Would you share with us how you came to train with Patrick Macdonald? How old would he have been when you first met him? 

How did I meet him? By accident, by fate, I don’t know. I was due to return to Australia, and just before I got on board the aircraft I had a strong intuition not to get on the plane. So I remained in London. Then I said to myself, what am I going to do now? During the previous few months while researching traditional medicine in Dublin, I had acquired several phone numbers of people and institutions in London connected with branches of education and medicine and his name was among them. I decided to have one lesson in the Alexander Technique and about three days later I met him. As the saying goes, when the pupil is ready, the teacher appears and that’s how it was. He was then 71 years of age. 

A youthful Patrick Macdonald

Reprinted with permission from the Patrick Macdonald Archive.

What made you decide to train? 

I started having private lessons and in those lessons I felt an emanation from him. I needed to stay close to that. So I kept on having private lessons, three a week, and at his invitation began to visit his teacher training classes. The only reason I trained was that I costed it a bit and reasoned if I wanted to be around him, this was probably the best way to do it. But I had no intention of being a teacher. 

What were your first impressions of him? Did it take you time to recognise his qualities? 

I felt something fairly quickly—almost the first lesson. It wasn’t anything extraordinary that he did. I felt an emanation of quietness and being. There were other factors working that I didn’t realise then. There are things going on that one doesn’t know about for a long time after. 

Some people have written about Macdonald’s occasional outbursts of temper during the classes. Some were frightened away by this aspect of his nature and decided that his training course was not for them. How did you respond? 

There were not so many outbursts when I was there, and I always thought that the outbursts were not personal, never directed at the person’s inner being. I heard him raise his voice to people to try and, I would say, shock them, and it could be shocking because it exposed you to yourself if you could bear it. In essence he was a quiet man. What he was like before I met him, I don’t know. I never found his shouting bothersome. But he used to use it to shock people, to help wake them up. 

Is it an important thing for a real teacher to do? 

If it is necessary and you know how to do so properly, yes. He didn’t do it to everyone. He never raised his voice to me. He shocked me in other ways. His eyes could shock you. In fact his eyes could stir you, enable you to see what you were really doing. 

When you finished the training course in 1984, did you continue to work with him and in what capacity? 

I kept on having private lessons, and working in the training class. Not assisting, just learning how to work. After a short time, some people approached me to teach them, so with certain reserva­tions I began to do so. After a while I would bring them individually with me to share a lesson with him, and I would work with them whilst he was mentoring. 

Did he put his hands on you whilst you were working with a pupil? 

Yes. I would also ask him to do so. 

So in a sense you were like an apprentice? 

Yes, very much so. It is the best way to learn and the way Miss Goldie advocated. 

…continuing to learn from the master after the basic skills are there? 

Of course. I wouldn’t even say that they were there. You do not know what you are doing after three years. Or even after ten years. Maybe after twenty or thirty years, you may come to know something. 

Macdonald’s extraordinary level of skill and ease in the work would in the performing arts be called virtuosity and it seemed he could demonstrate this at will. One sees it in the films of him working. Could you speak about this aspect of his ability? 

You need to be more specific. What, that he could do it at will? 

Yes, it seems that he didn’t need to prepare a pupil in a sense. He could just take whatever was there and immediately … 

The key word that you have used is will. You could say that he genuinely had will. Most people assume that they have will and they don’t. He had. He could put his hands on and it would be there instantly. He would take you into that space. Or not take you. You could sense it was something very direct. Somebody who has true power of will and uses it responsibly is rare. When he walked into a room it was there, you felt a presence in the force of his attention. 

There is a section in FM’s book Use of the Self about precisely that. He says we think we have the will to do and all this work shows is that this is a delusion. 

Yes, exactly. So someone like Mr Macdonald had will in my understanding of the word. He is one of the very few people I have met who I would say had that. It is an assumption we make about ourselves. But the danger is to try and copy that. So you have those who don’t understand and resort to pushing and pulling people. That never happened with him in my experience. 

In your own teaching, you demonstrated the pulsing of the spine which you refer to as Macdonald’s original contribution to the work. Would you share your thoughts about this? 

Patrick Macdonald, October 1966

Reprinted with permission from the Patrick Macdonald Archive.

I do not remember saying that it was his original contribution. Mr Macdonald is on record stating that Alexander did pulse the spine, but that he didn’t do it that much. Mr Macdonald some­times slowed it down to show you that pulse. When his hands were on you, that would just be happening. He could place you in a point and you would feel the spine dancing. You’d feel the forces; you’d feel the spring in the spine moving. He would create that, so there would be pulsing, but in the pulse there would be a lengthening going on as well, so the spine would be naturally stretching. 

Would you say he had a spring-like movement? 

He was enabling the releasing of a force in the spine which sprung the spine and you could feel it. It was a living motion, it wasn’t sprung and that’s it. It was pulsing so you would feel that throughout the whole body, but strongly and gently in the spine. 

Macdonald was a man of few words—a remarkable economy of expression that parallels the simplicity of his work. One of his most potent sayings to which you often refer is ‘let the spine light up the fingertips’. What did he mean by that? 

It was an energy—light is the best way to describe it. And even that doesn’t describe it. It comes close to it. So basically it was an energy that emanated. Initially he would ask us to think up from the base of the spine. So directing upwards, sensing up the spine and allowing that to permeate out into the hands and to the whole body, but particularly up the spine. And then gradually as the years went by and your practice deepened, you began to sense this as quicker than light. It is a very fast movement, fortunately so for us, otherwise we would in all probability corrupt it. Through the practice of inhibition, non-doing and directing—as Miss Goldie used to say—at brain-thought level, it gradually comes. When it appears, it is faster than so-called thought, and that’s what he meant in my understanding of it, of this movement that lights up the spine. It lights up the entire body. 

How did his hands-on work evolve in his final years? Did the later work differ from the time when you were a member of his training course? 

Yes. He was much quieter and towards the end he spoke rarely. After he returned from his last trip to the USA, what passed through his hands was fairly close to what it had been in London, but I would say even stronger. After about two years, there was in my reading of it a subtle yet dramatic shift in his work. There was an extraordinary elevation of the energy and the direction that I felt. I remember first feeling it very distinctly during a visit while he was staying in Lewes. It was a beautiful warm day and he gave me a lesson in the garden. The direction through his hands was different, more vibrant, vertical and direct than previously. It continued growing right to the end of his life. So yes, there was a difference, but not so obvious initially. 

Macdonald often spoke about the force of habit—how we underestimate it and how it acts upon us without our knowledge, even when we are otherwise convinced. What did he say to you in this regard? 

Nothing direct as such, but he would sometimes show you its action upon you. You would think you’d be doing something very fine, especially working in a class and then you might hear him saying ‘What are you doing?’ The presence behind those words could create a shift in you to throw you or to help you to separate, so you could see that what you were doing was not what you ‘thought you were doing’. It was something entirely different. He would speak about it, but he wouldn’t go on and on about it. He wasn’t that type of a man, but if you were prepared to be shown and to bear that, to really open to what he said and the feeling that accompanied the say­ing, which was more important, then you experienced it. You couldn’t do anything about it but you experienced it, you saw clearly that what you were doing was not what was required. That’s going on all the time and that’s what a Master can do. A Master can switch the light on in you for you to see. We do not have the level of the force of attention to do so ourselves. This has to be worked for. So the teacher shows you that and it can be a shock. It can be very painful because you are exposed to yourself. 

The first time he did it to me, my hands were on a pupil and I thought I was doing some good work. He was standing not too far away working on somebody and he said, ‘Ted, what are you doing?’ It’s very hard to describe, unless one has experienced it, what it opens inside of you. It is a very wonderful place and very precarious. I sometimes describe it like this: you’re on the top of a tree, a very tall tree, sitting on the edge of a branch thinking you’re someplace else and there is the master behind sawing the branch. He doesn’t drop you, he just lets you see where you are. And that’s all he did. His eyes rested on me for a few seconds and then he turned away. There was no commentary from him. 

Would you speak about the centrality of the back to Macdonald’s way  of working? 

Essential. The back was vital. The back and spine. He put great emphasis on the back– coming to the back, you’re not back enough. I never had a lesson of the hundreds I had with him when he wouldn’t say at least once to me ‘come back’ and you would see at that moment, although you might be physically back, you weren’t really back. The back is endless and you begin to re­alise that the back is actually a doorway. It is not just the physicality of the back; it is ultimately psychological, but not that of Western psychology. I would just mention in that regard, he used say, ‘Western psychology as it is doesn’t amount to very much. But there is a psychology that is sane.’ And in that sane psychology, the back is very important. But not the back as we know it. It’s a doorway, a stepping stone. The back needs to be working with the rest of the psycho-physi­cal organism. There is the back-back and up and then there is the vibration through the spine, 

Patrick Macdonald teaching Judith Stransky at Frank Ottiwell’s training school in the early 1970s
Reprinted with permission from the Patrick Macdonald Archive.

the direction through the spine and the opposition between the head against the back, the knees against the hips and the heel and, of course, all of that hinged on the neck. 

What did Macdonald have to say about inhibition and how did he teach this core principle, es­pecially in his later years? 

Through his hands really, and so he would be able to stay you —one way to express it— stay you from going any place and doing anything you were not meant to be doing. The clarity of his words always matched both his hands, so his mouth wouldn’t be saying something and his left hand doing something else and his right hand doing something else again. They were all together. In his last years, unless you had been with him previously, it would be difficult to understand what he was actually doing, but definitely he was living inhibition. 

The great masters teach through their being … 

Exactly. It was all emanating through the being, through the presence. There was a presence and everything was manifest in that presence. It was a confirmation to me of everything I had ever read about the spiritual search, if you want to call it that. But that’s not to say you could do the inhibition, no. You could see that you couldn’t do what he was doing. It takes a long, long time to learn to inhibit. We have this foolish belief that we are able to allow. Everything comes back, in some ways you could say, to allow. But how many people allow for anything, allow it to be, allow it to happen? We don’t. We just think we do. When he walked into a room, your inner state was magnified so you could see all the rubbish, more clearly. It was like being in front of a martial arts master. They don’t do anything — they use where you are to throw you. But throwing you doesn’t have to be physical. They can throw you just by sitting, standing, walking. He threw me many a time. Sometimes I would stand beside him realising there was nothing to say, and then I’d see this drive in myself to say something to fill in the space. That goes on all the time. People are always trying to fill in the space. 

Can you tell us briefly the story behind Macdonald’s book, The Alexander Technique as I see it—how it came into being and came to be published? 

Yes, a water pipe burst in his home a few miles outside Lewes. Part of the house got flooded. When they were clearing up after the water damage, they found notes in a drawer. He had been invited to write a book and obviously had started writing it. But it was left unfinished. His wife Alison decided to take these notes and other pieces that he had written and bring them all together in one little book. 

Was he still alive at this stage? 

Yes, and he was teaching. There was a little school there. Alison broached him about publishing it; he was against it and said no. Over subsequent weeks he kept saying no, so Alison asked me to speak with him about it. I spent some time with him one Saturday morning and sought his permis­sion to publish it. He replied ‘Everything that needs to be written has already been written.’ 

He wasn’t speaking just about the Alexander Technique, he was speaking about the whole —all the great writings that were needed for humanity were already there, so there was no need to add anything else to it. Then he was quiet and I said the book might help at least one person who might be searching. After a long silence he said ‘All right, you may go ahead for at least it will not do any harm.’ As it was being prepared, I read it aloud a few times for him and he made some very minor corrections, requesting it be left the way it was, no introductions and with the same photographs. 

I had collected several quotes which he rejected, except the one by John Bunyan from The Pilgrims Progress: ‘Though with great difficulty I am got hither, yet now I do not repent me of all the trouble I have been at to arrive where I am.’ When the book came out, he glanced at it for a few seconds, making no comment about it. If I’d ever met anyone free of the influence of ego­ism at that stage of life, it was him. 

You were with him on the day that he passed? 

No I wasn’t. Around September 1991 he lost the use of his legs. I was holding him by the arm and Alison was on the other side. He said with a smile ‘Once I could run up mountains. Now I cannot even get out of the chair.’Already the last of the pupils was gone and his work was over. Shortly after he was taken to hospital and later he was transferred to a rest home where I used to visit him regularly. 

Around 7am on the day of my last scheduled visit, I received a phone call informing me that he had died. But I’ve no doubts as to how he died because of what I witnessed in those last meet­ings: a man who had become free. To die before you die. You saw the inner weight of the body and it’s a weight that can’t be described. The earthly body was permeated with another seeing presence that was radiant with light. 

Looking back, how would you say the two primary guiding influences on your Alexander work —Patrick Macdonald and Margaret Goldie—manifested in their manner of teaching? 

I would like to include Walter Carrington because he was important. Although I worked with others such as Bill and Marjory Barlow, and briefly with Marjorie Barstow and Erica Whittaker, the first three mentioned were the most important. Mr Macdonald established in me some sense of the back. I’m not saying I know where my back is, but he gave me some sense of the direc-

tion to it. Equally important he gave me a sense of the verticality, although I did not understand the verticality then. It is only now, years later, that I am beginning to understand a little what it might be all about. 

Miss Goldie helped me to experience more of the inner quietness. Her teaching wouldn’t have the dynamic that his had. He had a dynamic of direction and movement through his hands. He showed you movement in stillness; stillness in movement. He could create that in your body. In both of them there was a quietness, but his quietness was more like the quietness experienced when I have walked long hours alone in the mountains. You need to work in a certain way to reach the quietness of the inner step. Hers was the quietness of just standing still. When I came out from a lesson with her, I would feel very quiet for a few moments. When I came out from him, something in me was more dynamic, ready to engage with the forces of life. It was also easier to see what she was up to, and more difficult to see what he was actually doing. 

I have chosen some words of Mr Macdonald to close this interview: ‘This is closer to you than your next heartbeat and further away than the moon’ . 

Yes, or he would say, as close to you as your next breath, or …it can’t be any closer. But he never laboured these things. It always came from a real place in him because he was living it. It takes a long time to realise what teachers of his simplicity and quality are actually teaching. 

A Tribute to Patrick Macdonald, a series of events commemorating the centenary of his birth, will take place in London dur­ing 2010–2011. For more information, please contactAnne-Marie O’Mahoney, Event Co-ordinator at pmtribute@gmail.com 07939 996504 

REFERENCES 

1 Macdonald, Patrick ‘On giving directions, doing and non-doing’ The STAT Memorial Lecture given on 12 November 1969. The Alexander Journal 9 (September 1988) 

2 Macdonald, Patrick The Alexander Technique as I See It  (Brighton: 1989) 

3 ‘On Taking Responsibility / notebook Jottings’ Macdonald, Patrick The Alexander Technique as I See It (Brighton: 1989) 

Acknowledgements

Photographs from the Patrick Macdonald Archive reprinted with their kind permission Photographs from Frank Ottiwells school reprinted with the permission of Frank Ottiwell 

With thanks to Francesca Greenoak, editor, who grants us permission to post this interview in advance of its publication in The Alexander Journal,

Autumn 2010.

 F.M. Alexander wrote:

 “They may teach you anatomy and physiology till they are black in the face—you will still have this to face sticking to a decision against the habit of a lifetime.”

It is an error to pass over these words assuming we understand them. For Alexander was also to say that he had not known anyone who upon first coming to him was able to do this, and that included some of the foremost and most distinguished minds in the arts, sciences and politics of his day. We believe that we are capable of making decisions but I gradually began to recognise that I had never made a decision in my life, it just appeared that way. And all the decisions that I ‘thought’ I had made were just happenings. Things happened. I also began to realise that in this I was not alone.

What does it take to make a proper decision? How does one learn to weigh with the head (mind) and to sustain that weighing against the force of habit? In its way that is why addiction may have a benefit for the condition shows, for those who come to recognise it, the real need for pure help.

“…. the addiction keeps a person in touch with the god—what I mean by this is that in AA, for example, the first thing you have to admit is that you can’t control your desire for alcohol, and you have to surrender to a higher power. At the very point of the vulnerability is where the surrender takes place—that is where the god enters. The god comes in through the wound. If you’ve ever been an addict, you know that you can always be an addict again, so it’s at that point that the energy, if opened to, becomes available again and again.”[1]

I have heard people say that they have overcome their destructive habit through their will power. Experience has taught me that this is an illusion. The manifestation of the habit may be halted and that in its way is no bad thing but in the meantime where has the force behind the habit gone?

Will, like consciousness belongs with a higher nature. To claim, which is so often done that one has will is erroneous. Unless a new intermediary body has been formed between our two natures the higher and the lower, how can one receive the power of will? A special force formed through refined inner work is necessary for the reconciliation of our two natures. In a harmoniously balanced man or woman the higher nature is active and the lower passive, as we are without this intermediate presence the opposite is the case, and what glimpses we may receive from time to time of the higher is fragmented and distorted, and as a result the seeker is often induced away from the necessary preparation which can facilitate change.

In The Alexander Technique AS I See IT Patrick Macdonald listed five items that for him constituted the Alexander Technique. They are:

Recognition of the Force of Habit

Inhibition and Non-Doing

Recognition of Faulty Sensory Awareness

Sending Directions

The Primary Control

He was a man who in his teaching took care with words, thus it is worth noting hat he placed at the top of the list,

Recognition of the Force of Habit. What is the force behind the habit?

[1] Worshiping Illusions An interview with Marion Woodman Parabola Magazine Volume XII. Number 2. Addiction. This edition of Parabola contains some of the finest articles on Addiction that I have yet encountered and includes The Center of Our Need an interview with Pauline De Dampierre and a striking correspondence between Bill Wilson and C. G. Jung entitled Spiritus contra Spiritum which was first published in the AA Grapevine in January 1963.

Tinkers a debut novel by Paul Harding, is simple, elegant, and beautifully written. It tells a lyrical tale observed through the last eight days of the life of George Washington Crosby, but within the tale are woven other stories of his father, mother, and others who were a part of his life. This novel is within a tradition of the finest of American writing, and was the surprise winner of the Pulitzer Prize in 2010.

The river swollen from recent rain in the hills has a dark colour, tinged brown. It flows fast and strong, passing between rocks and down rapids. Meadowsweet and willowherb grow along its tree shaded green mossy banks. I sit alone in wonder, how many sounds does a river make within its one sound? 

As a child I came to swim here, looking out for otters, watching the salmon return to spawn and to die, such is the way of life. There are several forms of death, but above all there is Life.

Resting upon a large rock I hear the rumbling sound of a large stone being moved by the current along the riverbed and the winds filled with diffused light blow in from the southwest.

Last night while reading I was touched by a line in Sebastian Barry’s novel The Whereabouts of Eneas McNulty – the son Eneas wonders how his father has such energy, the father Tom replies ‘Life, Eneas, life keeps me awake – don’t it you?’

There is such a profound difference between existing and living. There is also an extraordinary difference between life and Life and it entails quite a journey before one can reach an inner place of being and from there declare, “I am for the Work, I am for Life”.  

Q. Why is it so that some are people afraid to go down?

R. What type of down are you referring to?

Q. The kind of down that is in lawful opposition to the up?

Most people who haven’t been shown confuse the right sort of down with pulling down, they also have been led to a false belief that all forms of down are objectionable. These are two different things. There is a down that is legitimate. In fact, it is essential in the body if one wishes to go up. You can’t go up without this down and you can’t come down without the up. The force of the up needs the down. When these two forces are in harmony and flowing naturally in the spine, the spine is sprung, from the very top of the spine to the very tip of the bottom. As a result of this, the spine is like a spring.

I am speaking here of two energies. All great and true traditions are about energies. In Mr Macdonald’s unpublished writings, he says that we need to think in terms of energy and curves. When he produced this extension of the spine in you, you really felt the dance of flowing up and flowing down and a flow all through the body. To deny this down is in fact to deny the body and to ultimately hinder your way into the real presence of the body. And it leads to artificiality; many people are creating an artificial lightness in the body, which is actually a result of stiffening up. Ultimately, this can block one from accessing real feeling and proper emotion. The body belongs to the earth, and this is what this force is about. One needs the earth forces of the body. With a downward foundation in place, one can aim up; this is not a pulling or shoving, but an orientation.

Mr Macdonald used to say that there are only two possibilities: you’re either going up, or you’re going down (meaning the wrong kind of down). He meant this in both a psychological and spiritual sense. When he used the word “psychology,” it was not in the Western sense. The psychology he spoke of was far more wholesome, involving body, emotions, feelings, mind, instinct – the whole of the psycho-physical organism and its relationship to the earth, the stars, and the greater body of the universe.

There’s a deep, understandable fear of having to descend to the dark places in ourselves. Sometimes it is expressed as, “There is a Hitler in the bunker in all of us”. There is a very destructive force in almost everyone that needs to be seen rather than denied. In a desperate bid to avoid it, we turn to the light; what is in fact needed is for us to find our place so the light can descend down to meet the darkness. This also is relative. There are very few who can plume the depths of the darkness. It requires a Buddha or a Christ to go this far.  

In fairy tales there is the dragon. In the early icons, the lance doesn’t penetrate the dragon; it actually stops short. The lance symbolizes bringing the light to the darkness. It’s not about killing the dragon, but about marrying the light with the darkness. This has gotten confused over the centuries. The dark side has been thought of as bad. If you deny it, it only grows stronger.

But it is understandable that people do not wish to see what Jung called the shadow. Not only does the individual have their shadow, family has a shadow, the tribe or nation has a shadow; there is the shadow side of the earth. We are required to take responsibility for our own darkness only. It’s easy to blame others. A painful lesson is that one has to learn, regardless of past and upbringing, that should one really allow for the light to penetrate down into the darkness of one’s being, there is healing. Not only of oneself, but also of others. This is a sacred process and dangerous if not done with proper guidance. This process is about seeing.

The greatest aid that we have in this journey is the ability of something in us to see. To see my reactions, my negativity. Our habit is to react all the time to what we see rather than to bear witness. Remember that Christ asked of the apostles two fundamental things: to stay awake and to bear witness.

Apart from lack of awareness of a rightful opposition to the up, another obstacle to finding the down in the body is that many students of the Alexander Technique, as indeed students of other techniques, have been exposed to an ideological objection to the need for a going down.

Like a bird on the wire

Like a drunk in a midnight choir

I have tried in my way to be free.

Leonard Cohen

It has forever been the aspiration of mankind to fly like a bird, to become a wind, a breath; and it can be done, but it is paid for by the loss of the body, or the loss of humanity, which is the same thing. 

We cannot get rid of ourselves; we carry our body, and our shadow and everything else is as it always has been. We can only hope to become balanced between light and shadow.

C. G. Jung

"Of course the indispensable condition is that we have an archetypal experience and to have that means that you have surrendered to life. If your life has not three dimensions, if you don’t live in the body, if you live on the two dimensional plane in the paper world that is flat and printed, as if you were only living your biography, then you are nowhere. You don’t see the archetypal world, but live like a pressed flower in the pages of a book, a mere memory of yourself."

C.G. Jung, in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra  

Through grace one may arrive at a beginning place and inwardly declare, I am for the Work, I am for Life.  

The Work is not a form or a technique it is an influence, an influence descending from above. In a strange way our efforts of work may interfere with this mysterious process.

Yet we are as we are and we do as we do. How to accept this? We fail, we fail all the time it is just that we do not see it. Can it be said that in the process of awakening to our failure we awaken towards reality?  

Can I accept what I am as I am and allow for tears vulnerable, unknown.  

How Positive Thinking Fooled America and The World

By Barbara Ehrenreich. Published by Granta Books, 2009

This book opens with a simple sentence: ‘Americans are a “positive” people’, the author then sets about exploring how this view has taken root in the minds of many people both within and outside the USA. She proffers the view that the image and the reality are quite different and contrary to what may be offered on widely viewed television programmes like Larry King Live and the Oprah Winfrey Show or by best selling books such as The Secret, the core of American positive thinking is built upon anxiety and a terrible insecurity.

The American Revolution and the resultant fledgling Republic were based on idealistic principles. Its leadership was both flawed and young, and although several of the founding fathers were not at all positive that their rebellion would be successful, they fought bravely. Barbara Ehrenreich points out, “There is a vast difference between positive thinking and existential courage.”

It was during the 19th century that the movement of positive thinking began to take hold in the USA. It was brought about through the influence of a diverse collection of individuals seeking in their own way either wealth, health or happiness, often all three. Among them was Phineas Parkhurst Quimby (considered by many to be the founder of the New Thought movement). After his death Mary Eddy Baker claimed his teachings as her own and went on to establish Christian Science. It was through another of Quimby’s disciples, Annetta Dresser, that William James came to be influenced and subsequently wrote enthusiastically about the benefits of the New Thought approach to healing in The Varieties of Religious Experience. “To James, it did not matter that New Thought was a philosophical muddle; it worked.”

The essence of Quimby’s healing method is that the universe is fundamentally benevolent, that there is ‘One Mind’ out of which it came into being, that humans are a part of that ‘One’ and can ‘leverage their own powers of mind to cure or “correct” their life.’

The author was drawn to examine the history of how positive thinking reached such dominance in the USA as a result of her own diagnosis with cancer. ‘Breast cancer, I can now report, did not make me stronger, more feminine or spiritual. What it gave me, if you want to call this a “gift,” was a very personal, agonizing encounter with an ideological force in American culture that I had not been aware of before—one that encourages us to deny reality, submit cheerfully to misfortune, and blame only ourselves for our fate.’

The book has a journalistic approach and as a result lacks depth of questioning; however it does offer some valid criticisms of the multi-billion dollar positive-think-industry and its influence on health, religion, politics and business. Whereas the ‘power of positive thinking’, may work for a while for some, it is like a Ponzi scheme, fundamentally unstable, based as it is on a sort of wish fulfillment, one- sided affirmation and denial of anything ‘negative’.

There are many paths but there is only one Way. For those blessed upon the Way neither paths nor techniques have relevance.

The “path to the Way” does not negate J. Krishnamurti’s counsel that the search for truth is a pathless land requiring neither technique or teacher.

The Way in Chinese philosophy was named Tao and corresponds to the ancient Greek Logos. Menicus referred to Tao as “the kingly way”; and accessible only to those in conscience.

Among the Navaho the path is called “the Pollen Path of Beauty,” “And this way, congenial to the wholeness of man, is understood as the little portion of the great Way that binds the cosmos:” Joseph Campbell The Flight of the Wild Gander Harper Perennial New York 1990, P. 33.

“This cross of light is sometimes called Logos by me for your sakes, sometimes mind, sometimes Christ, sometimes a door, sometimes a way, sometimes bread, sometimes seed, sometimes resurrection, sometimes Son, sometimes Father, sometimes Spirit, sometimes life, sometimes truth, sometimes faith, sometimes grace; and so (it is called) for men’s sake.” The Acts of St John, New Testament Apocrypha.

“We must not forget that the path leads upward and forward.” Richard Wilhelm Lectures on the I Ching Routledge & Kegan Paul (London) 1981.

‘From the point of view of the path, the great struggle is for an inner freedom that can simply watch and contain both the upward and downward movements of energy within the psyche…. The real enemy of self development is our automatic tendency to identify the whole of ourselves with one or another of these fundamental movements of psychic energy.’ Jacob Needleman, Psychotherapy and The Sacred. Parabola Magazine Volume 1, Issue 1, Winter 1976, Pps. 54-55.

Understanding the relativity of doing is important for there exists also a doing, which is of a higher order. Is it to this that St. Paul is in part referring when he writes “That which would I do, I allow not; for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.” (The Epistle of St Paul to the Romans 7:15—16. King James Version)

This passage reveals itself more when line 14 “For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin” and line 17 “Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.” are included.

Goddard Binkley in The Expanding Self. Part II, My lessons with F. Matthias Alexander 1951—1953, p.88, records Alexander quoting St. Paul: “That which I would do, I do not; that which I would not do, I do.”  Alexander may be referring to either lines 15–16 or to line 19. “For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.” It is recollected that Alexander then goes on to state:

“When I read that, I thought it was one of the most tragic statements ever made. St Paul was an extremely religious man, so anxious to do the right thing. But, you see, in spite of all that, it was of no help to him. He had thus to admit that tragic truth. And it is the same with all of us, you see.”

Here I may be at variance with F. M. for I have long felt that a great deal more was being indicated by St. Paul than is first apparent. It is helpful to return to the beginning of Romans Chapter 7, “Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,)..” The word law occurs 24 times in the chapter. What law or laws and their levels is St Paul referring to? In 7:22 he delights in the “law of God after the inward man” and in 7:23 he speaks of another law “in my members, warring against the law of my mind,….”  Indeed the situation would be tragic if there was not levels and levels of influence, different laws governing our different natures, the higher and the lower, the inner and the outer. St. Paul does not speak in the language of Manicheism which condemns the body and wishes to escape from it, rather does he indicate the necessity of understanding the opposite tendencies in us and gradually undertaking the difficult effort of reconciling those opposites.  

 “Disciples do owe unto masters only a temporary belief and a suspension of their own judgement till they be fully instructed, and not an absolute resignation or perpetual captivity.” Francis Bacon 1561-1626. Advancement of Learning Book 1, IV, 12.

The experienced spiritual guide called Pir u Murshid  in the Sufi tradition, Anam Chara in the old Celtic Christian monasteries, and Guru in Indian yoga was considered to be indispensable. The Guru Gita (verse 17) describes the guru as “dispeller of darkness” from gu “darkness,” and ru, that which dispels. The Guru instructs through the inner alchemy of his or presence.

“If you have a touchstone, choose; otherwise go and devote yourself to one who is discerning. Either you must have a touchstone within your own soul or, if you do not know the way, find a guide.” Rumi Mathnawi II: 746–7. The spiritual guide or director has been characterized in Christianity in various ways – father  (abbas fem. Ammas), elder, teacher, trainer, leader, master. For a helpful view of the naming of the ‘spiritual director’ in relationship to his/her various functions see Irénée  Hausherr Spiritual Direction in the Early Christian Church pps 1–44.

“The word discipline is significant in this context, since it is not primarily a military term. The corresponding military term is regimentation. Discipline is a school term: the discipulus is the disciple, the pupil. Even the word pupil is apt here, because it is related to the pupil in our eye, the pupila — the little doll, the little image of one’s self that one sees in another’ eye. This eye to eye discipline is the essence of discipline: discipline is the attitude you have when you see eye-eye with your teacher.”  See Become What You Are: An interview with Brother David Steindl-Rast. Parabola Magazine Volume VII, Number 4, October 1982

 “Within the pupil …..the tiny reflection one sees of oneself within the eye of another, like the Telesphoros of Aesculapius—the mythical pointer of the way in antiquity and the child in man who fulfilled dreams and prayers.” Laurens Van Der Post Jung and the Story of Our Time, P.246.

On April 6th 2010 Bayern Munich played Manchester United at Old Trafford, with fifteen minutes left in the game the ball came to Arjen Robben and he scored a vital goal. Later he stated, "I saw that Franck saw me at the corner. I knew the ball would come across to me. I tried to stay calm. You can use force or technique. I tried to use technique. It worked out."

A soccer professional whose stark endeavour was to mark George Best in his prime, (for a while one the great players of the soccer game) stated years later “that trying to mark him twisted your blood.” One has only to watch the intelligent movement that manifested through Best during his period with Manchester United to confirm this.  It was said of Leônidas da Silva (Brazil), “He was as fast as a greyhound, as agile as a cat, and seemed not to be made of flesh and bones at all, but entirely of rubber …and compensated for his small height with exceptionally supple, unbelievable contortions and impossible acrobatics.” There was the intelligent aim and balance of Édson Arantes better known as Pelé, the agility of Manuel Francisco dos Santos (Garrincha), both instinctively knew how to play the unique Brazilian ‘futebol-arte’ of winning through apparent loss.[1]

In golf the legendary Bob Jones who in life as in sport intimated that one should not only play by the rules but also the etiquette of the game. There is Jack Nicklaus of whom one of his opponents stated after a major tournament, which Nicklaus won, “Well we were all playing golf but I don’t know what Jack was playing!”

But while eyes are on players such as Tiger Woods or Michelle Wie, how many notice the contribution and influence of the caddie or the coach? James “Tip” Anderson born with the craft of golf in his blood, and with his understanding of weather and psychology helped Arnold Palmer and Tony Lema win British Open Championships. Claude ‘Butch’ Harmon coached Tiger Woods to eight major titles and Greg Norman to his success in the 1993 British Open. Whether Tiger Woods will be able to find the level of his own game since separating from Harmon remains unknown. But his former coach once stated, “I start from the premise that old habits are hard to break.”[2] 

John Curry was one the most gifted of dance-ice skaters and endeavoured to manifest in movement many facets of his exploration. He was instructed in his early years of skating “don’t be graceful”; fortunately he did not listen to such advice. Although lacking the strong athleticism of Russian skaters Jayne Torvill and Christopher Dean took the dance on ice to new heights.

The jockey Lester Piggott (UK) sometimes won against all odds “in the sport of Kings”, however the remarkable ‘eye’ of Vincent O’Brien and the shrewd investment of Robert Sangster and John Magnier amply supported him in his endeavour. The “brethren” (as the latter trio became known) had a revolutionary effect on the world of horse racing. Bill Shoemaker (USA) rode his first winner aged fifteen in 1949. “At 7st, he was always 20 lb lighter than his British counterpart Lester Piggott, while his 2 quarter-size boots and tiny legs — only twelve inches from the knees down — made inexplicable his featherlight balance and centric control of a careering thoroughbred”.[3] Fred Archer, celebrated horseman infused with an aura of mystery but little known today, rode 246 winners in 1885 and 2,746 between 1869 and 1886 in a time without helicopters, automobiles, audio-visual media, or public relations agents.

In cricket the “Don” Bradman (Australia), Viv Richards (West Indies), Sachin Tendulkar (India) who while in form was enabled “to release strokes down the ground so sweetly timed that they were almost silent”,[4] drove to the boundary with a natural rotation in the spine and a squared back.

The remarkable Gertrude Ederle (USA) in 1926 became the first woman to swim the English Channel along the way breaking the men’s record for the crossing by two hours. She subsequently devoted much of her long life to teaching deaf children the art of swimming.

In athletics the fine distance runner Haile Gebrselassie finally gave way to an athlete of powerful closing speed, his fellow Ethiopian Kenenisa Bekele. Fanny Blankers-Koen (Netherlands) when as a mother of two young children became the first woman to win four gold medals in a single Olympic Games (set in London 1948) “had sensational spring in her long legs” set 20 world records at eight different events and opened a new trail for women in sport. Roger Bannister, maybe not the greatest runner, and around whom an idealised and inaccurate view has grown that he rarely trained for more than thirty minutes a day, and simply turned up to run the first recorded sub-four-minute mile.[5] There was the raw talent of Emil Zatopek who represented Czechoslovakia and who’s running style was described by the New York Times as “the most frightful horror spectacle since Frankenstein”. He won the 10,000 metres in Helsinki in 1952, then to give himself something to do entered the 5,000 metres, having won that he nonchalantly showed up for the marathon. The fact that he never had run one didn’t bother him. He introduced himself at the starting line to Jim Peters the then world record holder and when the race commenced proceeded to copy him until he was ready to strike out for his third gold medal in eight days.

Babe Ruth, Joe Di Maggio in baseball,[6] Althea Gibson, Steffi Graff, Roger Federer in tennis, Francis Joyon (France) sailing, Steven Redgrave (UK) rowing, Ayrton Senna (Brazil) Michael Schumaker (Germany) Formula One motor racing, and is Lance Armstrong (USA, cycling) who although winner of the Tour de France for the unprecedented sixth time in 2004, the equal of Eddy Merchx or Miguel Indurain? The play of names and their respective games could go on for pages whether it be American football “gridiron”, basket ball, bowling, free-climbing, hockey, hurling, mountaineering, pelota vasca,[7] rowing, squash, to mention but a few. And who among the participants of sport understand, what may in effect be happening, and carry the knowledge of those universal principles into daily activities long after their names are eroded from the arena?  

Some aspects of the mentation of modern sport may be gleamed from James Lawton when he referred to the Bernabeu stadium in Madrid as “one of the great Temples of the game”.[8] Phil Vickery equated rugby with war, fans baying for blood.., and the effort of training as being “flogged like animals.”[9] The latter’s attitude although understandable is a flawed,  “one natured” perspective of sport which can lead to the “win at all costs” brutality and ruthless manipulation of the psycho-physical organism which many young people suffered to extreme in their gymnastics and athletics training in the former German Democratic Republic, and the Soviet Union. Particularly in gymnastics the onset of ovulation in young women was often suppressed, or on occasion pregnancy (followed by abortion at what was considered the appropriate time) to enhance blood supply was built into a female athlete’s preparation.

The practice known as blood doping in which up to a quart or more of blood is extracted and frozen while the athlete continues with training to rebuild the blood to a normal level. Shortly before the sporting event red blood cells from the extracted blood is transfused back into the athlete, thus increasing the body’s haemoglobin level and oxygen-carrying capabilities which enables greater endurance. Blood doping remained legal until 1986, the same year that a synthetic version of the hormone erythropoietin (EPO) was produced. EPO, a single injection of which, offered the same benefits as blood doping, was quickly banned. [10]   

Brian English the British team doctor at the 2004 Athens Olympics indicated that Paula Radcliff could have died had she continued and tried to finish the marathon, however this did not satisfy some of the more rabid of the British media, many whom I suspect have never run a mile in their lives. Anyone (who in spite of the best and most thorough preparation) who has run a long rising distance in hot weather understands something of the deterioration that overwhelmed the distressed runner. There is more appropriate postural behaviour in stopping than dying for a gold medal.  

I have observed many players over the years participating in individual or team sports and some like the high jumper Bill Fosby at the Mexico Olympics broke all the then applicable techniques and transformed the game. Others like the English cricketer Geoff Boycott, without too much raw talent persevered, consistently practised and gradually brought a formidable shape to their use. On occasion the movement and poise like the former All Blacks New Zealander Grant Fox evokes a call to observe more closely.

In December 2003 I was having a conversation with Walter Carrington, he spoke about Johnny Wilkinson and the drop goal that secured the English Rugby Union team their victory by a “whisker” against Australia in Sydney. He said it was worth watching for the rotation of Wilkinson’s spine. I asked him if he thought the player knew what had actually happened. He replied “probably not, and if he did he would only muck it up”.

I have rarely heard participants or commentators acknowledge that there are other forces at play in sport as in other matters which are much bigger than any individual, team, or nation which also effect the outcome. It is most often the case that all manner of managers and players who do not concern themselves with, or wish to understand why it is that “It comes and It goes”, stay about too long, attribute to themselves powers that they do not have, as a result ego’s and/or salaries become grossly inflated.

 In the poignant Swedish film My Life as a Dog the young boy Ingemar who without a father and with his mother dangerously ill, is sent to spend some time with his uncle. His uncle befriends him and as they are sitting together a day before a local soccer match. The uncle says to Ingemar:

“Right, you should have the ball here. In your head. So you don’t have to chase it. You have to be the ball. Then you stand where you know the ball is going to come. You’ll see tomorrow.”

The match day comes and the uncle is in goal wearing his number one jersey. He gets a whack from the football and is sent spinning. Later on the way home with his nephew he says with some wonder about the incident:

“No I got it right in the head, groggy. Didn’t see it. Right in the head”.

That humorously illustrates a great deal of what actually goes on both on and off the playing field.

 [1] “A samba dancer’s gyrating hips, the feigning swing of a capoerista’s kick and a footballer’s guile are all trademarks of a national style.” Alex Bellos Futebal The Brazilian Way Of Life Bloomsbury 2003, p.97.

[2] Paul Trow Swing Commanders: why this is quite simply the best golf lesson in the world Sports Week 19, The Independent on Sunday 29 August 2004

[3] Frank Keating Those who have gone forever.. Guardian, Sport Section, Wednesday December 24, 2003.

[4] Matthew Engel Tendulkar hits a rich vein. The Irish Times, Sports Supplement p.8. Saturday, January 3, 2004.

[5] See Mike Cronin Bannister’s 4-minute mile Letters to the Editor, Irish Times, Saturday, April 24, 2004.  This letter was in reply to Eileen Battersby’s article The fastest and finest — by a mile. Roger Bannister and the sub-four-minute mile. Life Features The Irish Times Wednesday, April 21, 2004. See also articles on R. Bannister and Noureddine Morceli in Sport pps 66–67 The Times May 6th 2004. 

[6] Some of the home rum records and hitting capabilities that have swept through baseball in the past decade have raised questions concerning the use of tetrahydrogestrinone. See Rupert Cornwell Drugs cloud hangs over the Boys of Summer Sport, The Independent (London) Tuesday 16 March 2004

[7] Pelota or jai alai is played in the Basque region of Europe a glimpse of this ancient and dynamic game can be seen in Julio Medhem’s controversial documentary La Pelota Vasca; la piel contra la piedra (The Basque Ball: the skin against the stone), 2003.

[8] The Independent (London) Sport Thursday 18 November 2004 p.61. Referring to the outburst of racism that marred the friendly international game between England and Spain in November 2004, the president of FIFA Sepp Blatter also referred to Bernabeu as “a temple of football”.  The Irish Times SportsNews Monday, November 22, 2004 p.5 

[9] See Raging Bull on permanent war footing Sue Mott interview with Phil Vickery sportsaturday The Daily Telegraph Saturday, January 24, 2004

[10] See Ian O’Riordan Viren’s talent not just in the blood an interview with Lasse Viren winner of four Olympic gold medals at Munich and Montreal. Irish Times Sports Supplement p.10, Saturday November 6, 2004.

“Be like an astute buisness  man: make stillness your criterion for testing the value of everything. And choose always what contributes to it.” Evagrios Pontikos (the Solitary), The Philokalia Vol 1. “So vital to success is stillness that, in the absence of all the other components of the yoga, it would still be of value; whereas, in the absence of stillness, all the rest would be of no avail.” John Blofeld, Taoism: The Quest for Immorality, Ch.8 The Yellow and the White. Published by Unwin Paperbacks 1979.

A number of people have come to me recently for Alexander Technique sessions who have had trouble with a shoulder, such as pain, difficulty in movement or even a frozen shoulder. Although we may know of an instance when we injured or strained it, there is also the possibility that our discomfort just came on 'for no apparent reason'.

However, although we may not be able to determine the cause in some situations, it is likely that our painful or debilitating condition was brought about by straining, falling or bumping into something or even just sleeping awkwardly. Such conditions do not just happen by themselves and may well be brought on by a specific instance, but it may also be very closely linked to our own postural habits. Indeed the injury may have just been waiting to happen, although it's not entirely pleasant to accept this. For instance, it's very common for people to simply bend over to pick up something small from the floor and in the process of bending they trap a nerve in their back or muscles go into spasm and they can't move. It's certainly not the activity of bending that's the cause, but the manner in which we do the bending. If we have healthy, free poise that's balanced and expansive in nature, then we can bend easily without straining. But if we are somewhat collapsed in stature with a stoop or slouch or with general unwanted stiffness and then we bend to pick something up, we are already under unhealthy strain and a simple movement may just be enough to cause an injury. 'The final straw breaks the camel's back'. (Sorry for this rather unfortunate choice of analogy!)

If we experience restricted movement in our arm or shoulder, we may need some treatment from a physiotherapist, but there is a lot we can do for ourselves. The manner in which we reach upwards can have an effect on how our arm and shoulder feel and function. A helpful tip comes to mind that can make an enormous difference. For instance, if we want to raise our arm to reach something from a high kitchen cupboard, don't just raise your arm. Firstly the anticipation of pain is likely to make us stiffen more than we are already and then we probably make far more effort than is desirable because of our postural habits anyway.

When reaching high up, firstly stop to see if you can free your neck by letting your head balance freely on the top of your spine (let your head roll forwards a little by dropping your nose). Do this even though you are going to reach upwards. Now, having freed your neck to the best of your ability, try to also relax your shoulder. When you reach upwards, think of your fingertips leading the way. Think of your fingertips being 'taken upwards', even by invisible strings rather like a marionette puppet. Lead with your fingers all the way upwards until your hand touches the object you want.

Practice this now while you're sitting here. Firstly for comparison, just raise your arm upwards towards the ceiling in your normal manner and see how that feels. Now we do it again differently. Free your neck firstly by letting your head roll forwards a few millimetres then think of your fingers leading the way as though your fingertips are able to take your hand and arm upwards for you. See if you can notice any difference. If you've done it correctly you may notice that your arm feels lighter than before and you may reach further without strain.

If you're going to reach for something with your hand, think of your fingertips leading the way. The thought has an effect on your co-ordination and the way all your muscles work.

Sweden's Stefan Holm leaping for the Gold in the Men's high jump event in 2004 Olympics. Photo by: Vino John.

"If you think you can or can't, either way you are right."
Henry Ford, 1863-1947

I love this quote as it sums up so succinctly how our attitude or belief affects the outcome of our endeavours. I mean, have you ever heard a top athlete say, "I don't think I'm going to win this race." and then actually go ahead and win it? John Serle, philosopher took the principles of Visual Motor Rehearsal from the NASA space programme and introduced it to sport many years ago and now many top athletes will tell you that they give time to visualising themselves succeeding in their endeavours; winning the race and making the fastest time. Scientific experiments show that if an athlete at rest is wired up to a computer and then they close their eyes and visualise themselves as clearly as possible running and winning the race, the actual nerves in the correct muscles fire. The muscles are triggered by the thought despite the fact the athlete is actually at rest.

If you've got a difficult task ahead of you, whether it's a meeting, new job interview, project completion, athletic or sporting bid, a musical performance, a speech at a wedding or business conference or a reconciliation with an old friend, give some time to visualising it all turning out the way you'd like. See yourself successfully achieving it, being congratulated, applauded by smiling faces, hugging your friend with renewed affection, winning the race. Do not worry about it or visualise failure because you'll be programming that into your mind. You've got to keep your mind on what you do want because that's what you are energising. You experience in life what you think about and you become what you think about.

Every thought is energising a situation, so make sure you think of what you do want. I've written about this sort of thing before, but it's been an even greater focus of my own attention over the last few weeks, to my benefit. If you want to read more, see 'Want a new relationship?' or see the archive list on 'Law of Attraction'.

It's said that we only use around 5% of our mental capacity. That doesn't seem very much and one wonders what we could achieve if we could use more of it. It seems that anything may be possible.

"If you think you can or can't, either way you are right." .... Thank you, Mr Ford.