An important distinction
There is a very clear distinction between therapist and teacher when it comes to the world of Alexander Technique.
I feel compelled to write because I had such a strong reaction to seeing myself described in error on the top of my Google entries as an Alexander Technique ‘THERAPIST” Aarrgghh!
For one who is aspiring to a sense of spacious freedom in the area of the head, neck and back, (let alone thinking all the right thoughts!) I was startled to find myself in the throes of such a pickle.
Knotty neck, it certainly was.
Why such a to-do about this aberration? and what really is the difference in the end?
After all, I am skilled with my hands, I know lots about the body and how it works, and surely my pupils (not my patients) notice improvement in their well-being…… but no, I do not regard myself as a therapist.
As I see it, my work has the aim of showing people ‘how’
- How to stop pulling the head back
- How to go about activities in a way that will produce efficient results without putting strain on the body
- How to apply thinking in action
- How to prevent injury or the likelihood of strain
- How to restore natural grace and poise
- How to conserve energy
How to, how to….
How to apply the principles of the Alexander Technique during every day life and on into the future.
I teach, I do not treat
My clients are pupils, not patients
In a way, my aim is to impart enough understanding to make myself redundant and to encourage my pupils to think and act independently so that they can draw on the technique for as long as it inspires them and is useful.
If I now consider what it is to be a therapist, I guess I would have to say something like the client/patient is more of a recipient of a treatment than a lesson. That in some way as a therapist I would take more responsibility for her progress.
That whilst a patient participates in her treatment, and of course, pursues the suggestions made to her, she may not have such an active role in bringing about lasting change. (of course, now I can think of lots of therapies where it is vital to comply to get the most benefit… dietary, exercise etc)
There is, then, an element of healing or ‘cure’ for both therapy and re-education, but I think it is a matter of proportion.
The Alexander technique is strongly weighted towards an educative process through lessons in awareness and how to apply a particular kind of thinking in activity…. with an element of the kind of therapeutic benefits that could be called ‘getting better’.
The improvement in, for example, a specific condition such as back pain or headache comes about indirectly however, as a result of an overall improvement in the way in which the body functions, which in turn is as a result of learning how to release unhelpful habits and manage every day activities in a less detrimental way.
I do not go to the problem and work specifically to alleviate it, I work generally throughout the mind/body mechanism to bring about better overall function.
All sorts of unexpected benefits may arise as a consequence and not necessarily the ones most hoped for!
Therapeutic work on the other hand treats people with conditions for which they are seeking help. As a part of this there will be an element of information and education, but I think this is secondary and not vice versa. The primary goal is to alleviate suffering or to ‘mend’.
In the end, perhaps the neutral word ‘practitioner’ might save a lot of hassle?
I would be delighted for any thoughts or discussion.
This little one has the secret!
