People ask me: why am I so against tablework, hands-on practise and teaching individually?

Good question.

I ask it to my Self often, because it appears I am against the flow of an entire profession. All three of these are revered and valued, yet here I am stating unequivocally that I do not support this vision of our work.

No wonder I get attacked.

I don't see it as attack though, I see it as people defending their own position. Fair enough. What else can you do when someone (like me) appears to be undermining all that you hold valuable in your work?

It's reasonable to single me out as a charlatan, a money-grabbing snake willing to do anything to add another dime to his bank balance. Of course that's not me either - as people who know me can attest - but in the absence of clear explanations, it natural to imagine the worst.

So here's why:

Tablework - Lying About Life

One of my teachers loves to say: "We only do three things in life: lying down, sitting and standing." It's a Zen kind of perspective, which attributes all the rest to our furtive imaginations. Al that I can say is true about me now is: man sitting in chair typing.

But I love to add to that: man desperately missing his children, furiously finding ways to make it possible to return to his darlings. Our ego-minds will always add drama, a story and install into it a "reality" which is entirely projected, but feels entirely real. In a few minutes - with some deep mediative analysis - a new "reality" can be constructed that serves life better.

What's this got to do with tablework?

We don't live on tables. Your life involves mostly sitting and standing. When you lie, you rest. You sleep. Imagine trying to manage your current life as a paraplegic and you get the drift of what I am saying.

Our work involves constructive thinking, it concerns changing behaviour. Behaviour causes suffering, and behaviour is me responding to my idea of you. When does that happen? It happens while I am sitting and standing, mostly.

Life happens there - not in the supine position.

The one table we have at each BodyChance studio is mostly kept folded away in a corner. It comes out when someone wants to explore how they are using themselves to give a massage or treatment of some kind. We don't offer table turns - there's no time for that.

There's a sufi story that illustrates my obtuse thinking. A man loses his keys in a dark alley. Immediately he walks away to a street lamp further up the alley, and starts looking around there.

His friend is completely befuddled by this and asks:

"Why are you looking here? You dropped your keys over there…" he says pointing to the other end of the alley. The man looks up and says:

"Because I can see here! There's light!!"

You can see things about your arms, your legs, breathing while on a table, but that has very little to do with the behaviour that is causing your suffering. You can practise inhibition and direction about things that don't really matter - but does that really equip you to deal with the things that do matter?

It is like going to the place where there is light, but your truth is not existing there.

Hands-on – Objectifying Reality

Learning "hands-on" involves the same departure from the reality of I, you and this moment where I cause my suffering. Now it's all about "How to take a leg" and "How to take a shoulder." It doesn't matter that the other person - who you are practising "hands on" with - needs this now or not. There are there merely to serve your own agenda.

You'll not see this kind of thing happening at BodyChance, unless it's a visiting teacher because I also value diversity of approach.

Why don't I teach my students this way?

This is objectifying the process of using touch as one of the tools of teaching. It is pulling touch out of the teaching process, and turning it into "thing" to practise. When you explore touch this way, the other person loses their true identity, and instead becomes a "body" to practise on.

Some training schools even use this term. "Are there any bodies coming in to-day?" It reminds me of how beautiful woman are objectified in pornographic magazines - their true identity ceases to matter. They are "body" to look at, that's all.

No-one wants to do that, I understand. Forgive me if I offend.

Yet I believe that is what starts to happen when you divorce the object from the life you are in. It's what happens when you start looking around under the light: it's taking truth and pulling it out of the world and making it a "something" when in fact it's an artificially simulated view of reality: under the lamp where nothing actually really happened.

Hands-on practise and tablework are like this: departures from the sitting and standing of real life. Separated activities that serve their own agendas.

Of course you can learn things, of course you can get benefits - for example, tablework is enjoyable. It relaxes you. It helps you slow down and reflect. All good. And I also observe - through 10 years of practical experience of giving and receiving table turns - that it is an inefficient means of learning how to deal with the actual behaviours that cause suffering.

Many people cite the argument: it helps people calm down, it puts their mind in readiness to learn. Good. At least you agree they are not learning anything. At least you agree that this is a palliative, not a way to decisively end suffering.

I am for efficiency.

Private, Individual Lessons – Why I Gave Them Up

I think efficiency is an implicit aim within the work itself.

Why do we bother to change our manner of doing anything?

Because we want to be happy, because we want to feel ease. What brings about ease in my co-ordination? Doing things efficiently, doing things according to my design. In that sense we accept the principle: let's find the most efficient way to do this.

Why then is that same principle is not applied to the learning process itself? You can not book an individual lesson at BodyChance in Japan or Osaka - we don't offer it.

Why?

It's inefficient.

We offer group work over individual lessons for the simple reason that a greater number of people can benefit in a shorter amount of time. I do not deny the benefits of individual lessons or tablework, but I can not view them as efficient means of learning. Tablework is inefficient, slow: often even serving as a palliative for stressed out people. Which makes it therapy, not education. It's a fine line, but I like to keep BodyChance to the North of that divide.

I say - cut to the chase.

Don't take a pill to reduce your stress, then start the process of figuring it out. Why not cut out the middle step and get straight to the issue? Save the time. Stop looking around under the street lamp, and go back to that dark confusing place where you actually caused your suffering.

I know most people don't agree, but my attitude is what led to the creation of the largest Alexander school in the world. Ever. Maybe you think size does not matter? Then go and talk to the thousands of people whose lives have improved as a direct result of contact with BodyChance before you decide about that one.

I am not waiting around on a table while life passes me by - too much is at stake.

My vision is to bring Alexander's Discovery within reach of everyone on the planet. Individual lessons, tablework and "hands-on" practise have no place in that vision. This is what I have discovered.