GREAT MOVEMENTS

Y. Rywerant. Semiotics Spring 1994 pp. 10-13

A voluntary action is preceded by the image one has of oneself performing that action.

It is easy to verify this by observing ourselves. The time sequence “image before action” is easy to observe when we look at an action that calls for some planning—the action is perhaps new or unusual, or we might have some reason for hesitating to start it. In such a case, the two stages are distinct enough to be recognized.

We may ask whether this situation has any practical value. The image of the pattern of action to be performed has its engram encoded in the conscious part of our central nervous system. It serves as a blueprint for the action. As such, it could be useful for judging the possible outcome of the action, its feasibility, and its risks. Sometimes the decision will be to postpone the action, or even to refrain from it altogether.

The more common instance is when the action is just starting. At this time, a flow of sensory Impulses (involving various sensory modalities) originating in ourselves and in the environment also starts as a result of the action. These sensory impulses are recognized, interpreted, and integrated into a unified picture of what is happening while we are acting. This sensory information, or feedback, is of the utmost importance. It enables us to monitor our actions and their outcomes, to compare the continuously emerging picture with the blueprint of the action mentioned before, to diminish the possible mismatch between the blueprint and the image of the ongoing action by changing (correcting) the action (“negative feedback”), to go on, or to stop. In other words, the feedback enables us to have conscious control of our actions.

Moshe Feldenkrais, in developing his system of learning, has emphasized very clearly the importance and the role of the pre-action images in voluntary actions. A complete self-image would involve full awareness of all the joints in the skeletal structure as well as of the entire surface of the body—at the back, the sides, between the legs, and so forth. This is an ideal condition, and hence a rare one. We can all demonstrate to ourselves that everything we do is in accordance with the limits of our self-image, and that this image is no more than a narrow sector of the ideal image (Feldenkrais, 1977, p. 21). Our image is formed through familiar actions, in which approximation to reality is improved by bringing several senses into play that tend to correct each other (p. 22)..

The possibility of prolonging the period between the intention and its execution enables man to learn to know himself.

The possibility of a pause between the creation of the thought pattern for any particular action and the execution of that action is the physical basis of awareness. This pause makes it possible to examine what is happening within us at the moment when the intention to act is formed, as well as when it is carried out. The possibility of delaying action—prolonging the period between the intention and its execution—enables man to learn to know himself (p. 23).

Our self-image comprises more than just a static picture, like a photograph, or the way we see ourselves in the mirror. To this static aspect of the self-image, we should add the most important dynamic aspect, namely, the way we see ourselves potentially acting out various patterns of action. We might prefer those patterns that are somehow integrated into our way of acting; not only do we know the context in which such action seems feasible or even habitual, but we might also anticipate the sensory input (or information) that comes with our action. Those anticipations make our patterns of action into what they are: habitual, matter-of-course, and without special effort or conscious control. On the other hand, we might avoid the unknown, the untried, or the unhabitual patterns, and even more so those associated with a sense of inability, inadequacy, discomfort, or pain. A negative expectation associated with a pattern of action keeps us from considering the possibility of acting it out, unless we muster enough courage or curiosity to do so. When not carried out, such a pattern of action will ultimately cease to be part of our self-image. In adverse conditions, in other words, the self-image is reduced, in the sense that less is feasible now than before. This could happen after injuries and operations, when health problems are present, when / environmental conditions are} constricting, etc.

In the Feldenkrais® system, a person tries unhabitual actions in a safe environment, and is directed by the _ teacher to take notice of the sensory _ input that comes with the action so that the anticipation of sensory input will ultimately become part of the pattern of action.

Let me give two examples. With the pupil in a prone position, the teacher { might, by touching, find some excessive| tonus in the pupil’s back muscles. This* might also display itself as a stiff back._ When this situation is not voluntary,; but is rather controlled by a system of |, the central nervous system not readily open to conscious control, then the teacher can use the idea of “effort substitution.” He could just very gently bring the ends of those muscles (‘origin’ and ‘insertion’) towards each other. With this gentle support, the teacher substitutes his effort for part of that subsystem’s effort, giving it the opportunity to relinquish its own effort. When this happens, the pupil will feel more at ease moving his pelvis or his chest relative to each other, since the abdominal and back muscles might relax. Any considered pattern of action involving movement of the trunk will now have its pre-action image coming with an anticipation of “easy effort,” quite different from the previous state. The other example involves the idea of “relative conjugate movement” (Rywerant, 1983, pp. 70-76). Let us consider a movement in a particular joint, an element of a pattern of action. Generally, a movement in a joint could be performed in at least two ways: by moving the distal body part (the one that is farther away from the center of the body) and leaving the proximal part (the one closer to the center) motionless, or the other way around— keeping the distal part motionless and moving the proximal one. (Other ways, where neither part is stationary, are possible.) One particular way might be the more habitual of the two; usually, it will be the one in which the distal part moves. When it is habitual, the sensory anticipations are already established, so much so that they could be considered part of the image of that pattern of action. On the other hand, when there are In the Feldenkrais® system, a person tries the unhabitual in a safe environment… negative anticipations coming with the image of the action, such as a sense of inability, inadequacy, discomfort, or pain, the pattern will be avoided, possibly falling into disuse and eventually no longer being a part of the self-image. In such a situation, the teacher might try the “relative conjugate movement” by proposing to move the proximal part while keeping the respective distal part motionless. That pattern, different from the avoided one, might perhaps be free from negative anticipations (or any anticipations, for that matter), and might therefore be allowed. Now, the distal part’s turn comes to be moved relative to the proximal one. If this is done gradually, not intrusively, the pupil might accept it. In other words, he becomes consciously aware of the change, and his self-image expands. To illustrate this with a practical example, I will recount a unique story. It is unique for two reasons: first, it shows that changes in someone’s self-image (its deterioration and restoration) can be really dramatic; and second, the person in question was Moshe Feldenkrais himself, so his description of what happened to him has a special authenticity.

At the beginning of 1982, Moshe Feldenkrais returned home to Tel Aviv, shortly after undergoing a major skull operation for a subdural hematoma. The operation had been successfully performed in Switzerland, and Feldenkrais had remained there for an appropriate convalescence. Now that he was at home, he wanted to regain physical ability to work on people, giving Functional Integration® sessions as quickly as possible.

I worked on him three times a week, giving him Functional Integration sessions. What struck me immediately was a deterioration of the relationship between head and trunk. I knew that wonderfully organized neck from before the operation, and Moshe’s old ability to move his head with the greatest of ease in all possible directions. Now, the head seemed to be strongly connected to the shoulders; head and trunk appeared as one rigid unit. I didn’t feel like trying to move his head against this holding pattern. After all, one is supposed to be (consciously or otherwise) self-protective after a major traumatic experience such as a serious skull operation. What I did instead was use the idea of the “relative conjugate movement.” Moshe was lying on his back, and I took his left arm in my hands, moving it up vertically. I checked how far he would let me lift his left shoulder off the table. By allowing this, he actually allowed a change in the relationship between head and shoulders. Moshe had no difficulty with this. It seemed that he was not self-protective in relation to his arm and shoulder. He hadn’t been operated on there, had he?

The next step was to “integrate” this, in other words, to provide to Moshe the “You know what you did to me? You restored my neck!” sensation of the practical usefulness of the shoulder’s movability. With one of my hands, I supported Moshe’s right knee diagonally towards the middle of the body, and with my other hand, I took his left hand and helped him to reach out for that knee. While doing this, he left his head “hanging down,” supported only by the table. After lifting the right shoulder in a similar way, he established the other diagonal as he reached out with the right hand toward the left knee. Now, with Moshe in this position, I could place my hands underneath his shoulder blades and play with them, alternately lifting them gently. Then again, a crucial step: after lifting the left shoulder the same way from underneath, I kept it there and put my other palm on Moshe’s forehead. Now I allowed the left shoulder to lower onto the table while I simultaneously rolled the head to the left. I had to be very precise in keeping the head-shoulder configuration steady (non-differentiated), so that no expectation of “danger” might be elicited. The movability of the head had been accepted! It was now easy to make the transition towards moving the head relative to the left shoulder, in other words, in a differentiated way. Other approaches, in other positions, were also tried along this line of thought. Feldenkrais stood up and was silent for a few moments. Then he said, “You know what you did to me? You restored my neck! Since the operation, I feel like this!” While saying this, he repeatedly made a movement with both hands around his head and shoulders, indicating a silhouette without a neck, and showing by this the outline of a head planted directly on the shoulders, “and without a place for the mouth! And now, I feel my true image, like this again! With a neck and a chin!” This time, he outlined the silhouette of the rehabilitated self-image, the wide head, narrower neck, and then the shoulders.

The story exemplified, of course, the interrelationship between a person’s way of functioning and that person’s dynamic self-image. But the story’s poignancy lies in the fact that it proves that changes in the dynamic self-image—in both directions—can be very dramatic. A dramatic restriction in the way of functioning can produce an immediate restriction in the self-image, and a dramatic enhancement of the way of functioning can produce an immediate enlargement of the self-image. The latter is equivalent to more readiness to carry out more patterns of action. 

References 

Feldenkrais, Moshe. (1977). Awareness through Movement. New York: Harper & Row.

Rywerant, Yochanan. (1983). The Feldenkrais Method. New Canaan, CN: Keats Publishing Company, Inc.