Form Or Philosophy: That Old Question
by James Crader
Feb 21, 2018
Let’s be frank – we teach movement not magic.
It’s an old (and by old I mean so old that it’s hard to believe it’s not dead yet) conversation: Is what I’m doing Pilates or not?
If we were teaching magic then sure, I’m certain there’s a way to DO it … correctly. I’m sure for any given incantation you say this word before this word, and someone comes back to life, but if it’s reversed then the whole town dies. What we do is literally NOT magic. Sometimes it might look like it, but no one has literally returned someone to life via Pilates. Not ever.
CoreAlign/Stretch-eeze gait training with Chantill Lopez & student.
What we do is teach movement, plain and simple. We teach people to flex, extend, side bend, and rotate … and every now and again keep still … and so on. Exercises, in general, are simply arbitrary gestures representing greater ranges of movement, like specific hues on a larger color spectrum. If you look at all of our exercises it’s pretty inarguable that that is in fact what’s happening (e.g. Roll-Up is Flexion, and Pulling Straps is Extension). So, for the sake of frankness (and pathologies aside) let’s stop being so precious with our Method. After all it’s just a bunch of movement. (Thoughtful movement, but movement none the less.) Instead let’s create some space for exploration, and an appreciation for all the hues on that spectrum.
Somewhere in our history we did ourselves a disservice by switching the name from Contrology to Pilates. Let’s talk words … ‘cause they matter. The troubling (and useful) thing with words is that each one means something, and sometimes they mean different things to different people. If I said, “fruit,” someone reading this is envisioning a pineapple, someone else a banana, and maybe there’s an orange somewhere else. If I said, “apple,” more people begin thinking of the same thing that I’m thinking about … namely the type of computer I’m using to write this blog … but if you were thinking Golden Delicious then you got it wrong. See, words matter.
What calls to mind when you read Pilates? Is it the image of Joe? His exercises? A Reformer, or one of his other inventions? It could be a lot of things, and probably most of them are not wrong. How about when you read the word Contrology? Do you think of the way a specific exercise looks? A person? Or do you think of a philosophy, or an idea? To me it brings up an important conversation: What’s more important the man or his message?
I think when we edited Contrology to read Pilates we made the man more important than his mission. The archives became the rules, and we left behind the aliveness of the philosophy. It’s easy to get emotional and sentimental about a person, a proverbial Father figure, and religionize his work. It’s easy to make the priority the stories of what it was like to work with Mr. Pilates rather than what he was trying to accomplish as a mission. It’s acceptable to prioritize how so-and-so used to DO it. It’s even logical to prioritize the specific gestures someone else chose to depict greater ranges of movement, rather than prioritizing that movement in general, when it’s about a man not the message. As a culture we’ve prioritized the form of Pilates to the detriment of the philosophy. Consequently it’s expected that today it looks just like it did then. I don’t know that that’s Contrology though!?
Stephanie Behrendt, and SCI student Theo St. Francis, exploring Gyro-inspired rotations using Pilates apparatuses.
Why should someone else’s movement protocol limit my mission to cohesively communicate with, feel, and integrate my own body in an effort to achieve a sense of control within a given environment? (You know, practice Contrology). Why is it so confrontational if I flex my feet rather than point them? Why does it matter if I like to inhale rather than exhale to side bend? What is so special about a Reformer that it can only be used exclusively in the ways described by people who worked with Joe Pilates, or even people who worked with the people who worked with Mr. Pilates, and no other ways? Why is my movement so precious to some people that they’d rather halt it midway rather than letting me explore possibilities? Why are the rules of grammar so admirably broken for the sake of creative liberty and progress, but not the rules of Pilates? What is it about this Method that lends itself to emotional arguments rather than looking at what it is we’re actually doing … guiding people through a physically aware movement experience. Period. Paragraph.
I acknowledge that we have to have some baseline, some root we’re all working from. The 34 Mat Pilates poses (exercises / gestures / movement / or however you’re comfortable labeling them) and the numerous ways in which to classically utilize the apparatus comprise the archival work that Joe left us; a vessel to explore our body and ways in which we can move within a Contrology studio environment. However, if you look at Joe’s work it went beyond the container of the studio: stick wrestling, bear crawling, and numerous filmed iterations of calisthenics not mentioned in any of his written work (the dude broke the rules). I’m curious if the curated archival “PILATES” exercises are brilliant practices meant to teach us a movement skill set, designed to coax us into exploring what else we can do, rather than how I often see them taught, as things to be conquered and done aesthetically well? (To the end of just being right or wrong!?) Is my success at doing a beautiful Teaser important, or are the skills (and vulnerability) I’m practicing within that Teaser the goal? Does it even matter if I routinely show up to my practice and do my version of Teaser regardless of how it stacks up against everyone else’s? How about if I never call it Teaser? Or if I call it Boat Pose?
When we begin to look at the work we’re actually doing on a daily basis as a movement practice to explore and embody, rather than exercises to perform and get right, it opens up the potential for exploration and creativity. It allows us the opportunity to break rules for the sake of expanding our physical intelligence. (For the sake of enjoying all the colors of the movement spectrum.) I’ve never heard of anyone claiming Joseph Pilates wanted us to practice his exercises for the sake of getting better at his exercises. I am aware that his mission was to inspire a life filled with movement and zest, and he used his exercises and apparatuses to create environments for students to explore their potential. So why is it so alarming when we model rather than mimic our professional existence around a man who illustrated having a personal relationship with self and movement? Do I really need to follow the order to be considered a Pilates instructor? Or is encouraging my students to expand their movement vocabulary through precision, control, centering, use of breath, whole body movement, and rhythm enough?
Reformer-Chair play with James Crader’s student, Judith..
I’m not advocating for frivolous extreme movements for the sake of just doing them (although sometimes I do that). BOSU Balls on top of rotator discs on top of foam rollers on top of Reformers make for a good pageant, in much the same way Snake and Twist do. Yet both scenarios, BOSU and Twist (and many in between), could shift from being performances to being embodied experiences capable of helping students self-create movement strategies that are both fun and revelatory if we just look at them as a practice rather than a recital. When was the last time you asked your students what they were doing vs. what they were practicing? They aren’t the same question.
So, if the debate is whether or not something is Pilates – and that debate isn’t exclusively about movement potential, exploration, embodiment, and joy – then I don’t think I have much to say on the topic. It’s now my preference to occupy my career with a woke version of Pilates that leaves behind the tired disputes of do’s and do not’s and what something should or should not look like in order to be right or wrong. Instead I invest effort in expanding my students’ understanding of their movement choices, and overall sense of self. Unfailingly I’ll just be over here exploring and enjoying and teaching Contrology … aka, Modern Pilates.
James Crader is a Movement Coach specializing in Pilates and John F. Barnes Myofascial Release Therapy, a CoreAlign Faculty Member, and owner of Evolved Body in Sacramento, CA. Growing up, he never thought anything fitness would be his calling. What he was good at was listening and storytelling. He loved to experiment, learn, and play with the shapes he could make while rolling around on the ground. He even practiced writing with his toes (just in case). All that made for a weird kid, but an innovative movement educator. James began his Pilates training with Balanced Body, but has gone on to study with numerous teachers from many lineages of Pilates and beyond. James has contributed to movement conversations on many podcasts, blogs, Pilates Style, and soon Pilates Anytime. You can find out more about James and EB Studio at www.EvolvedBodyStudio.com. You can follow James’ life and Movement musings on Instagram @james_crader.