Teacher Matthew Remski's project What Are We Actually Doing in Asana? (WAWADIA),
which looks at injuries related to asana is a must read if you teach or practice yoga and are interested in self-refection. It will
eventually become a book, but in the process, Remski is posting some of
his findings in a series on his blog.
The posts have lead me down (a pleasing) rabbit warren of ideas, challenges and questions and fueled a fair bit of research myself. I can't wait for the book! If you haven't come across his work please do have a look...here is a little back-ground and an excerpt from the latest article...
"Everyone has a beautiful practice when
they’re practicing. And everyone can take selfies. But only a few of
those selfies can go viral. Maybe talent makes the difference.
In Yogaland, the valorization of talent happens beneath the surface,
because every reason for everything has a hidden esoteric default. Kino,
Mr. Iyengar, Cameron Shayne — they all have that something special
that shows up in their practice. We don’t want it to be talent. We want
it to be a virtue, accessible to everyone. But if we’re honest, talent
is probably all we can really claim to see on the yoga mat. If we think
we see more than that, we’re getting into the weird projective territory
of guessing at the internal states of others.
Using the word “talent” to describe what Kino is working with would
come with a price. It would confound the democratic promise of postural
learning that fuels the marketing of contemporary yoga. It sounds
deterministic, and yoga’s all about freedom, right? Explanations based
upon talent or genes would seem to rob the yogi of agency. “Talent”
would also reposition the desirability of the skill by obscuring
an implied therapeutic benefit that everyone should have access to.
Everyone wants to have a beautiful practice. But most people
understand that we are not all developing the same talents for the same
reasons. Despite our traumatized, what-else-can-we-do? belief in
neoliberal meritocracy, most of us know that talent itself, much like
the accident of happening to express conventional ideals of beauty, is
the primary engine of visual renown and influence. Nature bestows
differences that can look and even feel like inequalities. Perhaps
difference is its own beautiful practice.
Talent is not unlike inherited money. It’s the accumulation of
beneficial cultural and genetic transactions. Unfortunately, our entire
social architecture is set up to believe that it is the earned property
of the individual.
On the bright side, the acknowledgement of “talent” might also
demystify the process and charisma of exemplary postural yogis, and
perhaps encourage more people to practice within their means — or,
according to their difference."
-- Matthew Remski, WAWADIA Update #23: “Kino Has a Beautiful Practice” vs. “Kino Is Talented”
No comments:
Post a Comment