Pages

Tuesday, 9 December 2014

Matthew Remski

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