 |
  |
 |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
Site Areas  |
store | | | articles | | | forums | | | studios | | | vacations |
|
yoga | massage | fitness | wellness | meditation |
|
|
For future visits, link to "http://www.YogiSource.com/forums".
Make a new bookmark.
Tell your friends so they can find us and you!
Coming soon ... exciting new changes for our website, now at YogiSource.com.
 Memorizing the DialogModerators: Moderators Jump to page : 1 2 3 Now viewing page 2 [25 messages per page] | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Yoga -> Bikram Yoga | Message format |
 |
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
| Cyndi |
| ||
Expert Yogi Posts: 5098   Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Listening to broken English is cute and fun for a while, but after a while..it totally gets on your nerves!!!  | ||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
| Cyndi |
| ||
Expert Yogi Posts: 5098 Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | |||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
| tourist |
| ||
Expert Yogi Posts: 8442    | |||
| |||
| Cyndi |
| ||
Expert Yogi Posts: 5098 Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | tourist - 2010-02-07 11:30 AM I still get stuck on the whole "dialogue" thing. Unless the class is talking back in reply to the teacher, it is a monologue. YES, you are so right Tourist..why didn't I think of that, OMG, Monologues are worse than Dialogues,  | ||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
Here's my "I'm so liberal i can argue both sides" post.  it's a dialogue because. . . I find that in the classroom, even if someone isn't speaking, they are communicating quite a bit of information. I am "listening" to them and then teach according to what i "hear" from them. They communicate whether it is too much or too little, whether they are enjoying or struggling, etc etc. And i can gear my teaching to that--different kinds of encouraging, telling them to back off, telling them to not back off, etc. so, if the teacher is responding to the students in some way, then it is a dialogue. here's an example from outside of yoga. I took acting for non-majors when i was in Uni. loved and hated the class. loved it because i learned a *ton* about myself. hated it because it was a *really hard class*. that's also why i loved it. so confusing. anyway, our first exercise was the one-liner. we were paired up, each given a line. "i need the keys/you can't have the keys." on first blush, it looks like the one with the keys (you can't have them line) has the upper hand in the process, and with only one line, you have to convince that person to give you the keys. so, we were to prepare 4 different ways of doing it. my partner was rather lazy and so we only came up with three. we agreed to "improv" the fourth one. ok, cool. our day comes and we're set to do our "performance." i'm outside waiting to go in the room. she's in the room, with the keys, at the desk and reading a book. I open the door when our teacher, Mike, knocks. I come in and i see the keys on the desk, her reading. I walk over, pick up the keys, and walk out, and just as i leave, i say "i need the keys!" boring, matter of fact tone, a "just letting you know i just took them while you were looking the other way" tone. She then tried to get to me before i got out of the room, and of course she couldn't. I got an A--that was our improv one. Then we did three others, one excited with her angry; one me upset/crying and her apologetic; and one with me angry and her crying. boring. anyway, we did well. but it goes to show how the same line over and over can be expressed in different ways depending upon the context. so, take a bikram (or any scripted class) and it can be a dialogue *if* the teacher is saying those words with different intonations in response to what s/he is 'seeing/hearing' in the class. the teacher says "L like Linda" and then the class has folks saying "ahh, Linda!" and "see you in hell, Linda!" and "i love Linda!" and so on. then the teacher responds with the next line in such a way as to respond to these people (some, all, most, whatever). and then it is a dialogue, even though it is a script. it's a monologue because. . . as previously mentioned, it is a monologue because other's aren't speaking. while people may be communicating via their bodies, etc, the teacher may be choosing to not see that as a dialogue, but more of a Tourette's-like expression of emotion. It is simply an explosion rather than an expression. Since it is scripted, and the communication is seen more as off-gassing than conversing, then it is a monologue. And, if the teacher has no intention of changing the intonation as a response to the students, or doesn't see the students as communicating really, then yeah, it's a monologue. i had a teacher who was like this. she was a great lady and very sweet and loving and educated and what not, but every class was *exactly* the same. it was a monologue. good class, but very boring after a while. it was good to go to different teachers (also teaching from the script, though not as strictly and not the bikram script) because those who were also monologuing (as opposed to those dialoguing with a script) at least did it in their own voice and emphasized different things in the monologue. though after a while, i did question why they paid all of those teachers rather than just teaching a parrot. too messy, i guess. LOL | |||
| |||
|
| ||
| in re: language. i agree that people can choose to keep their accents or even their specialized english "idioms" because of a desire to stay connected to the "old world." as an example, while here in NZ i plan on retaining my american accent. so annoying, i'm sure. i have no problem with bikram teaching or speaking in whichever way he chooses. i actually *like* what people who do not have english as a first language come up with. i love, for example, http://www.engrish.com. not because i'm making fun of people, but because of how they put words together. it's usually a complete mind-bomb and an absolutely beautiful way of thinking about things. i mean, i remember reading a poem written to Johnny Depp by a japanese teenager wherein she "hugs his spiritual." i don't know what that means, but i LOVE it. it says a lot, to me, about what she was trying to say. it's funny and makes me laugh every time i think of it--but not at her, or her sentiment or sincerity, but just at how difficult the language is and yet, when we come to it with "new ears" as a newcomer would, it certainly sends a new message to those of us who speak it as a first language. ah, so much love for that expression! so, for example, if i take bikram's class, i have every expectation that he wouldn't speak "perfect english." ryan's sensei's sensei doesn't speak perfect english . . .and his descriptions are fantastic. sometimes very funny and much beloved because of that, but still fantastic. but what i don't agree with is taking that on as a standard. it's one thing to love "hugs his spiritual" and for me to then take it to my own with ryan wherein i might write in an email "hugging your spiritual, zoebird" because of how much i love it, but a completely different thing for the language to be "enforced" (for lack of a better term whilst i am tired--notice how i used the english there, how very unamerican of me. . .kiwi-ness is rubbing off!). i mean, i love some of the creative language that bikram chose . but i don't think that in order to teach bikram yoga well, i have to repeat that. i can speak the "proper" english, yk? i can understand the dialogue in it's completeness and complexity, and teach it appropriately and properly without using his idioms. i might choose to as a method of saying "as my teacher says. . ." or some such--which ryan's sensei does regarding his sensei--but not as an exact, verbatim. just my hugging your spiritual. Edited by zoebird 2010-02-08 12:53 AM | |||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
| ferret |
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
| personally, i do not find it difficult to be concise and precise. and with this, most of my classes have many more postures than bikram and i still manage to have students who have excellent alignment from the get-go. it's just what i do well. i'm not saying i'm better than Bikram, i'm just saying it's not a terribly difficult task for me. and i don't have any scripts at all. though, i suppose i do repeat myself quite frequently. in fact, i know that i do. that being said, learning scripts really helped me understand sequencing theory on a whole different level. prior to learning scripts, my process was to learn different asanas in depth. i had two primary teachers--kripalu trained and iyengar trained--and so i learned a great deal of detail about every pose from them. i could really only teach the postures that i "knew" but i also learned "posture theory"--how one posture is very much like the next, but with slightly different forces on the body (how bow, camel, and bridge are related, etc). so, when i first started teaching, it was focused on deep lesson planning--choosing the postures, getting the instructions down, working with my teacher to get the sequencing and everything right, then teaching the class. Typically, i would develop a "curriculum" of classes and then work them all out over the course of 10 or 12 weeks before the session started, and then work week to week. to get it all down. when i started studying baptiste style power yoga, astanga, and the like, i began to learn scripts. i really enjoyed the classes a lot (until things went sour socially), even the fact that they were the same every time. i started with one class per week, then two (because i could work study and you got two for working one), and at home i would do my normal kripalu/iyengar intuitive work. after a month or two, i began to understand the theory of the two sequences. then i decided that i would experiment. i would do one month of classes (  just baptiste style, then another month in astanga and compare them. they did work different things in different ways. both were valid, helpful, therapeutic, interesting. they weren't strictly scripted (like bikram's), but they were a strict sequence and certain things "had" to be said every class (or so i figured since they were said every class). once i was able to compare the two, i began to really understand how this sequence was leading to those results and that sequence was leading to these results. i began to pay closer attention to all sequences--any class i took, i would record at the end of class that sequence and do it twice a week for a month. and, i also watched my intuitive sequences from my home practice to see what my body was telling me, what experience it was creating. this is when my teaching made a big turn. it went from being this herculean effort of planning and writing and laboring to experimenting with the sequences that were around me. I taught baptiste--strictly to the sequencing and repeating many "key" phrases (if i felt/thought they were 'correct' descriptions--i refuse to give a description that i don't htink is correct, and i will debate them with the "authors" of those descriptions). i taught astanga strictly. i taught dharma mittra's maha sadhana classes strictly. i would see what happened to the student's bodies. how this body or that body responded. i would then start to intuit where to go--ah, i see. . .this body is leading towards that pose, needin that opening, and that body is going that way instead. for example, i could see how one body wanted to move forward with the baptiste sequence, whereas another body was more interested or crying out for the astanga sequence. so, there was a point where it was like--now what? two bodies need two different things, so which way do i go? i'm the teacher, i can choose--astanga or baptiste? and this is when i started to experiment with free-form vinyasa. in my home practice, i discovered that there arose certain "bridging postures." that is, i might start going "right, today astanga" and i would start, but then the sequence would "break down" and mybody would want to go a certain way. so, i would go that way, and then end up in a little bit of baptiste, and then my body would go the other way for a bit and then come back to astanga. it would just go. so, i began to observe that these were often "bridging poses" that it would prep me to go from here to there and then back again and so on. i could simply keep crossing the street between the two. and these "bridging postures" made it possible. i started to record these sequences. i started to use them if i saw the bodies starting to diverge from each other in need. i would use a "bridging sequence" and then bring it back around. and then eventually, it was all just observe, move the class in the directino that the bodies were leading without worrying at all about whether or not it was this or that sequence. and so for me, the real understanding of how energy moves, how the postures come together, was from learning scripted yoga classes. i could see, very clearly, the theory behind what others were doing. i would look at the claims, try the sequences, see what happened. i think that all of the groundwork came together to develop this "style" that i teach. And, i teach this method in my teacher trainings. First we study anatomy, alignment, and assisting. we go deep into the primary postures of my "general sequence" (i created a script for teacher training purposes). Then, we study different scripts from bikram, baptiste, astanga, dharma mittra, shiva rae, the one i created, and a couple out of iyengar's appendices. after going through this, they begin their projects, which can be pretty intensive. the projects include writing a personal mission statement, creating a sequence, and writing an essay/ book describing their sequence, alignment, and contraindications for each postures and thereby alternatives or modifications for those postures for those contraindications. this is the homework while we then spend the last 1/3 of our time togeher going over history, philosophy, context, yoga in modernity, etc. and then they present their projects in full. all the teachers in training get a copy of their paper a week in advance to study and practice it at home. we then spend a couple of weeks talking about teaching methodologies--learning observation and deep listening skills, talking about professionalism and boundaries, etc. and finally, each student gives their presentation. they teach the class to a group of volunteer students. the other teacher's in training as well as two other "certified" teachers sit with me and make notes on the class. after the class, the students are asked to go to the waiting area and fill out a qestionaire. the teachers and teachers in training question the presenting teacher in training. and then all of that information is collated and this determines whether or not a student will be certified. btw, most students are, because they want to do well. students do have the option of doing their presentation at a later date, but must do it within a decent time frame. I've only had to fail (or rather, not certify) one teacher so far. but anyway, the bottom line is that i want them to come to the point where they do know a lot and can share a lot in a concise and precise way without relying on a script because the script doesn't forsee every problem that might crop up. as we know, Bikram isn't for everyone. that is great. and no one teacher is for everyone. but if someone comes to my class, i do know that they will be safe and taken care of, and the whole class will get an amazing experience too. no one gets left behind. now i guess i've rambled a lot. LOL | |||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
| veggiepose |
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
| jim - Not the point! I'm trying to talk about the DIALOGUE! But thanks. veggie - HAHAHAHA... ahem, sorry. No, standing bow is not wrong, but you're definitely NOT the first person to say so!! You'll see when you take Bikram's class, and Rajashree's, and Emmy's, that they ALL say "charge forward" first, and it's not by accident. Of course, "SIMULTANEOUSLY" is really the key word in those two lines, but you simply can't say two sentences at the same time, so one of those lines has to come first. Kicking without coming down is JUST as wrong as coming down without kicking. There are PLENTY of teachers who'd be in your camp on that one (I hear it all the time), but I'm very firmly on the side of the dialogue. Especially when you are teaching newbies, they will understand what kicking means, but they will absolutely refuse to come down cause they don't want to fall. Gotta get them to come down, come down, come down, until the two feet are in one line from the side, which is where the benefits really start. Emmy says that ESPECIALLY when you are new, ESPECIALLY when you are inflexible, you've really gotta get your body down or else you will be grinding your in hip socket and shoulder socket. (Remember, the dialogue is written first and foremost for the beginning student.) Once you get more bendy, you can play a bit with the coordination... BUT... true story here... when my studio owner first told me to get my body down faster back in 2007, I immediately locked out my kicking leg in standing bow for the first time. On both sides. It was pretty convincing. I LOVE "flower petal blooming"! You don't have to say it in every set, but please at LEAST say it once. It's one of my favorites. It's silly, but it makes people smile, which makes them relax, which makes them do a better posture. And it's actually a VERY good description of the action that needs to happen with the ribcage. It's not JUST fluff. You can leave out "mama give me money," though. Hehe. THAT one is very, very uncommon outside of TT. | |||
| |||
|
| ||
| i don't have a problem with the order for standing bow in the dialogue. but it might be noted that in other schools of yoga, the charging forward part is really a secondary movement, while the primary is to create the backbend and *then* move "charge forward." iyengar, astanga, and others of this "family" teach it that way. that the charging forward is the "second step." so, it's actually not wrong either way. what i have found, though, is that often people focus are charging forward and never end up with a back bend. those who focus on the back bend first, then the charging forward, end up in the right place more quickly. i don't know if the duration of time it takes a person to "get" a pose is important, though. so, what i am saying is this: bikram's dialogue is not wrong, but it is also not wrong to back the person off and work the backbend first, and then the charging forward part. also, i have found that telling the students to draw the chest forward as they kick back and then "charge forward" (i don't use charge, btu anyway), is waht really gets the posture going the "fastest." if that matters. i love dancers pose. Edited by zoebird 2010-02-10 7:12 PM | |||
| |||
|
| ||
| "SIMULTANEOUSLY"!!! Hehehe. If people don't kick enough, you've gotta get them to work more on that. If people don't come down enough, you've gotta get them to work more on THAT. People can get stuck in either place, for sure! I think the "body down" bit is more important in our "family" because standing bow is sandwiched in the middle of a sequence of body down postures - standing head to knee, standing bow, and balancing stick - where the chest is brought down parallel to the floor to bring circulation through the heart. The backbend is ALMOST secondary, since we get to the serious backbends later, and this is just a warm-up. It's actually very closely related to balancing stick - abdomen down parallel to the floor - except that it only extends one side of the body at a time. But that's actually a good point about dancer's pose in other families: I think some students have an image of that "first stage" in their head, which lets them hang out very happily up there without ever coming down at all. I just see SO many people who have been practicing for YEARS and are kicking quite nicely, but never bring their body down. ZB, I love your perspective, cause you're making me think about the posture in its relation to the ENTIRE Bikram series! I forgot that the Bikram version IS distinct from the other yoga schools in this way - but it looks similar enough that people get confused! | |||
| |||
| veggiepose |
| ||
| |||
|
| ||
| |||
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 Now viewing page 2 [25 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
| (Delete all cookies set by this site) | |