Learning or Remembering…

When you are first shown choreography or a sequence of movement – do you try to remember it, or do you try to learn it? What is the difference between remembering choreography and learning choreography? 

Surely in order to remember something, you must have had an experience. If memory is the facility by which we remember, and to remember is to recall something from our past: let’s call it an experience for the sake of this musing. Then it would follow the experience is attached to the memory. So, when you are first see / or are shown something you aren’t trying to remember it because you’ve never experienced it. 

This helps us understand and develop a better attitude and approach to learning (not remembering… yet) choreography. Then the follow-on line of enquiry lies with the question – how long does it take to effectively learn something before we start moving to remembering it? 

It may be more beneficially to keep one’s mindset in the learning phase rather than shifting to remembering too soon? Regardless of whether one is a visual, verbal, aural, kinaesthetic or a blend of all four learning styles, we all take a different amount of time to digest choreography. It may therefore be prudent to keep these two points separate: learning and remembering. It may help to develop a clearer strategy on what and how you are learning through a variety of specific focuses in the learning phase in order to help with the remembering process.

Furthermore, even when we are remembering choreography in the context of a rehearsal for example, we inevitably will be given notes, so we have to shift gears back to the learning phase to re wire our neurological pathways so that we adjust our memory (experience) of the choreography.

Also, in the mix is pre-existing knowledge of movement for example you may already be an advanced combatant so some sequences, techniques or moves within the choreography may be ‘easy’ however the combination presented to you is new. Or you maybe learning choreography from scratch with no combative (stage or ‘real’) experience at all. Either way it may help to keep learning and remembering as two distinctly different modes and strategies to ensure that you know when you are operating in either mode.

To be continued…

Healthy arch – the key to mobility and stability.

After last week’s class where we had a great discussion about the role of the arch in the foot – I decided to put some thoughts down. Which was fantastic as I had recently been pondering the thought what or where is the keystone in the arch of the foot? But in order to find a resolution to that thought I need to first look at the differences in function between the architectural arch verses the anatomical arch of the foot.

The architectural arch which has been around for a long time, used by the Egyptians, Byzantines and Greeks was advanced by the Romans. The advancement was the use of ‘concrete’ thus creating an arch that was able to bear large amounts of weight. The keystone is the last part of the arch to be placed into position allowing both sides of the arch to ‘press’ against the other through / via the keystone thus distributing the weight evenly.

(excuse my crude drawings)

Now let’s look at the arch in an anatomical context. The foot has three arches: The Transverse (or Metatarsal) Arch, the Medial-Longitudinal Arch and Lateral-Longitudinal Arch. On one level foot arches share one key similarity to the architectural arch – strength. However here is the main difference between the architectural and anatomical arches, the foot needs to be mobile.

Obviously, the arches help us in terms of balance but this mobility of the arch aids in the absorption of impact as we move. The foot can make so many micro modifications in order to respond to a variety of surfaces with the main purpose to bring about stability to the upper body. As well as this agility in the arches they also provide a ‘spring’. An absorbing motion as we step and thus propelling us into the next step. This connection and flexibility across all three arches also allow for weight distribution and thus absorbs impacts that would otherwise be taken unnecessarily into the knees, hips and spine. 

So how does all this help me with my ponderings i.e. where is the keystone for the anatomical arch? Well two thoughts came out of diving in a little deeper with my musings. Firstly, I guess there is no actual physical keystone at the apex of the anatomical arch, so I guess the keystone is really a visualisation exercise in my body mind. The ability to visualise the arches working in harmony in order to bring about mobility. Secondly, I was happy to be reminded of the triangle created by the three arches working together. Any one who knows me knows I love circles and triangles – two very strong shapes. This triangle allows me to visualise a platform on the ground that permits me to see how the cohesion of the arches brings about stability.