What is the difference between Movement with big -M and movement with small -m?
A good question now that more and more people are spending hours per week on movement practice.
This question on Movement for some reason reminded me of Baudelaire who said:
"One should always be drunk. That's all that matters; that's our one imperative need. So as not to feel Time's horrible burden that breaks your shoulders and bows you down, you must get drunk without ceasing. But what with? With wine, with poetry, or with virtue, as you choose. But get drunk."
Henry Miller, inspired by Baudelaire, used similar wording too: “The aim of life is to live, and to live means to be aware, joyously, drunkenly, serenely, divinely aware.”
This sound like how I want to Move through life... but how do we get "drunk" and stay "drunk" when the situations in society we encounter so quickly can sober us up.
From what I have been learning through Inge-Jarl Clausen about Wilhelm Reich's research and 70 plus years of extension of his work in Norway, I feel there is a need to go earlier and zoom out on this subject of Movement to observe what big -M Movement really is. Reich wrote a book on Cosmic Superimposition, to give an idea how big the -M was with him and how far he was zooming out with his thinking.
I feel, today, that Movement is the contact we so desperately want to return to - and we want to return to it because we sense it is in some way inhibited, disturbed: we feel we are living way below our potential.
We want to return to the free dynamic highly plastic Moving organism we were as newborn babies before we had any experiences that limited our psychophysical functioning - like the waves of the ocean as an expression of the free dynamic of nature.
So how do we return? What modalities have we come up with for this? One proposed manner to return is through the medium of movement or "movement practice."
The danger here is: are we moving towards Moving or are we just moving? Is the moving we do bringing us closer to this free dynamic we once had or are we just moving within our disturbances, further living out an endless compensation of what our chief limitations and frustrations are - moving no closer at all to Moving but actually strengthening, rep on rep on rep, our limits and comfortable control-mechanisms?
If we are practicing movement just for the sake of practicing movement it seems to me that we are practicing the compensations of our disturbances, moving nowhere further at all. We are further engraining what is limiting us from ever attaining -M Movement - moving towards our potential.
Tyler Durden would probably call this type of "movement practice" something like "masturbation".
It makes you feel good but it is not the real thing nor is it getting you closer to the real thing.
These mediums such as 'movement practice' are proposed to function as a stimulus or disturbance that when thrown upon the current conflicts in our physiology will again open us up more towards the possibility of this free moving organismic state by removing the layers - the shell - that limits the emanation of free Movement.
In short, it is a proposition that movement with small -m as a medium will give us something that is beneficial for us. Why else would we do it, right? But how good are we at judging objectively what is good for us? If we observe man-kind objectively it has been clear that we would rather prefer to further intoxicate ourselves in our comfort than move out of it towards self-actualization of our core potentiality, following others that 'know' what is good for us instead of listening to these signals of Movement that want to erupt from the depths of our Being.
So then, will these movement stimuli allow us to express what we really want to express and were not able to express before - as these non-expressions are saved as unsolved conflicts in our body? The 'what' and the 'why' we want to express, get out of our system... this is a big question returning to our individual experiences that have formed us up to now.
William Blake wrote "If the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would appear to man as it is, Infinite.". What if we exchanged "perception" with physiology?
From the practices that are centred around physical movement that I've experienced and trained in myself I sense now that any kind of movement (or medium) that allows to further "open the doors" towards Movement are beneficial for the individual.
If they further close the doors - further strengthen body armour as Reich named it, or patterning deeper our emotional anatomy as Keleman described it - they can worsen the condition of why contact with big -M Movement is not there.
I have observed and seen it happen in myself and others: some proposed practices worsened my patterns and 'strengthened' old armour, other practices allowed more and seemed to dissolve old conflicts.
For example many people I've seen in the movement culture have shoulder and hip internal rotation limitations that improve nothing whatsoever with mobility training, the condition actually often worsens. The shoulder and hip regions are also the most "emotional" zones of our physiology, meaning that a lot experiences/tensions are stored in these areas. If the movement stimulus further disturbs the initial disturbance then the body closes down even more as in an alarm-state, like an elastic band being pulled apart and snapping back.
Therefore, small -m movement's - movement practice's - usefulness in allowing more Movement depends on how the individuals psychophysical structure has adapted to what he as experienced up to now.
In summary, if the movement practice allows you more Movement it seems to be good for you or...
movement that is making you more "drunk" is good, movement is making you less "drunk" is bad.