Wednesday, November 11, 2009

492/259: Rules Pondered.

We hated Bauhaus. It was a bad time in architecture... All they had were rules. Even for knives and forks they created rules. Picasso would never have accepted rules. The house is like a machine? No! The mechanical is ugly. The rule is the worst thing. You just want to break it.

Oscar Niemeyer.

* * *

Why do we push the boundaries? Over time, the chance of radical breakthroughs seems to increase as rules and their nuances are simply and slowly explored. The "rules" in place are pushed to the limits and ultimately broken - but concurrent to the exploration/deconstruction a new structure comes into formation. So, really, the original structure doesn't completely disappear - pieces remain.

Each successive pose feeds another - how they all link together - how opening/strength in one assists multiple other poses down the sequence. But can and usually does deepen expression in earlier poses.

There's truly a lot of depth to Primary.

To be honest, I'm not the biggest fan Intermediate yet.
There I said it.

Back on 10.28 D added parsva dhanurasana, ustrasana, and laghu vajrasna to my practice. I was ok having through dhanruasana. Prior to that, it didn't really "feel" like I "had" a second series - those first poses seemed more like an amuse-bouche.

Don't get me wrong I think parsva dhanurasana is quite enjoyable, while laghu vajrasna is pleasantly kicking my butt - or more specifically the rectus femoris, satoris, and would venture the tensor fasciae latae (thank you AP Bio anatomy textbook). From Primary, lolasana and bhuja pindasana are still slightly enigmatic to me. But, Intermediate seems to be doing amazing things for my backbending - Simply? Wow.

As I type this, I think - maybe it is the rules and their nuance that are close to the core of the beauty of this system.
As a result, there's hope for Intermediate.

After all, Niemeyer works in concrete with grids and structure - just with a different perspective on the rules.


Grimmly said...

It's taken me a year to come around to Intermediate, starting to find some beauty in it's intricacies finally and even the beginnings of affection.

Portside said...

Grimmly - Thanks for the encouragement on Intermediate. :)

thrdpoliceman said...

This begs a question: If you deconstruct the concept of a building, does it fall over? For that matter, if you deconstructed the concept of a yoga pose, do you end up on the floor? Hmm...philsosphical lit crit is dangerous.

Portside said...

Thinking a bit out loud here...

Literally, sure yes - if a building is stripped to its component parts? The building is no longer a building, the concept topples - a building is a sum - sums can be obtained multiple ways. Deconstructed it is nothing more than it's separate entities (which can also be further deconstructed) which become something else, when put together - in this example, a building. But at the same time, a dot, can be a line, can be a plane, can be a defined volume of space - which is the most basic/fundamental definition of a building.

Seeing how yoga poses are constructed/deconstructed through the Iyengar method, contradictions of space, muscular action and defiance of gravity are are blatantly apparent.

If say in handstand, who's to say that the floor really isn't the ceiling. The only constant then is the Earth's gravity - which I venture becomes moot with that whole levitation thing.

thrdpoliceman said...

This probably works better for the yoga than the buildings, which don't really care what you think of them, and are likely to keep standing even if we call them partridges, but if you're in a yoga pose and lose your concept of the pose as a whole by concentrating too hard on the parts, does the pose vanish even if your body doesn't move?

As for gravity, Einstein (and ironically Foucault) say that even that can be a matter of perspective. So you might just be holding up the world in a handstand.

If that helps you levitate, you totally have to show me.

Portside said...

Hadn't considered the pose vanishing - maybe it does, maybe that is for a later series. I personally really couldn't say. What I can say is that which looks simple in asana practice can so easily become mindbogglingly complex.

Maybe it all becomes about the presence of absence.

Good point on the handstand!

After this morning's commute, I'm thinking that levitation would probably be best explored on the red line.

thrdpoliceman said...

Well, the presence of absence is certainly a lot better than the absence of presents.

And yes, you should definitely try levitation the next time someone is trying to squeeze past you on the metro. The expression on is face will be worth it if you succeed or not.