Reflecting on analysis

The first things that come to mind when I consider analysis are: 

• that it is something undergone by characters in Woody Allen pictures
• it is what is happening when a scientist looks at a sample under a microscope

So, analysis, as something that goes on in my day to day life, seems pretty distant.  I mean, it's probably there but I know it by a series of other names.  This makes sense, as language - in the last eight months or so - has become a consideration for me.  Important in the sense that selecting the right words can provide momentum for an activity.

For example, I am quite sure that if I were to use the word 'analysis' I would make very little headway.  So I have replaced it with 'reflection'.  Of course, reflection really only covers part of the activity that analysis describes but, as Adesola indicates, analysis is a process, and I know currently I will feel the most supported if the beginning of the [analysis] process for me is described as or if my first action is reflection.    

Reflection is a first step in my process of analysis.   (Actually that's a lie.  Usually my first step is to do something: initiate an encounter, make a test, try something.)  Here I have reflected on my morning: 

Today I ran my training group.  There were six of us in total.  I rented a capoeira studio so that we could work on a padded floor.    This supported the Fighting Monkey movement situations that we engaged in.  (Fighting Monkey is an approach to training developed by Linda Kapatanea and Jozef Frucek of contemporary dance company Rootlessroot.  I trained with them for a month in September and was eager to keep the training going when I returned to Montreal, so I started my training group.)  Two of the movement situations we looked at were (all with a partner):

• one person pins another person (as in judo, or jujitsu), the other person tries to get out from under them
• riff on the mechanics of the pinning and unpinning of the above activity, with more 'agreement' between the two partners, so that it moves and rolls continuously

We did a few other things but finished with something I am naming 'hugging and pseudo-thai yoga massage'.  This is basically where one partner folds and hugs, squeezes and pulls their partner.  And then the roles get reversed so that the partner who was squeezing then gets squeezed etc.  It feels very nice.

Training group is a three hour practice that includes space for discussion.  Usually in the middle and at the end we sit in a circle and ask questions, share experiences, observations, thoughts, and so on.  I personally appreciate this time as it provides me with some feedback for how I facilitate and organize the training,  and also offers insight into views outside my own experience.  This comparing and contrasting, I think, are the next steps in analysis:  I do some tests, I reflect, and then I gather some other opinions.  In this step I can affirm my own observations or have access to those observations I hadn't considered.  I can generate and refine articulations.  All great stuff.  

The other thing that this discussion during training affords is some track record of the thread:  the thread of how I understand and experience what we undertake, how I articulate what I am experiencing, and how my experience evolves over time.  I often do a little personal writing after each session.  It's great.  It brings a really nice awareness to my values (and potentially facilitates development of those values).  

Today during discussion I brought up the following:

• I was struck by the generosity that exists in partner work.  And generosity manifested through a  diversity of relationships and intentions.  In both the instance of the pinning/unpinning as well as the hugging/pseudo thai yoga, the partners are offering themselves and taking care of one another in a very caring way.  Caring in the sense of having a thoughtfulness around outcome and quality of experience.  
• The difference in between fighting and hugging, and the tone of muscle observed when the body is resisting versus being soft and malleable.  Power exists in both.  Potential exists in both. 

One of the group's participants offered his observations regarding the information (anatomy, power potential) that is gleaned from these different muscle tones.  He expressed that he felt that he got a better sense of his partner's limitations when they were working with softness.  This was interesting to me as it seemed counter-intuitive.  I would think that the greatest engagement of muscle would offer limitation information....  for example, when I apply enough force to my partner and they can no longer resist, I get information regarding a particular limitation, their capacity to resist.  But, what is nice, and ties back to this idea of the generous work that exists in partner work, is that by one partner being vulnerable and available for manipulation, the other partner can explore other limitations: structural, muscle tightness, willingness to be manipulated, etc.  (All really good information to have if you are trying to pin someone, or give them a series of hugs).  

The last step in the process of analysis is the articulation of the process and / or findings.  This I have done here, in the the blog post.  I appreciate choosing words, constructing sentences, having a carefulness around what and how I am tracing my experience.  Because even if my opinion shifts, there will be this thread that I can follow that reminds me of the evolution of my experience.  

In conclusion, my understanding of analysis as a process includes (crudely): doing something, observing, reflecting, dialogue (with texts / people), compare / contrast considerations, articulating conclusions.  

What do you think?  Always interested in what others are working on / thinking about.  (Feeling sorry to have missed another skype....  I'll get it next time, I promise!)

~alanna