Personligen tycker jag att alldeles oavsett vad man tycker om hans filosofi om hästar och ridning kan man hitta tänkvärda saker i det han skriver. Mkt handlar dessutom inte om själva ridtekniken i sig utan istället synen på häst & reflektioner om hur vi människor fungerar...
Här nedan följer ett sådant citat:
"It seems obvious to me that the horse in the pasture can do the upper level work with no problem but then the horse suddenly "needs" training when you sit on it. This is distortion in our minds... carrying weight is generally not that big deal... just a small adjustment... it is obvious that human thinking is where the training is required to create a channel of communication. Generally in the process of attending to the psychological aspect of creating this channel, the physical problems vanish.
We generally see these body issues as the horse's when in fact it is just the refection of our own issue. In pushing our physical agenda with the horse we create psychological problems in the horse. When taken this way, the physical problems never end and the mental problems grow until, eventually, the horse is made unsound."
Här är ett annat:
"When you use strength with a horse, the horse remembers how strong you are and while it may let you win, it has taken your measure. It also indirectly points to just how ridiculous it is for you to physically compete with the horse."
Och ytterligare ett:
Om "Support" (stöd)....
"In common
riding the aids are based on constriction. One pulls the hand in, or presses
the leg to the side while constricting the rein on the opposite side—the aids
are defined in terms of "what constricts what." The rider is
considered to be "supporting" the horse through the constriction of
the hand and the leg.
This is a modern change in riding that began
in the 19th century.
The origins of this idea can be sourced in the
mistranslation of the French word “appui” from the writings of François
Robichon de la Guérinière. Appui means "support", but as in English,
"support" can be architectural or psychological. When the word
"appui" was read by trainers who did not speak French as their native
tongue, and came from more patriarchal cultures, it was understood and
translated as “physical support”.
When La Guérinière
used the term “appui”, what he was describing is the kind of support provided
by a “spotter” in gymnastics, not the kind of support provided by a beam in
construction.
This is why I
generally substitute the word “touch” for appui. It’s a psychological support
rather than a physical holding. This is the idea behind the touch of the hand,
and the same concept of touch, of psychological rather than physical support,
applies to the legs. The legs drape. It is the draft of the boot as it gently
leaves the side, not the constriction in, that is the interesting factor for
horse and rider. The question for the horse is always "Following this
harmony, where is something opening", not "what do I move away from
now?"
Om olika typer av ridfilosofier & frågan om vad som är kvalité:
"If you spend
any time exploring riding options you’ll find that there is not one method that
works to control the horse, but many. The question becomes not so much how to
control the horse, but which method is best, and what qualities define “best”.
If quality is found
in calm, brilliant, engaged horses, then the best methodology is that which
conforms to the horse’s nature. Therefore it has to be fair and extremely
simple.
Horses are smarter
than people in that they have a 24/7 moment to moment grasp of their own
nature. Humans don’t. Instead of beginning riding by careful observation of the
horse’s nature, riders impose our own nature and our cultural clichés on the
horse. And the horse, being fundamentally a peaceful creature, attempts to
figure out how to have a truce with the humans so that it can live its life in
peace.
Thus, many methods result in horses doing what
the rider asks, but to enjoy calm, brilliant, engagement-- that takes a
different mind on the part of the rider."
Till sist ett citat från någon helt annan (Dresden James):
"A truths
initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was
believed.....When a well packaged and managed web of lies has been sold
gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly
preposterous and it's speaker, a raving lunatic."
Ovanstående tycker jag stämmer bra in på LDR, rollkur och andra avarter som blivit mer regel än undantag i dagens ridning.
ps. har medvetet ej översatt ovanstående citat för att risken finns att "det finstilta" försvinner med min översättning :-), men om det finns intresse av att jag översätter - hör av er!
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar