(Perspective) Who invented exercise movements?
An overview of the idea of movement from a creation/natural/functional perspective. How to think about it? | Includes a movement video to observe and practice.
Notes: Thank you for showing up to class.
As it is the intention to explore the slopes and tangents of fitness and wellness, today we will go over the notion of human movement -and movement exercises- from a creation perspective. After years of having been asked, “What do I do?”, when it comes to matters of human movement, it is pertinent to start by questioning the topic.
As the class continues to move, we are going to be exploring this notion in different ways. This (what you are reading now) is just the starter dish, a mouth opener (or mind opener), cooked with the awareness that it may create more doubt.
This writing does not intend to give specific answers, nor once and for all define movement, or any other concept mentioned, in its entirety. Not everything is as easy to define as the fitness industry makes it seem. Although I present my opinion, the idea is that you start thinking about human movement in a more organic way, and from different angles (philosophically, physiologically, intellectually, economically, socially, emotionally, situationally, historically and anthropologically, etc.)
But where to start is another confusing thing. The benefits of movement? The coolest move out there for a specific result, or for the end of the year? As a teacher (like many other teachers), I once (many times) didn’t have a plan and I started the class with whatever came to mind. Not good in a conventional educational system. I am supposed to know, and to tell you what to know. But… I don’t always know, and I often have more questions than answers!
I hope that somewhere in this writing (and the movement practice at the bottom) you can find some moving inspiration and learning. There are many questions along the writing, and while I offer my angle (which might be confusing on its own), I’d also like to know yours. Comments and queries are welcomed and encouraged.
Movement is everything to us. It is how we experience life (period). Had our way of moving not evolved the way it has, then we'd be another species. Movement - human or otherwise - is not something that anybody created. It came to be as the result the constant evolution of a species - where after millions of years of adapting and re-adapting becomes what an organism favors the most - in terms of energy conservation, propagation of the species, and ultimately its survival and pleasure.
What's easiest for it to survive!
There is a lot of argument in social media from people who claim to have invented certain exercise movements, who are quick to demand citation and recognition as creators. On the other hand, there are those who say that anyone can move however they want without asking permission.
It is crazy how something so natural as movement finds itself in the midst of a multi-directional tug of war - where every system pulls to its own way.
Often in conversations, when I bring up the concept of natural movement, some have argued that “any movement that we can do is natural”. “Bench pressing, biceps curls, kickbacks, pushups….” But are they? And what functionality do they have?
Let’s explore the (also multi-directionally pulled idea) of… Function, from a movement perspective!
Functional movements are those we do whether we are in the woods hunting and gathering, finding the perfect spot to fish, or at Disney World - walking, running, standing up, reaching out, carrying, crawling, squatting, rolling, sitting, grabbing, twisting, pushing, pulling - that do not go past their natural range of motion, and that do not look like most exercise movements. Or is functional movement the kind that allows us to perform our daily living activities and natural movement more efficiently? It is confusing because often, these ideas are mixed. Natural equals functional for some, while functional equals natural for others. My question is… What the hell is each? Is there a balance? Is there such a thing as functionally natural? And is it the same as naturally functional?
Whether to survive, or to reach the phone to take another selfie - regardless of level of strength, social media status, or whether you live in the ghetto or in prison - natural movements tend to be the same. People do them instinctively and without the conscious restriction of joint range of motion - or fluidity.
These (natural movements) are actions like sitting, standing, lifting a purse, or grabbing a pan from below the kitchen sink - just like it was like when we used to hunt and gather. What changes is the frequency, intensity, and time (duration) of these motions; and the degree, speed and intensity to which the moment or environment requires, without planning it (based on the situation at the moment). Or the intention!
With the exception of certain situations in which we are required to alter or push a movement past its limits of range (which is not the norm and at the conscious risk of injury, or possible death); natural movement come from the same place or origin (biomechanically, and subconsciously).
Not surprisingly, we also have exercise systems that compete for which one invented the most natural way to exercise more naturally, as well as those who claim that they have intended the most functional system to train most functionally. It is like the 'organic wars' in nutrition, where there is a battle for who has the most organic food.
Natural movement and functional movement as exercise practices are not new. There are records of these kinds of systems going back hundreds of years1 - with people like me who argue that these practices are “better and healthier”.
For a long time, there has been a resistance (an opposing party) to trendy, capitalistic, and idealistic movement approaches. The opposition argues generally - from what I gather - that natural movement methods and functional training systems should be organismically pleasing, less stressful to our tissues, and more enabling for general daily living activities and pleasure - more focused on the process than the in the results. But these exercises should be based on how we instinctively move.
But if we already do these things anyways (meaning, moving naturally), why do we need exercise them?
Natural movement is indeed trainable. I have spent years helping people with their movement - after injury, surgery, a stroke; or helping people with other physical and mental disabilities. Regardless of the issue, if for any reason a person loses (or does not develop) a fundamental physical ability, these things can be trained. Given that the condition allows for it of course. But this can be considered functional natural movement training, since the idea is to reach the capacity to move within what is considered ‘normal’ for our biomechanical survival needs - or at least for better quality of life and independence of movement.
There is another reason for natural movement to be ‘trained’ or exercised. I argue that thanks to sedentarism, as well cultural beliefs and social standards - that restrict movement with moral rules, trendy movement practices that restrict movement to what is trending, specialists restricting it to their individual specialties, and even fashion trends engaging - most modern societies have lost the connection to our simple and yet abundant movement capabilities. Which leads to more questions!
Can natural movement be re-trained in a society that has gotten so used to specialized or restricted movement?
Most prominent, recognized, and practiced training systems - that are adopted by the masses - are based on restriction. No need to be a be a PhD to figure that out. People who practice any specific system (i.e. yoga, cross fit, etc.) are constantly being told what to do and what not to do. Can specific movement exercise methods help you learn more about your own movement? Maybe. It depends on the context with which you use them, as well as the intention. But who gets to decide what those movements are?
A physical therapist? A sports scientist? An exercise physiologist? A physical educator? A fitness influencer? A Certified “Master Trainer Level 3”? Arnold the Terminator? Football coaches? A celebrity trainer?
Everybody wants to be the creator of something new and revolutionary - I have been there - even if it is just mixing things without making sense; and exercise movements are no exception. A tweak here, rotate the hip like this - breathe like that and squeeze in here until you feel the burn where nobody else knows how to make you feel it - and bam - you get a new exercise system, a new seminar, a new certification, and a new trend. And these things spread like viruses in search of the support of athletes, bigger certifying entities, and from more clinical sources of energy like physical therapists, cardiologists, neurologists, etc.
Out of all certifications out there (and let it be on record that I am not saying that certifications are bad) the ones that make me cringe the most are those who work under the umbrella of natural and functional movement. I resonate with those concepts, don't get me wrong (and I do have my preferred certifications as well) but if we tweak fundamental movements just to differentiate your beliefs - those we instinctively and naturally do - that doesn't mean it is functional or natural at all.
How much more difference can the human body move naturally?
To take it even further, since we have created workout systems that simulate how other species move, I ask; Do other species even exercise?2 And if so, do they try to imitate us like we do with them?
Human-like movement behaviors in other species is not something new. We have videos of cats and dogs doing “pushups” and praying. It looks cute, but are they really? Or is it because we have trained?
One can argue that as a species we try to train everything that surrounds us: ourselves, animals, plants, insects, and even the course of rivers.
There have been observations on animals imitating facial expressions, and certain actions we do - but I am not so sure that they intentionally imitate how we move as a way to get fit (or to connect with a higher being). I think it is more about survival. Perhaps a natural multi organismic tendency to do so as a way to communicate and coexist, or to deceive and survive. Don’t we do that? Who are we to think that we are the only species with that capacity?
The sportswear and the fitness equipment industries, with their tentacles reaching all aspects of life produce new technologies, accessories, and equipment from which new methods evolve as well. This has also influenced how we move and perceive movement as well.
Some people argue that modern running shoes, which exploded back in the 60s and 70s as the running movement was taking over, changed the way we perceived such a fundamental skill by introducing themselves as impact absorbent3.
Why run on the ground when you can run on the clouds? But you just have to change the way you run naturally!
How to think about movement then?
Perhaps as something that no one invented, but as something that changes and adapts depending on situations through time and space. Natural movement being those fundamental patterns that keep us moving regardless of external influences or ideals (that are untrained, instinctive, unrestricted, embodied) but that can be exercised (or at least engaged frequently) for the enjoyment of it, and the maintenance of natural fitness.
Functional movement practices, on the other hand, can be the complementary practice to develop, improve, maintain, or re-educate natural movement (through similar and or relatable motions); and secondarily, as what, due to social realities, help us adapt.
Perhaps, a good way to think about practices to improve our movement and functionality is that they should be similar to both our natural motion, and to our daily living activities; occupational, domestic, and recreational (in that order). Or that to counteract the effects of a sedentary lifestyle if these activities are low intensity and infrequent.
Since movement was not created and is not something that can’t be claimed as original - then, we should stop focusing on finding “new” methods (pushing movement past function and mechanical simplicity), but just honing the natural skills we already have.
There here is no space in the U.S. Copyright Office for movement specialties, or as they call them “non-expressive physical movement - such as ‘ordinary motor activities’, or ‘functional physical movements.”4
I know this is confusing. Yet another reason to call this an unconventional “class”. Honestly, I wouldn’t say that I can answer all the questions in this writing with certainty. There is no absolute knowledge, and yet, I think we know what is natural and functional. We feel it! I think we can’t see it though, because there are ‘movements’ at play to ‘train’ us to do instead of teaching us to see and think.
Comments? Questions?
Thank you for showing up! You are a fundamental part of this “class” and it is because of people like you that I keep doing it. Help me reach out to more people by sharing my Substack page with others.
You can also support by giving the gift of a subscription to someone else:
Movement Practice
Watch the video a few times. First pay attention to the action in its entirety, and then two different aspects of it. Start thinking about how you would do it.
While holding a heavy object against your chest - as heavy as you can handle - step under a bar.
Repeat to each side according to your capacity.
Note:
You don’t have to carry a weight if you can’t or don’t want to. You can just focus on the motion of stepping under.
Modify by changing the height of the bar. If you are using an imaginary bar, simply vary the height at which you 'go under' and become aware of how low you can go.
Mental challenge / Alternative: Perhaps you and the object you will use as a weight don’t have to go under the bar at the same time.
This is for reference only. If you can't do it don't force it!
Hoffman, J, and C Philip Gabel. "The origins of Western mind–body exercise methods." 2015. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5022134/.
Pilcher, H. (n.d.). Do animals exercise? BBC Science Focused Magazine. https://www.sciencefocus.com/nature/do-animals-exercise/
Francis, P. (2020, April 27). Is It Really Better to Run Barefoot? Another Major Study Just Weighed in. Science Alert. https://www.sciencealert.com/running-shoes-can-cause-injuries-here-s-what-the-science-says-to-do
C O M P E N D I U M: Chapter 800 - Works of the Performing Arts. (2021). U.S. Copyright Office. https://www.copyright.gov/comp3/chap800/ch800-performing-arts.pdf