Learning to be a Thinking Horseman
Published by Cari Zancanelli under Clinton Anderson, horse clinicians, horse training, Pat Parelli, riding lessons, thinking horseman on 8:02 PM
I don't feel that I have yet lived up to the title of this blog, "The Thinking Horse Trainer" as yet. I started writing down my history, or how I arrived at this point. I thought that for some reason my history was important, and perhaps it is, but now it seems like things should be moving towards the heart of the subject. I'm going to jump ahead and tell you a few pertinent details for context, and then we can talk about all the juicy, controversial stuff that I would much rather be discussing.
OK, here they are - the few pertinent details:
1. I learned to ride in England. They taught me to jump before I could ride and I fell off. A LOT. I hate jumping to this day!
2. This is what caused me to get into dressage, which is my passion. It's all about sitting and having control over the horse.
3. I have also learned some reining and western and am not opposed to learning other disciplines.
4. I attended CSU and have a degree in Equine Science. Getting my degree taught me that there is a larger world out there beyond the accepted methods for working with horses.
5. I think that more horse people should question their trainer, their clinician and/or whoever they follow. Not to say that these professionals don't have credentials or know what they're doing. But sometimes you have to look at the big picture, and that is my purpose - looking at the big picture.
In fact, I was taking a lesson from a very uninspired and lazy dressage instructor who kept telling me that in order to get a horse on the bit I must pull much harder. She did mean much harder, too. So I pulled and pulled more and the horse pulled back. Yes, his head bent slightly in towards his chest, but we were both so focused on the fight that I knew nothing good was happening. The questions popped up in my mind one after the other: "Is this right? Doesn't feel right! How can it possibly be good to pull this hard on his mouth? Does she know what she's talking about? Really - pull more? Please lady!" And so on... The next day my arms and shoulders were so stiff and sore I couldn't lift a grocery bag.
This was not my first dressage lesson. For the previous 5 or 6 years I had taken regular lessons first in England and then from a combined training instructor in New Mexico. Books on riding technique filled a bookcase at home and I watched every TV program on riding they broadcasted. As an informed rider I already knew the accepted methods for working a horse and had run across several teaching styles. They had involved some pulling but not to that extreme. It felt wrong and more importantly it did not have the desired affect on the horse. This instructor had won a gold medal at a USDF show once or twice but lacked true enthusiasm. She often sat in a corner surrounded by admiring girls and gossiped while giving lessons. It didn't breed trust in her students.
The point being that although someone may appear to have all the right credentials and can "do the moves", it doesn't mean they can teach it or that they really understand it. Sometimes it's a fine line between teaching that contact that is at once sensitive but unyielding at the right moment to get the result and just saying "pull harder!" That's one aspect of the situation. The other question that came to mind was...why does getting a horse on the bit and collected require pulling? Is it really the way to collect a horse?
That question changed my life and changed the way I came to approach dressage. If those questions had never come up, or if they had not been allowed to flower in my mind the way they did I wouldn't know what I know today. Which is so much more than following blindly what a particular instructor says. If something feels wrong to you, allow yourself to question that. Ask the instructor to explain, or do your own research. Take lessons from other people. Practice another discipline. These things can all improve whatever your original discipline is and can allow a new approach if you feel stuck.
I have met people who blindly and devotedly follow a particular horse trainer (especially clinicians like Pat Parelli, John Lyons, etc.) to the exclusion of all else. They sound almost religious when they talk about this person. It's kind of scary that people are that close-minded and singular in their thinking. I spent a long time studying different clinicians in particular (this is a separate kind of thing from dressage and how dressage clinics are run) and came to the conclusion that they are all teaching the same techniques. The key word is technique. Their true differences lie in how well they communicate their message to people and how well their instructions can be duplicated at home when you work your horse. If you really look, a lot of the exercises are slightly different but many are the same. What does that tell you? It tells you that the source is the same for all of them. There is nothing new in their method, just in the way it's taught.
If you find yourself getting caught up in some instructor or clinician and feeling, well, devotional and like you want to worship at their feet it's a sign that you should step back and look at the big picture. To be fair, I "fell for" Clinton Anderson and I still think that he is one of the best clinicians out there. But this is because he has taken a huge amount of effort to learn how to get his message across. I had to step back and take a rational look, though, and I found that there were things I didn't like. So what? I still bought his DVDs and use the exercises. By altering the things I found too harsh with clicker training the exercises were still valid and the things he taught me still relevant. More on Clinton later...
My message is that you don't have to believe everything you are told, taught or read about horses. There are lots of myths and beliefs that have been around for literally hundreds of years concerning horses and their care. These "wisdoms" are passed on to each new generation in perpetuity without being questioned. You do not have to believe it. You can research things yourself in the scientific horse journals which report on studies done with horses. You may be surprised at what you learn...
OK, here they are - the few pertinent details:
1. I learned to ride in England. They taught me to jump before I could ride and I fell off. A LOT. I hate jumping to this day!
2. This is what caused me to get into dressage, which is my passion. It's all about sitting and having control over the horse.
3. I have also learned some reining and western and am not opposed to learning other disciplines.
4. I attended CSU and have a degree in Equine Science. Getting my degree taught me that there is a larger world out there beyond the accepted methods for working with horses.
5. I think that more horse people should question their trainer, their clinician and/or whoever they follow. Not to say that these professionals don't have credentials or know what they're doing. But sometimes you have to look at the big picture, and that is my purpose - looking at the big picture.
In fact, I was taking a lesson from a very uninspired and lazy dressage instructor who kept telling me that in order to get a horse on the bit I must pull much harder. She did mean much harder, too. So I pulled and pulled more and the horse pulled back. Yes, his head bent slightly in towards his chest, but we were both so focused on the fight that I knew nothing good was happening. The questions popped up in my mind one after the other: "Is this right? Doesn't feel right! How can it possibly be good to pull this hard on his mouth? Does she know what she's talking about? Really - pull more? Please lady!" And so on... The next day my arms and shoulders were so stiff and sore I couldn't lift a grocery bag.
This was not my first dressage lesson. For the previous 5 or 6 years I had taken regular lessons first in England and then from a combined training instructor in New Mexico. Books on riding technique filled a bookcase at home and I watched every TV program on riding they broadcasted. As an informed rider I already knew the accepted methods for working a horse and had run across several teaching styles. They had involved some pulling but not to that extreme. It felt wrong and more importantly it did not have the desired affect on the horse. This instructor had won a gold medal at a USDF show once or twice but lacked true enthusiasm. She often sat in a corner surrounded by admiring girls and gossiped while giving lessons. It didn't breed trust in her students.
The point being that although someone may appear to have all the right credentials and can "do the moves", it doesn't mean they can teach it or that they really understand it. Sometimes it's a fine line between teaching that contact that is at once sensitive but unyielding at the right moment to get the result and just saying "pull harder!" That's one aspect of the situation. The other question that came to mind was...why does getting a horse on the bit and collected require pulling? Is it really the way to collect a horse?
That question changed my life and changed the way I came to approach dressage. If those questions had never come up, or if they had not been allowed to flower in my mind the way they did I wouldn't know what I know today. Which is so much more than following blindly what a particular instructor says. If something feels wrong to you, allow yourself to question that. Ask the instructor to explain, or do your own research. Take lessons from other people. Practice another discipline. These things can all improve whatever your original discipline is and can allow a new approach if you feel stuck.
I have met people who blindly and devotedly follow a particular horse trainer (especially clinicians like Pat Parelli, John Lyons, etc.) to the exclusion of all else. They sound almost religious when they talk about this person. It's kind of scary that people are that close-minded and singular in their thinking. I spent a long time studying different clinicians in particular (this is a separate kind of thing from dressage and how dressage clinics are run) and came to the conclusion that they are all teaching the same techniques. The key word is technique. Their true differences lie in how well they communicate their message to people and how well their instructions can be duplicated at home when you work your horse. If you really look, a lot of the exercises are slightly different but many are the same. What does that tell you? It tells you that the source is the same for all of them. There is nothing new in their method, just in the way it's taught.
If you find yourself getting caught up in some instructor or clinician and feeling, well, devotional and like you want to worship at their feet it's a sign that you should step back and look at the big picture. To be fair, I "fell for" Clinton Anderson and I still think that he is one of the best clinicians out there. But this is because he has taken a huge amount of effort to learn how to get his message across. I had to step back and take a rational look, though, and I found that there were things I didn't like. So what? I still bought his DVDs and use the exercises. By altering the things I found too harsh with clicker training the exercises were still valid and the things he taught me still relevant. More on Clinton later...
My message is that you don't have to believe everything you are told, taught or read about horses. There are lots of myths and beliefs that have been around for literally hundreds of years concerning horses and their care. These "wisdoms" are passed on to each new generation in perpetuity without being questioned. You do not have to believe it. You can research things yourself in the scientific horse journals which report on studies done with horses. You may be surprised at what you learn...
 |
| Both photos taken at Bella's adoption in Meeker, CO |
0 comments:
Post a Comment