clarity
Filed in: training
The Gray Areas
In the recent clinics in the US and England, there was a noticeable difference between people who had experience with the style of training that I was trying to teach and those that had no or little previous experience. The folks who had a sound knowledge of the principles had got them mostly from either attending clinics by other clinicians.
You might think that would automatically give them an advantage over the more novice horse people in picking up the concepts I was trying to impart. And that is true for the most part. But what also came across is how people were accepting these principles as hard and fast rules with very little flexibility in how they can be used to help horses.
As an example, a few times I was asked by different people about getting a horse to look at something or in a direction as part of the concept of directing a horse’s focus. I might have been working a horse or instructing an owner in working their horse when I would release the pressure or get the owner to release the pressure. Sometimes I was asked by somebody why I released at that moment when the horse obviously did not look where he was going or at what I was asking of him.
This was a tough one to explain because I know I put a lot of emphasis on where a horse is looking and thinking as being fundamental to good training. But what these people missed was that even though the horse did not give a strong look or thought to what I was asking, he always gave up the thought he had that was causing the resistance I was working to eradicate. At times this is enough as a beginning. Getting a horse to give up the idea he has is for the most part the hardest aspect of directing a horse, so if you can do that you are making progress.
At one clinic I was asked about a horse that was very scattered in his thoughts. He was thinking and moving all over the place. I slapped my chaps really hard and he suddenly turned towards me and stopped moving. I stood still for a second and then petted him even though he was looking over the top of me and not directly at me. I was asked why I petted him if he was not looking at me. I said it was good enough for now because even though he was not looking at me I finally had his attention – he now knew every move I made and every breath I took. When I took one step to the side (after a few seconds of standing quietly) he lowered his head, turned with me and look at me. There were similar examples at other times too. But it was clear to me that the person asking was having trouble understanding why I didn’t initially do more until the horse looked at me.
I’m not blaming people for being confused because clearly the problem lies with people like me who try to teach these concepts. I need to do a better job at being clear.
I am so grateful that people ask these types of questions during the clinics because they illuminate the areas of my teaching where my clarity is not good enough. I’m always talking about clarity with horses and then fail in my clarity with people.
But I want everyone to appreciate that good horsemanship is largely made up of gray areas and not black & white rules. When you think you understand one concept you’ll meet a horse that turns that on it’s head. I know people like structure and rules to make it easier to learn – that’s why schools of horsemanship like Pat Parelli and Clinton Anderson are so popular. They take out the gray areas for people.
In the recent clinics in the US and England, there was a noticeable difference between people who had experience with the style of training that I was trying to teach and those that had no or little previous experience. The folks who had a sound knowledge of the principles had got them mostly from either attending clinics by other clinicians.
You might think that would automatically give them an advantage over the more novice horse people in picking up the concepts I was trying to impart. And that is true for the most part. But what also came across is how people were accepting these principles as hard and fast rules with very little flexibility in how they can be used to help horses.
As an example, a few times I was asked by different people about getting a horse to look at something or in a direction as part of the concept of directing a horse’s focus. I might have been working a horse or instructing an owner in working their horse when I would release the pressure or get the owner to release the pressure. Sometimes I was asked by somebody why I released at that moment when the horse obviously did not look where he was going or at what I was asking of him.
This was a tough one to explain because I know I put a lot of emphasis on where a horse is looking and thinking as being fundamental to good training. But what these people missed was that even though the horse did not give a strong look or thought to what I was asking, he always gave up the thought he had that was causing the resistance I was working to eradicate. At times this is enough as a beginning. Getting a horse to give up the idea he has is for the most part the hardest aspect of directing a horse, so if you can do that you are making progress.
At one clinic I was asked about a horse that was very scattered in his thoughts. He was thinking and moving all over the place. I slapped my chaps really hard and he suddenly turned towards me and stopped moving. I stood still for a second and then petted him even though he was looking over the top of me and not directly at me. I was asked why I petted him if he was not looking at me. I said it was good enough for now because even though he was not looking at me I finally had his attention – he now knew every move I made and every breath I took. When I took one step to the side (after a few seconds of standing quietly) he lowered his head, turned with me and look at me. There were similar examples at other times too. But it was clear to me that the person asking was having trouble understanding why I didn’t initially do more until the horse looked at me.
I’m not blaming people for being confused because clearly the problem lies with people like me who try to teach these concepts. I need to do a better job at being clear.
I am so grateful that people ask these types of questions during the clinics because they illuminate the areas of my teaching where my clarity is not good enough. I’m always talking about clarity with horses and then fail in my clarity with people.
But I want everyone to appreciate that good horsemanship is largely made up of gray areas and not black & white rules. When you think you understand one concept you’ll meet a horse that turns that on it’s head. I know people like structure and rules to make it easier to learn – that’s why schools of horsemanship like Pat Parelli and Clinton Anderson are so popular. They take out the gray areas for people.