Virtual Bodywork (?!)

It is the 21st century.  I am finding through trial and error, exploration and surprise there is a practice which could be named Virtual Bodywork.

Merriam-Webster's definition of bodywork, in my estimation, is woefully vague and lacking:   "therapeutic touching or manipulation of the body by using specialized techniques."  My experience of what bodywork is, from both the giving and receiving point of view, is complex and layered.  It includes M-W's definition, but goes way beyond (see a more in-depth description in my post:Bodywork, Energy Medicine: Whole Healing).  Bodywork is an act of a layered, mutual listening between facilitator and client.  Intuition and all senses are engaged in an acute attention.  The relationship in the experience of bodywork is anchored in trust; it has to be, because what occurs is deep, intimate, and often edgy.  From both role's point of view (the facilitator and receiver), there is a heightened sense of the sublime in oneself:  the way energy is moving, expressing itself; and the subsequent following provides information to the now and what is present.  The facilitator is not only grounded in whatever skills he/she might have developed, but is also providing an attention (full-bodied listening capacity) and meta-witnessing skills that are flexible enough to go with the flow, often the unexpected.  Trust is implicit. Trust of one's knowing in a moment.  Trust in one's inclinations as they come (even if they seem cognitively bizarre in the moment).  Trust in other.  This happens for both parties.  Whereas there is room for wonder and question, there isn't room for insecurity and fear.  Easy to say, hard to Be.

Based on the decades I have done bodywork, I can say that communication between facilitator and receiver is not usually seated in verbalization.  Bodywork is, by nature, often nonverbal; and when it's not, the verbal communication is based in an energetic exchange and doesn't usually have a 'chatty' or talkative quality.  Good facilitators and open receivers who are experienced in this type of work don't have rigid agendas or hard and fast rules.  To get the most from the work both facilitator and receiver allow the "energy bath" of the work to wash over them without immediately interpreting, but just following.  We are curious energy detectives, following the small and large clues, making no immediate conclusions, allowing what is to Be. 

Some of my work with people necessitates the use of the internet, webcams and (virtual) software applications.  Up until recently I was using this technology primarily for wellness coaching, which works pretty well with clients whom are long distance.  Almost accidentally, as of late, I have begun using this technology to do a version of long-distance bodywork.  






What has occurred is surprising.  Bodywork is, to me, so tactile a practice—how could one do it without touch?  In the past, I've depended heavily on the touch aspect for much of the information being transmitted.  Of course, when one uses a webcam and internet software applications, this isn't possible.  

The question that arises is, what is possible?

How can I call work using virtual means bodywork?  Bodywork is working with the body, right?  Well, what I am finding in this virtual work is that the subtler aspects of bodywork—those aspects not related to touch—become accentuated.  They come to the forefront of the work.  The energy aspect is still largely there, but the approach seems to need to be altered to accommodate the tactile deficit.  As in life, where there is a deficit in one area, one emphasizes the possibilities and capacities in another area.  This is interesting, like discovering other senses you didn't know you had, or strengthening aspects of oneself that have largely remained in the wings.  Necessity is the mother of invention.  Loss begets (scary, but welcomed) change.

What are the challenges in this?  The virtual medium (webcam, software application, like Skype) has limitations, besides loss of the tactile element.  It's flat.  It's difficult (if not impossible) to see a clear and actual relationship of object to person.  This can be confusing to the visual sense of the facilitator.  Black or dark clothing masks the smallest visual cues.  So, it is important for the receiver to wear light colored clothing so as to obscure as little as possible when using this virtual medium. 

Doing Authentic Movement (AM) virtually works well, except it's (again, not surprising) visually flat.  It's the medium.  It's limited.  But as facilitator, once I stop fighting this, minding it, my attention goes elsewhere.  It becomes more acute taking in shape and form.  The energy reads stronger.  Taking time on the other end to set the webcam up to maximize the visual is important.  Even then, the mover can move out of the scope of the camera:  you get missing feet or legs.  And again, it's flat.  The image is two dimensional at best and usually appears one dimensional.  Small, near imperceptible movements, movements of breath are not picked up as they most likely would be if the session was in person.  A deficit for sure.  What is necessary to offset this?

What I am finding is that the in-the-moment-communication between the facilitator and the receiver has to be more verbal than it normally would be if the session was in person.  There has to be a planned understanding that either or both of us is given the freedom to give intuited direction (i.e. "Squat.  See what happens." "Feel the breath travel on the left side; let that lead you."), ask questions (i.e. "Where is your weight?", "What is going on with your feet, I can't see them." "Is there sound or words available?") with the understanding the directive can be rejected if it doesn't feel right to the receiver.  The facilitator relies on the receiver's acute sense of the moment, what's right, what's not, what is possible to be verbalized and what isn't, as well as the trust the receiver has in her/his process and the willingness to stay close to that truth.  If the receiver doesn't stay close to her truth, but largely reacts to the direction given, it stops being bodywork and becomes a form of puppetry.  As in-person bodywork, the closer both participants are to themselves and their individual/joint experience the more illuminating the material that surfaces.

One of the astounding perks of using this medium is the separation factor.  Seeing something on a screen creates a natural (or unnatural) barrier.  One doesn't get drawn in so readily by the distant energy seen or expressiveness projected.  Other perceptions become more readily available.  The dynamics become marked and the noticing of missing aspects or aspects that might make it more whole become a curiosity.  For example, the divided creativity of the facilitator finds the question, "Where is the light aspect of the darkness present?".  Also, the tactile impulses of the facilitator are palpable (to the facilitator).  Because laying on of hands is not possible, imagining the possibility and vocalizing the impulse to the receiver actually impacts the experience for both.  Although not physical, the intention is made good (almost as good as if it was in person) thanks to using other communication venues, primarily vocal.  This is so interesting.  The impossible becomes possible and unusually spacious at that.

In some ways, all of this is not surprising.  The brain and the creative are expansive devises used in bodywork.  As we know from the physiology of the brain, when one pathway is obstructed, the brain finds other ways, other pathways.  This seems to be reflected in this virtual bodywork.  There is a malleable element to this physiology and its workings.  At this juncture, it seems limitless.  Untapped reservoirs.

As I continue with this exploration, I will write a Part II to report further findings.  Until then, may the miraculous continue to be with us in our efforts.