Mark Rashid's New Book

[Thyme & Me]

.... Is out! A blend of Aikido and Horsemanship apparently.

Also just finished reading Whole Heart, Whole Horse which was beautifully written.

I love Mark's writing but his recent books are becoming less 'how to' and more philosophical about the nature of horses. Eg he talks about the difference between 'lightness' and 'softness'. Lightness is the technical stuff a horse does: Responsiveness, self carriage, grace etc. Whereas softness is 'joy' - the willingness of a horse to be totally available to you. It's a lovely thought but leaves me thinking HOW DO I GET THAT? And he doesn't really tell you. Maybe there is no 'how to' guide for that kind of relationship?

Still love the books, though.

 

[popularfurball]

I love his books. I think in subtle ways it answers those questions - they certainly make me reflect on my practice - though they don't tell me "how to", they do leave me with questions about my behaviour which I think about and then develop alternative approaches to solve any problems.

They are beautifully written and actually I think a better way to learn - often how to books get boring and left part read - I love my 101 groundwork exercises but have to admit a large section is unread as we just haven't mastered the first bits!

 

[Skib]

I like his books too - but only up to a point.

The first one I ever read passed pretty much over my head. I had been riding two years - interesting stories about a super USA trainer but didnt feel relevance to my riding.

A year later, having watched him do a clinic or two, it was a different matter. I was in my third year of riding and applied what I learned from him. And it worked. It was the right moment for me and he gave answers to the questions I needed answers to.

Now for the downside - when I went to a clinic to be taught by Mark in person, he had no idea what I meant when I told him that it was he who had taught me to ride and he was thus unable to build on that.

This was possibly because he had himself moved on to applying the benefit of his akido skills to the managing of both horses and humans. I have long been very wary of horse trainers who transfer those skills to man management.
It does not always produce the results/ human teamwork they intend - and indeed creates its own hierarchies. Beware "the jargon of authenticity".

The words "softness", "lightness", "joy" must stand up to scrutiny even when applied to horses.
If I apply Mark Rashid's teachings in my horse management and it works - then the effectiveness is self evident.
It is a different matter when trainers create their own vocabulary for communicating their ideas. Attention gets diverted to a discussion of the authors' intended definition of words. Just because the meanings are obscure to you, you dont have to assume that someone else has something with their horses you don't.

 

[Thyme & Me]

Interesting post Skib.

Yes, jargon can be a problem, but sometimes it is hard to express an idea in more concrete terms. A few years ago I would have been impatient with Whole Heart/Whole Horse, and dismissed the soft/light distinction as nice sounding but pretty meaningless.

But I read it at a time when I had begun to notice more subtle communications from my pony: If I had got impatient and forceful in a schooling session, he would be a little less willing to come to me the following day, for example. Stuff I would not even have noticed or thought about before - a) because I saw nothing wrong with having a bit of a battle of wills while schooling (not hitting him, or fighting him just being a bit strong and impatient with him. Or as I used to call it 'not taking any nonsense'!); and b) because as long as he didn't actually walk away from me, I wouldn;t have really paid any attention to how we 'greeted' each other.

So that distinction just made perfect sense. Charlie is usually 'light' because he is quite well schooled. But he is not always 'soft' in that he sometimes shows some resistance to being ridden and some reluctance to come to me while other times he appears very willing and keen to please. His whole body langauge is different when he is 'soft'. But I see that the sense it made to me might not be what Mark meant or what other people take from the phrase. So, yes, perhaps people just reinforce their existing beliefs when writers are vague!

On the other hand, a lot of the book is highly specific eg the numerous case examples, and is not vague at all, so I think there is enough clarity for it to be a genuinely informative book.

 

[sjp1]

I have loved all of Mark Rashid's books. However, I think that what isn't sometimes written is that there have got to be times when he has to get tough with horses. Not hitting them, or treating them badly of course, but upping the pressure. Can't remember which book it was, but I remember him talking in an early book about a horse that just used to barge off when being led and putting his head down and eating. He physically had to bring his boot up underneath the horses nose a couple of times to dissuade him of that. That made sense. He didn't beat it or punish it, just made it uncomfortable so it changed its mind about its course of action.

His later books when he talks about being soft, don't especially talk about any particular 'problems' and of course if the horses he comes across don't have any problems, then there would be no remedial action to take. But it makes me wonder how realistic perhaps for every day horses with slight issues it is.

 

[Thyme & Me]

His later books when he talks about being soft, don't especially talk about any particular 'problems' and of course if the horses he comes across don't have any problems, then there would be no remedial action to take. But it makes me wonder how realistic perhaps for every day horses with slight issues it is.

In Whole Heart/Whole Horse he says he was taken aback by a woman who accused him of not understanding because his horses were well trained. So he bought a 'problem' horse as he thought she had a point, as his current horses had all been started/trained by him from a very young age. As far as I can tel he uses the same soft approaches with the problem horses as with any other?

I think that what isn't sometimes written is that there have got to be times when he has to get tough with horses. Not hitting them, or treating them badly of course, but upping the pressure. Can't remember which book it was, but I remember him talking in an early book about a horse that just used to barge off when being led and putting his head down and eating. He physically had to bring his boot up underneath the horses nose a couple of times to dissuade him of that. That made sense. He didn't beat it or punish it, just made it uncomfortable so it changed its mind about its course of action.

Yes that was Tom in Considering The Horse. He had no manners at all, and just dragged Mark over to grass and started eating. I think the principle is 'make the right thing easy and the wrong thing hard'. So when Tom put his head down it would run into a boot toe. Same as when Charlie crowds me he runs into a bony elbow.

Interestingly in later books Mark says he no longer agrees with that. He has moved towards seeing the issue as one of communication: if a horse doesn't know any better then you need to teach it, and there may be softer, gentler ways of teaching manners.

On similar lines, if a horse doesn't much feel like doing what you are asking him to do and therefore is evasive, what is the problem? The evasion or the attitude to work? If it's the evasion then get strong/firm etc but if it's an attitude problem then getting tough might make the horse have even more of an attitude problem.

But that's a topic for another thread!

 

[Dreamster]

So excited that Mark is back in the UK again finally next year. Am going to spectate at the New Forest Clinic. Somehow the fact he has a new book out had completely passed me by, will be ordering one now so than you for that.

 

[sjp1]

Interestingly in later books Mark says he no longer agrees with that. He has moved towards seeing the issue as one of communication: if a horse doesn't know any better then you need to teach it, and there may be softer, gentler ways of teaching manners.

And therein lies the question - how!!!

 

[Thyme & Me]

Well that's what I hope the spend the rest of my horsey life finding out!

I dont have the answers. But I do belive it is possible.

The only time I am 'aggressive' is when a horse is attacking me: Then I will swing a rope, act big, adopt a threatening posture and drive him off. Also when Charlie takes the bit and runs off I'll use an emergency stop which will be uncomfortable for him. But he needs to learn this is unacceptable.

I try not to punish evasion though. Only aggression or behaviour that is dangerous to me.

 

[KP nut]

I never thought I'd say this, but I don't like his new book. Not new one of the thread title, but the New New One: The Missed Path - about re-starting horses.

I had such high hopes because I am re-starting Amber. Also he says it is more of a 'how to' guide than his previous books but it just isn't at all.

His horsemanship has now developed to such a degree of refinement that when he talks about what he does with a horse it is no longer remotely accessible to normal people! The book seems rather self indulgent actually. Lengthy woolly accounts about how he feels and how he thinks the horses feel. I skipped whole passages in the end to get to something I could even relate to, let alone apply.

I wrote before how in his books you can see the evolution of his ideas: from make the wrong thing hard and the right thing easy, to focusing on the qualities that horses like in a leader, to softness and feel. But now he's on telepathy more or less!

Also I always used the like the fact that he was very minimalist: the 'Old Man' used whatever he had to hand and it was all very down to earth. Whereas Mark is now a big fan of Masterston Method Body Work (TM - of course) and Natural Balance Dentistry (TM - of course). Neither are proven. NBD in particular is controversial as the practitioners are not necessarily even dentists! Just have done the course. And even if these treatments are useful they aren't accessible over here anyway. And the claims are excessive as alternative treatments always are; improves horse's whole way of going, health and mental state. Hmmmm. He does not seem to gain personally from his endorsements of these approaches. They aren't his. But it grates all the same.

I don't doubt his genius as a horseman, but I think he's become just a bit too 'out there' for me now.

 

[Trewsers]

I never thought I'd say this, but I don't like his new book. Not new one of the thread title, but the New New One: The Missed Path - about re-starting horses.

I had such high hopes because I am re-starting Amber. Also he says it is more of a 'how to' guide than his previous books but it just isn't at all.

His horsemanship has now developed to such a degree of refinement that when he talks about what he does with a horse it is no longer remotely accessible to normal people! The book seems rather self indulgent actually. Lengthy woolly accounts about how he feels and how he thinks the horses feel. I skipped whole passages in the end to get to something I could even relate to, let alone apply.

I wrote before how in his books you can see the evolution of his ideas: from make the wrong thing hard and the right thing easy, to focusing on the qualities that horses like in a leader, to softness and feel. But now he's on telepathy more or less!

Also I always used the like the fact that he was very minimalist: the 'Old Man' used whatever he had to hand and it was all very down to earth. Whereas Mark is now a big fan of Masterston Method Body Work (TM - of course) and Natural Balance Dentistry (TM - of course). Neither are proven. NBD in particular is controversial as the practitioners are not necessarily even dentists! Just have done the course. And even if these treatments are useful they aren't accessible over here anyway. And the claims are excessive as alternative treatments always are; improves horse's whole way of going, health and mental state. Hmmmm. He does not seem to gain personally from his endorsements of these approaches. They aren't his. But it grates all the same.

I don't doubt his genius as a horseman, but I think he's become just a bit too 'out there' for me now.

That's worrying about the dental aspect.

 

[Skib]

I think it high time KP nut that you altered your attitude to trainers, authority figures and the resolution of problems.

Everyone including teachers and writers works in the context of their personal life, their education and the surrounding culture. None of which is permanent. So their views change often in directions their former students may not admire or want to follow because we, their students, have also meanwhile built up different experiences and have ourselves changed.
Forget the reassurance you get from following a guy who gives a clinic and the human endorsement that comes with that compliance. It is something women tend to do. We look for approval from masters. We underestimate ourselves and our capabilities.

I am particularly bolshy in real life. I was educated to question everything - which means no high marks as no correct answers - If I look at Rashid's work, I can see that the early books consist of story telling in which an owner is shown to be particularly useless or stupid, and Mark comes along and does something else which is superior. Fair enough because I have seen that magic transformation happen in his clinics and taken it away and had it work for me.

But even in those early clinics he would make remarks I didnt agree with. He is a Western raised American male. I am an English feminist and he was sexist.
His second wife was different in her interests and her education. So with a new wife, sure he changed too. And some of his methods. But if I got on well with what he learned from the old man, I am not going to stop doing things that way. Mark knows that.

Have I read his more recent books?- No so I cant comment. The directions he has taken dont interest me so much and I always learned most just from watching him. Am I interested in martial arts like Akido, no. I am a pacifist.

But Marks example works when I follow it with a horse. And as previous threads on NR show, I learned much from him as a result of his studying the dentistry and affect of head position.

I have often mentioned the way I have been influenced by John Lyons - Communicating with Clues - If I had a young horse, that is where I would start, then enlarging my horizons in the UK context by looking at Michael Peace, and Pippa Funnel. And then closing the books and getting on with it on my own.

Dont program yourself or your horse. None of these are step by step methods. Training a horse or teaching a child isnt a rigid timetable - Being professionally involved in child therapy means you may have to suffer from (and comply with) the current thinking on standards and the structures on which they depend.

But the process between you and a horse doesnt need reporting on every day to human beings. It doesnt have to adher to public standards (whatever they may be). You can manage it by yourself getting feedback from the horse. I have a friend currently training her young horse and I doubt if she ever read a word of any of this theory.

For those of us who did find it helpful to understand behaviourism, the fact is that like many new things it had unforseen consequences. If I had my kids now, I wouldnt raise them in the way I did then. Thinking moved on. Mark Rashid was one of the people who moved it on - in his third book particularly. But letting the horse have some initiative, accepting offers from the horse involves a delicate balance -and decision making from the human.

Life is full of learning from mistakes. If one thing doesnt work in your training, try another. If you encounter total failure, that is the moment to think what kind of professional help you might need to bail you out of the emergency. And make your choice, but remember even in that situation you are the employer. You have a brain and can think for yourself.

I have moved on from many teachers in my life, but I am not going to dismiss what they did for me in the past. Nor can I rule out learning from someone whose late work gives me insight, just because their early work seemed to me superficial or misguided. The framework in which you train and qualify for your therapy now, wont be the professional standard thirty five years from now.

 

[KP nut]

I think it high time KP nut that you altered your attitude to trainers, authority figures and the resolution of problems.
.

Woah I'm just reviewing a book! You are making rather a lot of assumptions about me and my thinking from that. Thanks for taking the time to reply, but really much of what you are 'correcting' me on about my 'attitude' is unnecessary. I have never slavishly or rigidly followed anyone, not even Mark. As I hope my training diaries in which I frequently try and work things out from first principles has shown in the past. Anyway I think I will confine my writing on NR to pics of the ponies, updates on fun days out and requests for specific advice re feed or tack or whatever. The days of sharing of different views seem to be over in favour of people just jumping down each others throats..... Although remembering the Natural Horsemanship section of the forum, perhaps we never were very good at respectfully sharing ideas!

 

[MrC]

Woah I'm just reviewing a book! You are making rather a lot of assumptions about me and my thinking from that. Thanks for taking the time to reply, but really much of what you are 'correcting' me on about my 'attitude' is unnecessary. I have never slavishly or rigidly followed anyone, not even Mark. As I hope my training diaries in which I frequently try and work things out from first principles has shown in the past. Anyway I think I will confine my writing on NR to pics of the ponies, updates on fun days out and requests for specific advice re feed or tack or whatever. The days of sharing of different views seem to be over in favour of people just jumping down each others throats..... Although remembering the Natural Horsemanship section of the forum, perhaps we never were very good at respectfully sharing ideas!

Based on your other thread KPnut I think Skib is right really. You seem unable to extrapolate from the given text or starts from the laid out pathway to think for yourself. You quote this horseman or that horseman in you reasoning instead of just saying I tried this and got this result. It's all name dropping and justification because such and such a person says it works.

Over complicating things because you have too many other people's ways of doing things is not a great way to be training horses.