Anatomy and Physiology of Costal Breathing

[ Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]


A few thoughts...

From: Aonghus Heatley
Date: 02 Oct 2011
Time: 09:14:59 -0500
Remote Name: 87.194.37.201

Comments

Peter, I've just read your paper on costal breathing and enjoyed it a lot. I do have a few minor points I'd like to - constructively - raise, but they are really quite minor. As you know I'm wary of coming across as a costal breathing 'evangelist' so these points are coming from a sceptical proponent of the technique (as just one of many techniques) rather than from a die-hard costal breathing zealot! One point I'd like to make which may solve some of the confusion is that the key aspects of costal breathing should not be regarded as things totally separate from normal breathing, but instead they should be things you should merely emphasise as part of normal breathing. I'm sure you are aware of that, but at points in your article your discussion appears to rest upon the 'impossibility' of some of the costal breathing aspects. If however you view the costal breathing elements as goals to strive for (I increasingly regard them as flexible 'goals' rather than 'absolute' physical criteria to satisfy) then perhaps the whole things makes a little more sense. The courses naturally emphasise these elements of the technique as being 'things that thou must do', but I believe that's only a means by which the elements can be drummed into people and their importance stressed as opposed to being things that should be put into practise instead of normal breathing... Yes, some of the elements don't fit easily into the framework of normal breathing, but after having used the technique - or having tried to use the technique - for several years I think the differences between costal breathing and normal breathing can be over-stated. I also think it's also important to look at the costal breathing technique in a holistic way. By that I don't just mean that you should view the physical aspects in conjunction with the Sheehanesque elements taught on the McGuire and Starfish courses, but that the physical elements shouldn't be viewed as being independent of each-other. That is perhaps why you concluded that there were contradictory instructions as to how the technique should be implemented and it's probably why, on paper or even in a phone call, it's not easy to get a sense of costal breathing across. I perhaps would have avoided relying so much on the 'McGuire Unmasked' document - I'm not sure it's a good source upon which to base academic analysis. A better source might have been Dave McGuire's book 'Beyond Stammering: The McGuire Programme for Getting Good at the Sport of Speaking'. The latter text isn't an academic book, but it goes into quite a bit more detail on the technique and the rationale behind the elements (which isn't necessarily that convincing). Despite these points, which are minor, I think your paper is a very valuable contribution.


Last changed: 10/02/11