I first encountered Feldenkrais in 2007 in written form. I was taking a somatic studies class within the dance department at Oberlin college and we were assigned his book, Awareness Through Movement. Compared to the other books in the class, which mostly conveyed new-agey ideas in pablum language, ATM seemed more like a philosophy book. Big ideas, big claims. The first line reads, “We act in accordance with our self-image.” What does he mean, self-image? > “This self-image—which, in turn, governs our every act—is conditioned in varying degree by three factors, heritage, education, and self education.” _Whoa_, I thought, _this could be good_. At the time, I loved philosophy books. I fancied myself an intellectual and admired intellectual prowess in others. I was excited to discuss this conceptually challenging and definitely interesting book. But when the time came for discussion, no one else seemed excited. Maybe they didn’t get it? Maybe they were thinking, “I didn’t sign up for a class in the dance department to _think_ this hard.” Not even the teacher who assigned the book seemed inclined to make a discussion of it. I felt sparky about the book, like, _this Feldenkrais guy is really on about something, even if I can’t tell what yet_, but everyone else seemed bored, maybe even a little turned off by it.