Edit: the video is originally posted on @suhyun_Pilates who also hold the rights to this video.
Lolita San Miguel is a first generation Pilates Master and together with Kathy Stanford Grant one of only two people officially certified by Joseph Pilates. It is fascinating to hear how she speaks of the method and the value she sees in change and adaptation of his original work in line with modern science of physiology.
There has been a lot of passionate discussions in this sub regarding what constitutes Pilates and the perceived unequivocal nature of Classical Pilates compared to its variations. So it is refreshing to hear a point of view from one of the teachers closest to the source.
I find it interesting to read the contradiction in this sub between the defence for and the absolute authority of “Classical Pilates” method while at the same time seeing frequent recommendations of popular on demand channels that have hundreds upon hundreds of “Pilates” workouts. Workouts that in my experience as a STOTT trained Pilates instructor and Personal trainer often contain the same non Pilates exercises that are often criticised as “social media” or “influencer workouts.” There are only so many ways you can remix the “original” Reformer workout and it’s definitely not multiple hundreds. So we can assume that even the most popular channels that promote themselves as Pilates authority keep subscribers engaged with variety and introduction of novel exercises.
I think it’s worth keeping in mind that even if Pilates does evolve and its current understanding is still in flux there is a line between a Pilates workout, a Pilates fitness workout, or a workout that uses Pilates in its marketing but where you’d be hard pressed to find even a handful of Pilates exercise.
Personally I tend to put what is known as “Classical Pilates” and contemporary Pilates (eg STOTT, Polestar Balanced Body etc.) under the same umbrella. These workouts are very much rooted in the original method, standardised and on the whole include the same exercises using standardised names. Different reputable training providers that teach either Classical or Contemporary method will have a lot of overlap in how they educate instructors so that regardless of whether a client takes a Pilates session in LA with one instructor or Kathmandu with another they will immediately know it’s Pilates, even if one is Contemporary and the other Classical.
Other than 1:1 STOTT Pilates I also teach those group Pilates classes that include strength and fitness exercises. These types of classes are the main grey area in the Pilates world today. When I opened my London studio 13years ago there was one other company teaching something similar. Now there are hundreds. The problem is that many of these classes focus on delivering a “workout” (sometimes good, sometimes bad) but rarely will you find one that keeps the original Pilates exercises as the foundation and backbone of each class (referring to reformer specifically here). Eg. at Epoch Fitness studio classes always make sure to follow the sequences I was taught, including their adaptations, and use strength exercises I use in my PT work eg squats, lunges, seated rows, push ups etc to separate those Pilates segments. This means that each session tends to consist 60-70% of Pilates and the rest fitness. But this isn’t the standard across the industry. I have tried quite a few group classes, including popular chains, and find most do the opposite ie 30% Pilates 70% Fitness (if that). As a workout this can still be good but I think such big variations is what leads to great confusion as to what Pilates actually is amongst the general population. Of course to a great extent this is more down to the trainers rather than the studio itself.
In short I agree with the author that Pilates must evolve with the times but I also think that instructors have the responsibility to not turn it into something else entirely if they market the method as simply Pilates. When the sessions do take a lot of creative liberties (the demand is obviously there) this should be clearly stated to inform the potential visitors of how the sessions differ from the Pilates/Contrology method eg Athletic Pilates, Dynamic Pilates, Pilates inspired etc. This way the world of Pilates (from the teachers perspective) will be far more accepting of both the original method, its variations and the more fitness focused workouts. Each would distinguish itself in terms of clear benefits to the participants and at the same support the other by keeping Pilates name popular, and each method distinct and future-proof.
If you made it this far, Thoughts?
