m 
 
 Bl3 
 
 CJ 
 Q 
 
GYMNASTIC PAPERS 
 
 EDITED BT 
 
 JAKOB BOLIN 
 
 645 Madison Avenue New York City 
 
 Serie4 A 
 
 dumber 2 
 
 Why Do We 
 
 TeaLch 
 GymnaLstics ? 
 
 BY 
 
 JAKOB BOLIN 
 
 PRICE : —TWENTY-FIVE CENTS 
 
 CopyrlgKt 1903 by JAKOB BOLIN 
 

Gymnastics 
 
 One individual takes gymnastics for his health ; an- 
 other to overcome his awkwardness ; a third for the 
 pleasure that he derives from bodily activity; a fourth 
 to get an opportunity to show his ability and to be 
 admired by others. Each has a mere personal object 
 in view. , 
 
 We may endeavor to fill the varying wants of differ- 
 ent individuals, and thus address ourselves to one class 
 of clients or another. But that is essentially a com- 
 mercial question. The one has something to sell which 
 the other wants to buy. 
 
 This narrow, personal, or commercial aspect can, 
 however, be allowed only a very small place in the 
 thoughts of those who seriously advocate gymnastics. 
 They do not concern themselves with individual de- 
 sires, but claim that gymnastics is imperatively needed 
 for the race. They wish the community, the State, the 
 Nation, to step in to furnish gymnastics to all its citi- 
 zens, claiming that thereby the purpose of the State 
 may be better realized. Supplying the means of happi- 
 ness to one individual here, to another there, is properly 
 the function of private initiative. The State has nothing 
 to do with it. She should not do anything for my bene- 
 fit, or your benefit, except so far as it redounds to her 
 own benefit. All that does not so redound lies outside 
 of her functions. You may send your boy to school 
 in order thereby to assure him a greater amount of 
 
 ,.'* 
 

 • <• , , 
 
 " Why Do We Teach' GV'm nasties? 
 
 happiness in life. But the State receives him at school 
 not primarily for his sake, but for her own, to assure 
 herself that he shall fill his proper place as a future 
 citizen. 
 
 When, in a general discussion, we speak of the pur- 
 pose of gA-mnastics, we must therefore focus our atten- 
 tion, not on filling the individual desires, but on an in- 
 quiry as to whether, and in what manner, the general 
 effectiveness and usefulness of the citizen may be en- 
 hanced. If a general introduction of gymnastics will 
 make better citizens, then it is the duty of the State to 
 furnish it. If on the contrary it merely addresses itself 
 to comparatively few individuals, the State may or may 
 not consider herself bound to undertake the work, which 
 in such case might perhaps assume the character of a 
 semi-charitable institution, such as schools for defec- 
 tives, or possibly be classified with subsidized operas or 
 other agencies for a specialized education. 
 
 But this is our contention, on the correctness of 
 which we stand or fall, that gymnastics increases the 
 general effectiveness and usefulness of the average indi- 
 vidual coming under its influence to such a degree that 
 the State would be well repaid by a higher level of her 
 citizens for the labor and expense of the general intro- 
 duction of this subject. 
 
 We argue for the introduction of gymnastics into the 
 schools, because the school is the agency by which the 
 State lays the foundation for the usefulness of the 
 individual, and because it is through the public school 
 that the greatest multitude may be reached. 
 
 Like everything else, the school is constantly under- 
 going a process of evolution. The school of to-day is 
 quite different from that of yesterday, and to-morrow 
 will see new changes. I But through it all the general 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 3 
 
 purpose is clear : the school shall fit for Hfe, shall edu- 
 cate. ] Not in the sense that it is to be considered the 
 only, or even the chief, educative agency. Surrounding 
 conditions force an education upon us whether we have 
 schools or not. This process is an effective one. Those 
 who, from one cause or another, respond improperly 
 to the influences of surrounding conditions are crowded 
 to the wall, weaken, disappear, are weeded out. Those 
 who react most in accord with nature's laws are re- 
 warded, strengthened, saved to propagate the race. But 
 nature is a hard taskmaster. She is just, but knows no 
 mercy. If the individual development be left to fortui- 
 tous circumstances, there are many, very many, who 
 will fall by the wayside, because of the mistakes they 
 make. To help the individual, to make it possible for 
 him to profit by the experiences of those who have 
 passed before him, the school was brought in. It is ■ 
 not intended that it shall supply a substitute for educa- 
 tion through life ; in fact, it cannot, but it rather serves 
 as a valuable complement. The means it utilizes vary 
 with the changing experiences. At first the school en- ^ 
 deavored to assist the individual by furnishing him 
 knowledge of isolated facts which might be of value 
 in after life. A mass of names, dates, and events consti- 
 tuted history. There was no study of the development 
 of thought and institutions. The education in geog- 
 raphy consisted chiefly in the cramming of boundary 
 lines, names of cities, their location, the number of their 
 inhabitants, the altitude of mountains, the length of 
 rivers. Natural conditions and resources which influ- 
 ence the civilization of man and determine the direction 
 of his pursuits were given no heed. The language 
 teacher dealt mainly with glossaries, grammatical rules, 
 paradigms, not with the thoughts expressed. Botany 
 
4 Why Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 was a jumble of names, families, classes, orders of plants, 
 not their relation to the development of life and to man. 
 Such instruction as was offered in physical activity had 
 for its purpose to give the pupil a direct utilitarian 
 ability in definite circumscribed fields. It was the teach- 
 ing of trades and crafts. Education in the modern sense 
 had little place in this school. We might say that the 
 child-mind was considered as a miniature of the adult 
 mind, while the physical child was looked upon as a 
 pocket edition of the full grown man and woman. For 
 both mind and body growth was considered all-essen- 
 tial, and was to be brought about by passive absorption 
 of new material. The development, the gradual change, 
 concomitant with mere growth, was overlooked. 
 
 But new ideas were born, developed. It became evi- 
 dent that the facts poured into the child's mind, and 
 the abilities given his body, were too few to fill the needs 
 ot a life which grew ever more complex. Comenius, 
 Rousseau, Pestalozzi, and others urged the presentation 
 of more facts than formerly. But at the same time they 
 pointed out that the facts should not merely be pre- 
 sented to the passive pupil. He should himself gather 
 "them in by his own activity. Thus came the impulse to 
 "gaming by doing," of which we now hear so much, and 
 wmch led to school laboratories, school gardens, manual 
 training, all designed to open new avenues to the mind, 
 to train the senses for observation, to focus attention, 
 to develop will. 
 
 Building upon this foundation, but recognizing the 
 inadequacy of the presentation of isolated facts, how- 
 ever valuable, however acquired, later reformers, no- 
 tably Herbart and his pupils, revolutionized the methods 
 of the school by setting a higher ideal for it. The 
 facts were joined together, co-ordinated, correlated. 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymrvastlcs 7 5 
 
 The new and unknown facts were attached to the old 
 and well known ones by strong bonds of union ; associa- 
 tions were established ; relations were considered. 
 Knowledge was no longer a conglomeration of mem- 
 orized facts, but a woof in which each fact was firmly 
 united with a large number of other facts, so that each 
 fact now, because of its many relationships, frequently 
 rose in consciousness to be utilized for the elucidation of 
 many conditions with which it had no connections when 
 presented according to the old methods. Knowing 
 became synonymous with understanding, and the 
 school's ideal became action in conformity with the 
 understanding; it became the building of character. 
 
 At the present time, the school is primarily an insti- 
 tution for the development of intellect and morality, of 
 power to think right, to feel right, and to will right. If 
 it succeeds in its purpose, the future citizen is supposed 
 to act right. 
 
 As far as we can see now, this will always remain 
 the central idea in the school. It was mainly, through 
 a superior mental development that our ancestors suc- 
 ceeded in elevating themselves above the rest of the 
 animal kingdom. It was by the development of higher 
 and ever higher mental and moral characteristics that 
 they gained the mastery over nature. It is through the 
 development of these that we may hope for a still fur- 
 ther rise. It is by the fos4e«-ng~ of thought, feeling, and 
 will, that the school shall make useful citizens. Thought, 
 feeling, and \yill are the objects with which the school 
 deals. If gymnastics is to have a place in the school, it^^ 
 must have a favorable influence on these, directly or in-^ 
 directly. 
 
 But keen thought, lofty feelings, and right will are 
 of value only so far as they become actualized in mo- 
 
 t^ 
 
6 Why Do We Teach Gymrvastics? 
 
 tion. They are important to the race only if they find their 
 expression in action. Every thought and every feehng 
 which gHmmer only in the consciousness of the individ- 
 ual, without modifying his actions, are wasted. Human- 
 ity is not benefited by him who imprisons his thoughts 
 and feelings within himself, but by him who seeks to 
 give them an outlet in some form of action. Action is 
 the only means by which the environment may be in- 
 fluenced, the only means by which the citizen may be 
 useful. Thoughts and feelings do not suffice, however 
 good they may be. Will without action is sterile. Ac- 
 tion is the fruit of will. That is a true ethical formula, 
 "Be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only" is a 
 good Christian doctrine. "What we think, or what we 
 know, or what we believe, is, in the end, of little con- 
 sequence. The only thing of consequence is what we 
 do" (Ruskin). 
 
 If all this be true — and nobody denies it — the school 
 must ofifer training in doing, in will — expression. It 
 must habituate the child to realize the thoughts and 
 feelings in motion, if it is to rear a race of doers ; if the 
 future citizens are not to be mere thinkers and feelers 
 without initiative ; if the pupils, when leaving school, 
 shall be able to take their places in the active life 
 around them ; if they are not to be mere onlookers, 
 standing by philosophizing over what is happening, with- 
 out endeavoring to direct the events in accord with 
 their thoughts and feelings. 
 
 Those who have read aright the history of the birth 
 of gymnastics in Germany and Sweden, those who have 
 been able to look behind the mere forms for the spirit of 
 the time, for the force which drove Jahn and Ling to 
 the fulfillment of their great mission, must be impressed 
 by the fact that the ideals of these men are the ideals 
 
WKy Do We Toach Gymnastics? « 
 
 of the school to-day. Their native countries weak- 
 ened, dismembered, victims of scorn, subjected to in- 
 suks and injustice, while their countrymen in careless 
 indolence saw nothing, did nothing, hoped for nothing. 
 Such were the scenes upon which Ling and Jahn 
 glanced. Such were the pictures which stirred them to I 
 
 activity. L To make useful citizens by uniting strong a\ 
 bodies, strong minds, and strong characters, that was "^ 
 the aim of Ling, that was the object of Jahn, that is the 
 purpose of our school to-day.' 
 
 ( The early gymnasts recognized the necessity of sys- 
 tematic training in doing. They recognized that this was 
 of equal importance with systematic training in thinking. 
 Therefore, "they introduced gymnastics, sports, physical 
 activity of various kind. Our modern educators have 
 arrived at the same conclusions. Motor training is in- 
 troduced in every modern school. And hope is enter- 
 tained that thereby not only shall the pupils acquire 
 some direct utilitarian dexterity absolutely necessary 
 for everyone in a civilized community, such as writing a 
 legible hand, but that attention shall be trained in va- 
 rious directions, that power of observation may be de- 
 veloped, tlrat knowledge may become more many-sided, 
 because gained through several senses, that manifold 
 relations may be established between facts which nat- 
 urally belong together, and that there may be created 
 the ability and the will to realize thoughts and feelings 
 in action. /The object in view is to make men and 
 women ready and able to take their places as active 
 members of the community. 
 
 In this motor training which our schools offer, gym- \ 
 nasties and sports enter nominally, but their place is 
 rather without, than within, the curriculum. They are 
 not recognized as true educative agencies to be accorded 
 
o Why Do We Teach Gymnastics ? 
 
 the same care and attention as other branches. Where 
 they are allotted a place in the school, the place is in- 
 significant, and they are allowed to develop more or less 
 at haphazard. When we speak of motor training in our 
 school as it is to-day, we therefore mean those branches 
 which have been consciously developed for the purpose 
 of assisting in definite directions in the real education 
 of the child. The motor training brought to our youth 
 by the gymnasts still remains mainly outside the school. 
 But the difference between this motor training and the 
 one more or less thoroughly recognized by the school 
 makes it incumbent on us to ascertain whether the for- 
 mer can bring into the school some new educative force 
 which may make it desirable as a complement to the 
 latter. 
 
 The changes urged by the elder reformers in the field 
 of the school was, to a great extent at least, based on 
 the necessity of increasing the number and vividness of 
 the sense perceptions presented to the child. It was 
 recognized that one sense alone does not give us a satis- 
 factory knowledge. An object is known in the ratio 
 that it gives us sensations. The more sensations we 
 receive from it, the better we know it. For a complete 
 knowledge of it, it is not enough to see it. To know it 
 thoroughly, we must hear the sound it emits when 
 struck; we must get hold of it, feel it, lift it, turn it, 
 handle it. We must represent it by drawing, by model- 
 ing. Thus only can we gain a full cognition of it. Sense 
 perception is the basis of all mental lifei» The fewer 
 sensations, the lower mentality. Idiocy is to a great 
 extent characterized by a dearth of sensations. 
 
 Other things being equal, the more numerous and 
 the more acute the sensations, the richer the mental 
 life. Anything that we can do to render sensations more 
 
Why Do We TeacK Gymnastics? » 
 
 numerous and more keen is advantageous to the intel- 
 lect. (Especially is this true in childhood, and more, 
 particularly in early childhood, when the sensational 
 foundation for mind development is laid.\ 
 
 The sense organs can l)e developed. One of the 
 reasons why Rousseau brought "Emile" away from the 
 cramping influences of "over-civilization" to the wide 
 expanse of "nature" was to give scope to the exercise 
 of the senses. The blind develop their sense of touch to 
 a remarkable degree. The expert in linen detects by 
 touch adulterations which escape the average person. 
 The fencer becomes aware of the slightest movement 
 of his opponent's foil so rapidly and unerringly that it 
 appears as if he were able to read the latter's thoughts 
 even before they have taken form. And so on. Motor 
 training is the only means by which this education of 
 touch and muscular sense may take place. Numerous 
 perceptions, clear-cut, well-defined, are thus formed re- 
 garding distance, direction, weight, force, resistance, 
 effort, and so on, which without motor training remain 
 dim and vague. The judicious mother can give power- 
 ful impulses in this direction to her little one simply be- 
 cause of her mother-feeling. But I doubt whether much 
 good can come from the average mother undertaking 
 systematic work with her infants. She knows too little 
 of child-nature. We know too little to guide her prop- 
 erly. There would be too great a danger of instituting 
 a forcing-process, unhealthy and pernicious. There is 
 only one absolutely safe rule, by following 'which we 
 may at least cause no great injury, even if we do not 
 gain the greatest possible development : Supply the in- 
 fant with space to move in, allow it to handle the differ- 
 ent objects in this space, and leave the process to nature. 
 The curiosity and instinct of the child will guide it 
 
10 Why Do We Teach Gymnastics ? 
 
 rightly. You may help it, but if you do not know how, 
 leave it alone. In any event, this is a matter for the 
 parent, not for the teacher; for the home, not for the 
 school. 
 
 But the child grows. It comes to the Kindergarten. 
 Here it is guided more systematically than formerly. 
 The senses receive due attention. Motor training is 
 available in many forms. Regulated play and games, 
 songs, paper folding and cutting, building with blocks, 
 using the "gifts," moulding in sand or clay, drawing, and 
 so on. Formal gymnastics in the true sense does not 
 enter. It should not, it cannot, for reasons to give which 
 would carry us too far. But gradually the movements 
 take definite form, become directed not only in a gen- 
 eral way, but more closely predetermined by the teacher. 
 We enter the primary school. Gymnastics is in the cur- 
 riculum. 
 
 Like all forms of motor training it educates the 
 senses. That is one of the benefits our pupils gain from 
 it. That is, and must be, recognized by all. We need no 
 discussion of the matter. It is self-evident. Gymnas- 
 tics must address itself to the training of sense percep- 
 tion. It must be presented in such a manner that the 
 senses are unfolded by it, not stunted or dulled. It 
 must be presented in the natural order of sense develop- 
 ment. But that is a principle that is not peculiar to 
 gymnastics. It belongs to everything taught in the 
 school. So, when Dr. Arnold enunciated this principle 
 in his paper," I cannot understand that he thereby en- 
 riched our knowledge of gymnastics. He only reiter- 
 ated a truth, generally recognized by teachers of all 
 branches, even if they, as must be admitted, frequently 
 
 1. Some of the principles that guide me in teaching German 
 gymnastics. Report of the tenth annual meeting of the American 
 Association for the Advancement of Physical Eduoation. 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics ? H 
 
 overlook it in their daily lessons. He certainly did not 
 advance any principle peculiar to the system which he 
 represents. The principle is common to all systems. Dr. 
 Arnold makes much of gymnastics for sense training. 
 Dr. Hartung has followed his lead.^ Has gymnastics, 
 then, any particular claims to be considered as a means 
 of training the senses? Is it in any way superior to 
 other branches ? Is it superior to other forms of motor 
 training? These questions are important. Upon the 
 answer depend to great extent our methods. 
 y Gymnastics differs from all other formal modes of 
 motor training in our schools inasmuch as it utilizes 
 the whole body as a sense-organ, while the latter ad- 
 dress themselves only or mainlv to the hand. To be 
 able to arrive at cognition, not only by sight, verified 
 by manual touch, but by sensations derived from mus- 
 cular contractions in legs, thighs, back, chest, may at 
 first sight appear to be a great gain, a considerable 
 widening of the field upon which our mental life is based. 
 But is it so in reality? Pure sensations probably never 
 exist. They are mere psychological abstractions. As 
 soon as a sensation is received in consciousness, it is a 
 perception. The matter of consequence is not, there- 
 fore, the sensory stimuli we receive, but the percep- 
 tions to which they give rise. The question whether we 
 get more or less stimuH or from what part of the body 
 they enter our consciousness, is of small importance to 
 our mental life, compared with the one whether they 
 are clear, distinct, and easy of interpretation. And even 
 the very best gymnastic training can never bring us 
 to such clear and definite perceptions from our legs 
 and back and the larger articulations as are those which 
 we receive from the hands and the fingers. I do not 
 
 1. Mind and Body, vol. 9, p. 145. 
 
12 
 
 WKy Do We Teach Gymrvastics? 
 
 wish to belittle the perceptual gain by gymnastics, but 
 I can never be brought to the opinion that this gain is 
 at all to be compared with what we are daily gaining 
 from manual training in its various forms. The per- 
 ceptions received through gymnastics may help to give 
 a considerably greater formative material for the mind 
 to elaborate. But the formative material thus used will 
 always be decidedly inferior in quality to that brought us 
 by other methods. And, therefore, I can but assert that 
 those who take it upon themselves to advocate gymnas- 
 tics mainly, or even to a great extent, upon the ground 
 that it furnishes us w^ith new and important sense per- 
 ceptions, are making a grievous error. 'Gymnastics 
 must be brought into the very heart of our educational 
 system for several reasons. But to bring forth claims 
 for it as a powerful agency in training the perceptions 
 seems to me to be a mistake, based upon the most 
 narrow conception. It is exactly in. line with the claims 
 of the one-idea-men in medicine. It is, according to 
 my viewpoint, as if a general were using his auxiliary 
 troops as his main forces, employing them for the main 
 attack when they should be utilized only for supporting 
 and strengthening his position. I think we shall always 
 be obliged. to consider the development of perceptions 
 through gymnastics, but we cannot make this a promi- 
 nent part of the educational value which we expect from 
 a general introduction of this branch into our schools. J 
 And, after all, whatever view we may take of the de- 
 velopment of perceptions from our wQrk, we are bound 
 to recognize that this training belongs to the earliest 
 period of life. For the small child it is, I hold, of no in- 
 considerable importance to enlarge and enrich the field 
 of sensory perceptions. Perhaps it may be counted 
 as of great value up to ten or twelve years of age ; but 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics ? 13 
 
 thereafter its value surely rapidly diminishes. The mind 
 after that age deals, not with things, but with relations. 
 The mind then is built, not upon the formation of im- 
 ages, but upon the growth of general notions. Percep- 
 tion wanes, conception waxes. And we should certainly 
 not allow ourselves to be carried away by any idea that 
 conception is the mere adding of percept to percept. 
 The percepts must be present, vivid and numerous, for 
 the formation of concepts. But conception is not a mere 
 conglomeration of percepts. It is a process of abstrac- 
 tion. It is the relating, the comparing, the classifying 
 of percepts according to their similarities and dissim- 
 ilarities. It is a process of thought. The percepts are 
 only the material of thought. By furnishing a richer 
 thought material the motor training assists thinking, 
 with all that it implies of reflection, imagination, judg- 
 ment, and so on. By giving richer perceptual content 
 to the mind, possibilities for more associations are fur- 
 nished. But beyond that it cannot go. The processes 
 themselves can only be developed by their own practice. 
 You cannot learn to think through gymnastics. Prac- 
 tice in thinking is the only way by which we learn to 
 think. You can only utilize the additional percepts given 
 by gymnastics as material for thought. And as these are 
 dim and vague, the thoughts to which they give rise 
 will be dim and vague. Some enthusiasts apparently 
 claim more for motor training in general and for gym- 
 nastics in particular, as assisting thought and reflection, 
 than is warranted by the facts. Just as I am willing to 
 grant a certain efficiency to gymnastics in developing 
 sense perception, so I am willing to admit that it may 
 assist in forming concepts. Just as willing as I am to 
 assert that it is of some advantage to the pupil to re- 
 ceive his perceptions of various kinds through his whole 
 
14 WKy Do W« Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 body, so I acknowledge that gymnastics may be utilized 
 to fortify and strengthen concepts. But positive as I am 
 that by far the most important percepts gained by motor 
 training are not gained by that particular form called 
 gymnastics, I am equally positive that the concepts 
 formed by gymnastics are of small importance com- 
 pared with those reached through other avenues. I do 
 not deny that gymnastics contributes to right thinking 
 by its direct influence on the mind. But I do deny that 
 to be the main benefit derived from it. 
 
 It is proper that we ourselves should be enthusiastic. 
 It is but right that we should believe thoroughly in the 
 value of our own work. But it is a dangerous pro- 
 cedure to make sweeping statements which cannot be 
 substantiated or verified. Does Dr. Arnold consider 
 that the appreciation of weight, distance, resistance, etc., 
 can be gained only through gymnastics, or very much 
 better through gymnastics than through other means? 
 Does he think that the additional knowledge received 
 from gymnastics is of great value to our mental develop- 
 ment? Does Dr. Hartung believe that the "multitude 
 of conceptions and judgments" arrived at through gym- 
 nastics are of vital importance to a well educated mem- 
 ber of society? I do not. I could not bring myself to 
 advocate taking up the children's time with gymnastics, 
 if I considered that these conceptions and judgments 
 were the chief benefit they would derive from it. I 
 would not have my own children "complete their edu- 
 cation" through gymnastics, did I not think that there 
 were more vital questions involved. I do believe that 
 the training of the senses, the development of concep- 
 tions, etc., through gymnastics is the very least educa- 
 tional gain to be derived from it, and also do I believe 
 it better for the cause of physical education that we 
 
Why Do We Teach Gymr\astlcs7 15 
 
 treat the direct increments in that line as mere inci- 
 dentals, which may well be put in parentheses when we 
 array the benefits of gymnastics. We must acknowledge 
 that they are secured better, quicker, and more com- 
 pletely by other branches in our schools. I do not deny 
 them. Nor does anybody. But I believe that our Ger- 
 man friends are making a great tactical mistake in lay- 
 ing such stress on these matters. Rather might we all 
 join hands in attacking the problem from a different 
 standpoint. 
 
 The time is past when the school worked mainly for 
 the development of thought. Everywhere the demand is 
 growing that the school shall form character first of all. 
 But what is character? I do not know that anyone has 
 ever given a perfectly satisfactory definition of the term. 
 We might perhaps say, however, that it is the general 
 attitude of the individual to life, shown by his knowledge 
 and feeling, and by the manner in which he reacts. In 
 fact, [the mode of reaction seems to be the essential fac- 
 tor in character. And hence, character-building means 
 training in proper reaction. It means the development 
 of volition first of all. And if so, motor training is the 
 sine qua non of character formation, because the motor 
 organs are the organs of the will. The school now ad- 
 mittedly strives to develop will by the various forms 
 of motor training in its curriculum. So far, so good. 
 But this motor training seems to me to be altogether 
 inadequate. The leading pedagogues, in advocating 
 motor training, have long said that they wished to "send 
 the whole boy to school." But it seems to me that the 
 training in vogue takes him apart, training one piece 
 of him during this lesson, another part during that, so 
 to speak. The whole boy is never trained at once, so 
 far as I can see. His hand, his eye, his brain are all 
 
16 Why Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 trained ; other parts also. But they are never really put 
 to working all together in a hearty all-sided, simul- 
 taneous co-operation with each other. The brain is 
 used to guide the hand, the eye is called in to help, but 
 when is the boy as a whole, with head and arms and legs 
 and trunk, called upon to launch himself as a unit at 
 something, against something, for the purpose of making 
 it yield by the whole force and weight there is in him? 
 When is the boy encouraged to pit himself against some- 
 thing that is really offering a formidable obstacle to his 
 will? When is he required to do something by which 
 he may come to an understanding of his ability to over- 
 come difficulties by putting his whole mind and body 
 upon it? Our civilization demands the strictest atten- 
 tion to details. This, I believe, the present school strives 
 admirably to secure. But the present time demands 
 something more than that. Fifteen-dollar-a-week 
 clerks, bookkeepers, salesmen, artisans, people who 
 "fill" their places by attending to the details immediately 
 demanded of them are numerous enough. But the 
 complaint is heard everywhere that ambition to rise, 
 and ability to rise beyond mere drudgery, are rare. We 
 need more than anything else people with enthusiasm 
 for their vocations, with an eye open for their mani- 
 fold relations to everything around them, with ability 
 not only to do the task allotted to them in their little 
 pigeonholes, but ready to widen out, to grasp new op- 
 portunities, to assume greater duties, to do work outside 
 the exact limits for which they are immediately com- 
 pensated, to become leaders. "There is always room at 
 the top," because so few are really willing to work hard 
 to gain the top. Everybody is inclined to think that 
 what is not immediately prescribed as his particular duty 
 should be left for somebody else to do, and the result 
 
Why Do We TeacK Gymnastics? I"? 
 
 is that so very much remains undone which should and 
 could be done. The school should educate not to mere 
 thinking and reflection, nor to mere small activities, 
 but should create initiative, willingness, desire, anxiety 
 to do anything which ought to be done and comes 
 wdthin one's ken. The school should give the pupil that 
 indefinable tendency to take hold which is so generally 
 lacking. Our education is responsible for the fact that 
 the office boy sits still until ordered about, instead of 
 finding something to do, and thus showing that he is 
 interested not merely in his weekly stipend, but in the 
 affairs of the firm. It is the fault of our education that 
 the attendants in a hotel foyer are so remarkably anx- 
 ious not to carry a satchel, that they let the guest wait, 
 if it is not the turn of the one nearest at hand. Our 
 education is to blame that laws are not enforced, be- 
 cause nobody wants to bother about it. You may not 
 think it shows dignity for a district attorney to raid 
 gambling places with a sledge-hammer ; but you are 
 yourself responsible for it because you refuse to do your 
 little share in compelling respect for the laws. You make 
 the laws, and see them violated daily, without really car- 
 ing to see them enforced. If anybody tries to enforce 
 them by means not to your fancy you grumble, criticise, 
 find fault, and there you end. We have too many of that 
 kind of citizens. We have too little active work. One 
 of our citizens, much in the public eye of late, has re- 
 cently expressed his preference for a healthy and active 
 devil as compared to an angel down with nervous pros- 
 tration. I think more of us are coming to that opinion 
 every day. "The strenuous life" has been preached to 
 us considerably of late years. It is beginning to find 
 more and more admirers. That is what we want. And 
 we are coming to it. Our civilization forces us to it. 
 
18 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 President Roosevelt and Emperor William, J. P. Mor- 
 gan and Charles M. Schwab, cowboys and the new gen- 
 eration of college presidents, you may criticise them all, 
 but in your heart you respect them because they are do- 
 ing something, while you are half asleep. We must 
 have more men of that type. And it is our educational 
 system which has the responsibihty of furnishing them. 
 But we must then have something else in our schools 
 than we have at present. We have all heard the com- 
 plaint that a college education unfits for practical life. 
 While this statement is probably exaggerated, without 
 doubt there is a kernel of truth in it. The college has 
 never given us too much study, but it has given us too 
 little of life. It is, however, improving. The new genera- 
 tion will be less open to criticism in this regard. Similar 
 are the conditions in our schools. We train the will there. 
 But it is a negative rather than a positive will, a will of 
 inhibition rather than one of execution. "Don't do 
 this ! Don't do that !" A war is waged against sins of 
 commission. Sins of omission flourish. What there is 
 of training to a positive will is training in small things, 
 not unimportant but physically small, detail work, hand- 
 work, poking at test tubes, making match stands, draw- 
 ing maps. That is all very well ; it is" a necessary will 
 training. But it must be supplemented. We must have 
 wholehearted action of our whole persons, we must learn 
 to "make things hum," and to make us feel the respon- 
 sibility not merely for the little things directly assigned 
 to us, but for all that which goes on around us. 
 
 A friend of mine, an orthopedic surgeon, who em- 
 ploys gymnasts for some of his work, not long ago 
 spoke to me in terms of the highest appreciation of 
 one of them, who was a graduate of a normal school of 
 gymnastics, doctor of medicine, director of a college 
 
Why Do We TeacK Gymnastics 7 19 
 
 gymnasium. And it was not chiefly her superior knowl- 
 edge which made him place her ahead of all his other 
 assistants. It was her ability always to find something 
 to do, her inability to just "hang around." When one day 
 upon finding her kneeling in a dark closet with scrub- 
 bing brush and a pail of water, he remonstrated with her 
 on the necessity of leaving such labor to others, she 
 simply declared that at that particular ni'oment she had 
 nothing else to do, that it was desirable that it should 
 be done, and that she probably did it better than any of 
 the servants anyhow. That is the spirit our education 
 should give. Nothing too low, nothing too high for us 
 to pitch into. If that spirit is cultivated, if will of that 
 kind is made, our nation is safe. We may go astray 
 sometimes, but we will surely find our way back. In 
 the mean time we live ; we cannot die from inactivity 
 with that spirit in us. But we cannot get that spirit by 
 talking about it, or of our plain duty, or by letting the 
 pupils talk of it, or act in a small way. Associations 
 of school boys, putting the discipline in the hands of the 
 pupils, boys' congresses and similar means, are all good 
 for forming character, but most of such features result 
 in talk or in limited activities. It is an excellent training 
 of character to have a culprit brought before a judge of 
 his own class, to be prosecuted for his transgressions by 
 his comrade to the right, while his classmate to the left 
 acts as his defender, but the fight for justice then is after 
 all only a wordy fencing bout. ( The college boys take 
 more pride in winning a football match than an oratorical 
 contest, I believe. Why? Because youth is nearer to 
 physical nature than to intellectual life. The individual 
 repeats in himself the phylogenetic development, men- 
 tally and morally, as well as physically. ^We must choose 
 our educational means to conform to the individual's 
 
20 Why Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 development.^ We must catch his nascent periods. The 
 long period in the racial development, when most of life 
 was physical activity of a large kind, hunting, warfare, 
 corresponds to a long period in the ontogeny. The 
 interests arising then must be cared for and guided. 
 If suppressed in their nascent periods, they will disap- 
 pear forever. And these interests are mighty forces to 
 create will of a wholesouled, overpowering kind. We 
 cannot afford to let the growing tendencies die from 
 lack of nutrition. We cannot afford to let the fertile 
 field lie fallow. -It must be cultivated. And from it 
 shall grow strong will, fine characters, useful citizens, 
 men in a true sense. 
 
 ; To supply the large activity which I thus find neces- 
 sary for character formation I hold to be the true and 
 most important office of sports. Nothing can equal 
 them as agencies for the development of the desire "to 
 be in it," to take part, to lend a hand. No agency exists, 
 so far as I know, which is so powerful to develop pres- 
 ence of mind and courage, physical courage, in which 
 we are so sadlv deficient, and which is a breeder of 
 moral courage and right doing. Last summer some 
 young men were out for a lark. One of them, a nice 
 young fellow, had during the previous winter been 
 thrown much with men not in the habit of weighing their 
 words so very carefully. He used various expletives not 
 allowed in the most select parlors. A forceful "Jack, stop 
 that !" soon came from one of the others, a college ath- 
 lete. I do not know who was the better man of the two, 
 I do not pit one against the other in Sunday-school book 
 fashion. This athlete may, for all I know, have been in- 
 ferior to "Jack" in many respects.' But this I do know, 
 that when the former found that the latter did not be- 
 have in accordance with his ideas of what was proper, 
 
Why Do We Teach Gymnastics'? 21 
 
 he immediately/ acted upon his convictions. That is 
 courage. That is character. Those few words were to 
 me more significant of the good he had got out of his 
 athletic training than the whole number of medals and 
 trophies bestowed upon him. Because I believe that the 
 confidence in self, the desire to act, the will, the courage 
 shown in these words of his, could be traced back to 
 the athletic field. Had he been fed simply on lectures 
 in ethics, he might have blushingly withdrawn from the 
 company for fear of being contaminated. Passive virtue 
 may be all right in its way, but it is aggressive combative- 
 ness which carries the day, whether for good or evil. Itj 
 is a positive will we need. That is what I believe prop- 
 erly regulated sports can give. The common school 
 branches do not suffice. Manual training is too one-sided 
 and circumscribed to suffice. Properly conducted gym- 
 nastics can supply a great deal of it. But not all of the 
 gymnastics that we see in our gymnasia is fit for it. 
 Not even all of that which from other viewpoints is ex- 
 cellent. Gymnastics gains efficiency in this regard in 
 the same degree that it approaches the sports. It is. the 
 jumping, and vaulting, and climbing, and tumbling, and 
 giant swings, and the like, which are producers of this 
 particular kind of large will, the producers of courage 
 and self-reliance in the gymnastic lesson. The arm 
 stretchings and head bendings and trunk twistings and 
 exercises with dumbbells, wands, and pully weights have 
 certainly no more influence in this regard than manual 
 training. They may all supplement the sports and each 
 other, but the former ought always to be considered as 
 the chief ingredient, when the question arises for a pro- 
 gramme primarily designed for the promotion of will,| 
 courage, self-reliance. 
 
23 
 
 Why Do We Teach Gymrvastics? 
 
 X 
 
 I therefore come to the conckision that though gym- 
 nastics in our schools can, and should be, so arranged 
 and conducted as to have a direct and immediate influ- 
 ence on mind development, there are other agencies, in 
 the motor training as well as outside its field, which 
 transcend it in importance, and that gymnastics cannot 
 be successfully defended merely or mainly because of 
 this direct influence. If we endeavor to do so we only 
 invite a comparison with these other agencies which 
 cannot but be detrimental to gymnastics. For training 
 of sense perception, manual training is better ; through 
 language, history, mathematics, the natural sciences, we 
 acquire "a multitude of conceptions and judgments," in 
 comparison with which those acquired by gymnastics 
 fade into insignificance; by all subjects in the school, 
 rightly taught, we train attention to detail and devotion 
 to duty just as well as by gymnastics ; by well regulated 
 sports we develop that larger, positive will of which I 
 have spoken to a greater extent than by gymnastics in 
 the true sense. 
 
 I do not deny the direct beneficial effects on the mind 
 of gymnastics. Nobody does. The close inter-relation 
 between mind and body is too well established to allow 
 any Quixotic endeavor in that direction. I simply wish 
 to warn as to exaggerations in the claims ; that is all. 
 Do not let us speak of the direct benefits on the develop- 
 ment of the mind and its various "faculties" (which the 
 philosophers no longer recognize as separate entities) 
 as if we wished to make the impression that nothing but 
 gymnastics is worth anything as an educational agency, 
 and that the only or chief benefit from gymnastics lies in 
 this field. For this is not true. 
 
 In the preceding paragraphs I have endeavored to 
 give reasons for my opinions. These "reasons" are not 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gytnrvastlcs'? 33 
 
 free from weakness. I know it welk They do not prove 
 me right. But the question is not one susceptible of ob- 
 jective proof. The data are lacking. Such data as we 
 possess showing mental development as a result of 
 motor training in general, or gymnastics in particular, 
 do not help us materially. The improvement noticed 
 may as well be interpreted to be the result of improve- 
 ment in the nutritive functions and, consequently, as in- 
 direct and mediate results. Our position in the matter 
 must essentially rest upon faith, not on objective proofs. 
 And if the latter are demanded the burden certainly 
 must fall upon those who make a disputable assertion, 
 not on those who deny it, as not proven. 
 
 But in claiming that certain advocates of gymnastics 
 take a too extreme position when demanding its recog- 
 nition, because of supposed direct educational influences, 
 I wish to emphasize that there is one kind of education 
 which to the greatest extent perhaps comes directly and 
 immediately from motor training, and more particularly 
 from gymnastics. But this education is not mental or 
 moral in- the Strict sense. It is decidedly physical, ma- 
 terial,' corporeal? I me ajL_£dLu£alicu£-ia--e€>--OJp4iHation. 
 With co-ordination we mean the harmonious working 
 together of a large number of muscles, simultaneously 
 or consecutively, for the execution of a given act with 
 the least efifort. The physical basis of the growing mus- 
 cular co-ordination is the development of the governing 
 nerve cells wath their connecting links, and the habitua- 
 tion of these cells to respond in the same manner, with 
 the same strength, in the same sequence, when stimuli 
 of the same kind reach them. Muscular co-ordination is 
 a result of the development and the education of the 
 nerve centres. This comes directly from repetition of 
 movements. And the movements are regulated by more 
 
24 Why Do We Teach Gymrvastics? 
 
 or less unconscious sensory impressions and judgments 
 based on the memory of previous ones. We may, of 
 course, speak of this as a mental development. It differs 
 perhaps, not in kind but in degree, from what we usually 
 denote as mentality. But the automatism involved in 
 complete co-ordination seems to me to be just as closely 
 related to the amoebic movements on the one hand and 
 to such phenomena as geotropism, heliotropism and 
 chemotropism on the other, and I doubt our right to 
 speak of it or of them as mental phenomena in the true 
 sense. The difficulty, of course, lies in the impossibility 
 to draw a boundary line between the purely physical and 
 the purely psychical fields. Such line does not exist, 
 and when we, for the sake of convenience, make an arti- 
 ficial division, we cannot agree where to place the de- 
 marcation. 
 
 But whatever our viewpoint may be, development of 
 co-ordination is a part of education, and it is directly 
 gained by motor training. Manual training and similar 
 forms bring about co-ordination to limited activities, and 
 in this result it approaches training in manual trades, 
 though it, of course, is more all-sided than the latter, 
 which has its aim only in a particular movement or suc- 
 cession of movements. Sports of various kinds are, as 
 a rule, more far-reaching in their results, but even in 
 them the co-ordination becomes more or less special- 
 ized. Of all forms of motor training gymnastics, proper- 
 ly conceived and carried out, addresses itself to the most 
 all-sided co-ordination, and furnishes, therefore, the 
 most fundamental education in co-ordination. The im- 
 portance of its many sided influence is to be found in 
 many directions, as, for instance, in a general saving of 
 energy in whatever we undertake, in maintenance of 
 postures, correct from an esthetic as well as from an 
 
^- 
 
 Why Do We TeacK Gyrrvnastlcs 7 25 
 
 hygienic viewpoint, and so on. To give the fundamental 
 training to co-ordination I hold to be the main direct 
 educative function of gymnastics, which must make 
 itself felt in all forms of motion applied to definite 
 external purpose, be it play or work. 
 
 With this I believe that practically all is said on the 
 direct educational benefits from gymnastics. But there 
 are other benefits to be taken into consideration, which 
 we gain directly, and from which spring indirectly in- 
 creased! power of sensation, attention, perception, con- 
 ception, volition and so on. - . 
 
 Man, as a neuromuscular machine, is the material to 
 be formed by our education. This machine is meant for 
 energy-expenditure. It must be so handled by the edu- 
 cator that the energy will be expended in the most 
 profitable manner and in the most desirable direction. 
 The first condition for this is that it shall be kept in good 
 repair. The repair is made by a set of organs which sup- 
 ply not only the material with which to compensate the 
 loss of substance, but which also supply the potential en- 
 ergy which the machine changes into kinetic form. The 
 very first condition for success in our educajtii^al pur- 
 pose is that the organs furnishing and distributing po- 
 tential energy, and those which are to remove the refuse, 
 be kept in good repair. Behind education this necessary 
 condition stands, namely, that the organs of digestion, 
 circulation, respiration, excretion and so on be kept 
 in a high degree of health and regulated in such a man- 
 ner as to work in harmony with each other and with the 
 neuromuscular system,/ The knov/ledge of the relation 
 between a healthy mind and a healthy body has come 
 down to us from the ancients. But it is only in our own 
 day that it has been put to the test by actual measure- 
 ments ; and while we formerly considered in a general 
 
26 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 way physical health and strength, i. e., good nutrition, as 
 necessary for mental health and strength, we now have 
 at our disposal at least some results of investigations 
 showing definitely that mental ability corresponds close- 
 ly to the height and weight of the individual. As a pre- 
 liminary to our education, then, we must consider it our 
 duty to maintain the nutrition at as high a level as pos- 
 sible. But the actions of the organs involved are not, to 
 any great extent at least, under the direct influence of 
 our will. Hence we cannot properly speak of their edu- 
 cation, a term that always presupposes volition. Any 
 influence which we may bring to bear upon them in an 
 indirect way lies outside of the educational field, strictly 
 speaking. We call such influences hygienic when they 
 are suitable to maintain and develop a normal nutritive 
 function, and therapeutic when they are effective in 
 restoring to its normal state a deranged function, ill 
 adjusted to the conditions of life. These questions, then, 
 confront us quite naturally in this connection : Has the 
 school, besides its direct educational duties, any obliga- 
 tion to fulfill as to hygiene and therapy? If so, do any of 
 these oyigations fall to the special lot of the teacher of 
 gymnastics ? And how extensive are these obligations ? 
 I imagine that there is unanimity of opinion regard- 
 ing the responsibility of the school to the extent that 
 everybody recognizes it as a perfectly legitimate demand 
 that the health of the pupil must not deteriorate from 
 any cause over which the school has control. This de- 
 mand is even more imperative than that for positive edu- 
 cational results. Whatever failures the school may show 
 in the latter, it must not fail in doing everything in its 
 power to return the pupil to the parental home in as 
 healthy condition as at matriculation. Satisfactory 
 drainage, good ventilation, proper furniture, suitable al- 
 
Why Do We Teach'Gymrvastlcs!? 27 
 
 ternation between work and rest, a judicious choice of 
 studies according to the abilities of the pupil, a presenta- 
 tion corresponding to his development, and hundreds of 
 other factors are to be given due consideration. The 
 duty of the gymnastic teacher in this general school 
 hygiene is just as pressing as that of any other teacher, 
 but no more so. That he, sometimes and somewhere, 
 may take upon himself to appear as a special advocate 
 of these matters is as natural as the fact that there are 
 numerous teachers and directors who do not feel called 
 upon to take a particularly active part in that kind of 
 work. If he does so, he ought to be commended, not 
 sneered at as posing for an expert in school hygiene. He 
 only fulfills a duty as he sees it, because there is nobody 
 else to do it. But this duty is a general one, a duty 
 which falls to him as an olBcial of the school, or as a 
 citizen, if you please, not as a teacher of gymnastics. In 
 the latter capacity he must see to it that in his particular 
 part of the school building conditions are the best pos- 
 sible from a hygienic viewpoint, that nothing shall be 
 used there which can be definitely shown to be detri- 
 mental to the general health of the pupil or prejudicial 
 to any organ or function. Hygienic principles must, as 
 Dr. Arnold says, serve us as contra-indications. They 
 shall save us from using injurious movements as exer- 
 cises. This is so imperative that to it everything else must 
 yield. Thus we have here the first guide for our gym- 
 nastic selection. If any movement, combination of 
 movements, or sequence of movements be found to have 
 a definite deleterious influence upon the pupil from a 
 hygienic point of view it must be ruthlessly discarded, 
 be its educational value great or small. Unhygienic 
 forms must be rigorously excluded, but the residue left 
 after such a sifting process may be utiHzed, and if it be 
 
28 Why Do We Teach Gymrvastics? 
 
 utilized it must be applied strictly according to peda- 
 gogic principles. This is a statement to which I believe 
 all will agree, whatever the system to which they owe 
 allegiance. But all difficulties are not thereby swept 
 aside. Even if the statement is simple and acceptable 
 to all in the form given, it contains at least two points 
 out of which disagreements may arise, viz., the presup- 
 position that movements exist which may work injury 
 to the system; and even if this be accepted as true we 
 may still differ as to which movements are injurious and 
 which not. As is well known, the Swedish gymnasts 
 have always contended for the exclusion of certain 
 movements, as being injurious. Dr. Arnold, represent- 
 ing the German school, takes the same ground. The 
 apostles of the all-possibility principle must, of course, 
 have denied the possibility of injury resulting from any 
 movements whatsoever, if they meant anything at all 
 by their assertion that "everything possible is rational." 
 But in our day advocates of this principle are rare in- 
 deed. Dr. Geo. W. Fitz probably comes as near to up- 
 holding this defunct principle as any one. He is on rec- 
 ord as believing that "probably no exercise is really 
 harmful,'" though he distinguishes between such exer- 
 cises as are best and such as are not so good. The use 
 of exercises "not so good" is, of course, undesirable for 
 this reason, if for nothing else, that they take time away 
 from those which are best. But without dwelling upon 
 that aspect of the question, it may perhaps be well, in 
 view of the fact that some may be found who do not 
 give unequivocal assent to the proposition that certain 
 exercises are injurious, to inquire into the truth of the 
 matter. 
 
 1. Proceedings of the Am. Ass. for the Adv. of Phys. Educ, 
 at its seventh annual meeting, p. 204. 
 
Why Do We Teach Gynrvrvastlcs? 29 
 
 Let us then note that Dr. Fitz docs not say that 
 probably no movement is really harmful. He uses the 
 expression "exercise." But what does he mean by "ex- 
 ercise" in this connection? If he means "movements se- 
 lected as regard to time and space so as to correspond 
 to the conditions and needs of the organism" there is, of 
 course, nothing to say against it, because that means 
 that the movements so selected are not only non-injuri- 
 ous, but beneficial. But he certainly cannot mean that. 
 It would be nonsensical. We have no right to believe 
 that he would be guilty of such tautology. Apparently 
 he means that among the postures and movements 
 which are habitually used by gymnastic teachers as exer- 
 cises there is probably none which is really harmful. I 
 cannot bring myself to the belief that he takes to-day 
 the same position that DuBois Reymond took forty 
 years ago, viz., that any possible movement is non-in- 
 jurious and may properly be used as an exercise. Such 
 a position would be so absolutely untenable that it 
 would not be defended by anybody with the slightest 
 knowledge of gymnastics. He does mean — let us at 
 least suppose so — that intuition, which we all use more 
 or less for guidance in our selection, in default of knowl- 
 edge, practically never leads us astray, but that we all 
 and each of us may well look with pride on our work 
 and say : Behold, it is all very good ! 
 
 I am of a different opinion. I believe that practical- 
 ly every lesson, even by the very best teachers, contains 
 numerous forms which should be excluded as really 
 harmful, and which will be excluded with growing 
 knowledge. 
 
 Every one, of course, recognizes that practically 
 every movement may become really harmful if its dura- 
 tion or the energy with which it is executed exceeds a 
 
30 Why Do W© Teach Gymrvastics? 
 
 certain limit. Where this limit is to be placed is a diffi- 
 cult and far-reaching problem, but all of us ought to 
 admit that the limit is not infrequently passed in our 
 gymnasia. Every one recognizes, equally as a matter of 
 course, that no movement, whatever its form, is really 
 harmful if executed once, twice, or at rare intervals. 
 But this does not prove Dr. Fitz to be right. "Exercise" 
 does not imply the occasional performance of a move- 
 ment. It means systematic and persistent practice. And 
 therefore it is inconceivable to me how Dr. Fitz can 
 maintain that no "exercise" is "really harmful." 
 
 At another place,^ Dr. Fitz undertakes "a discussion 
 of the claims of Swedish gymnastics," as he understands 
 them, and endeavors to refute a majority of them. In 
 the proper connection I shall try to show to what ex- 
 tent he fails to do so. Here I take up the matter only 
 to give an idea how far this author differs from the 
 Swedish gymnasts in one particular point, viz., the ex- 
 istence of injurious movements. According to him, the 
 Swedes claim that "movements for exercises must be 
 non-injurious, that is, must not contract chest or deform 
 body, cause faulty positions. ..." I do not know the 
 exact place in the works referred to by him where this 
 claim is made, but it is not necessary to compare it with 
 the original statement, because I am sure that every 
 Swedish gymnast is perfectly willing to subscribe to it 
 in the form given by Dr. Fitz, provided no other mean- 
 ing be read into these words than common sense dic- 
 tates. It is true that the words quoted may, if we de- 
 sire, for the sake of mere argument, be twisted into a 
 sweeping assertion that a movement in order to be non- 
 injurious must not, even for the briefest moment, cause 
 
 1. Proceedings and Papers of the Sargent Normal School Asso- 
 ciation. Season of 1899-1900. 
 
WKy Do Wo Teach Gyrrvrvastics? 31 
 
 a faulty attitude or a depression of the ribs. But I do 
 not see why such asininity shall necessarily be ascribed 
 to the Swedish gymnasts. Why may they not be con- 
 sidered as men of average intelligence, who in their turn 
 presuppose average intelligence in their readers, who 
 choose their words accordingly, and who expect to have 
 them scrutinized by fair-minded critics, not by those who 
 delight in painting Beelzebub on the wall for the pleas- 
 ure of flogging him ? Dr. Fitz says : "We have to con- 
 sider that movements which compress the chest or which 
 bring about deforming postures, if they merely carry 
 the ribs or spine through their normal range of move- 
 ments, tend only to keep these parts flexible, provided 
 that the movements are balanced by full movements on 
 the opposite side or in the opposite direction. The es- 
 sential deforming postures to be avoided are those 
 habitual postures which remain uncorrected." In put- 
 ting this statement in opposition to the claim of the 
 Swedes, he thus intimates that the two are contradic- 
 tory. But is it necessary for the understanding of the 
 unbiased reader that we insert in the claim some modify- 
 ing words, to say that we must not "permanently, re- 
 peatedly, or for long periods compress the chest?" Is 
 not that meaning evident? I have said above that "no 
 movement, whatever its form (including consequently 
 those by which the chest is compressed !), is really harm- 
 ful if executed once, twice, or at rare intervals." And 
 this is the position of all Swedes. There is nothing in 
 Dr. Fitz's statement which refutes anything said or 
 written by Swedish gymnasts, to my knowledge. It is, all 
 of it, good gymnastic doctrine as taught by them. That 
 is — on the face of it. To the thoughts implied, to the 
 conclusions which might be drawn, and which are drawn, 
 objections can and must be taken. They do not claim 
 
33 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 that in itself it is injurious to depress the ribs or to flex 
 the spine in any direction under the proviso made by 
 Dr. Fitz. Like him, they beHeve that such movements 
 tend to keep the parts flexible. Like him, they believe 
 that these movements should be counteracted by move- 
 ments in the opposite direction. They believe, however, 
 that the daily work outside of the gymnasium is to a 
 great extent such as to cause costal depression. They 
 believe that the effects of this work are noticeable in the 
 general appearance of the pupils. They believe that this 
 is one of the habitual postures which remain uncor- 
 rected. They believe that, for the average individual, 
 there is no need of exercising in order to increase the 
 amplitude of the ribs downward, the daily work taking 
 ample care of that. They believe that the time given up 
 to gymnastics in our schools is so brief that no time 
 should be given to exercises which compress the chest, 
 but in all exercises attention should be paid to things 
 more necessary. Dr. Fitz says that the chest compres- 
 sors must be counterbalanced by other movements. Very 
 well ! Counteract the chest compressors of daily life, but 
 do not bring in any new ones which again need to be 
 counteracted. 
 
 Personally, I further claim that during a long his- 
 torical period of gymnastic development this gymnastic 
 doctrine was overlooked, except by the pupils of Ling. 
 I claim that the old German Turner paid little or no 
 heed to it. I claim that it was Rothstein's warfare 
 against the German methods which was the most potent 
 factor in introducing good form in the German gym- 
 nasia, thereby abolishing a whole series of "really harm- 
 ful" movements. I claim that it is the direct influence of 
 the Swedes in this country and their indirect influence 
 through the Germans which has made possible the ac- 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gyrrv nasties 7 
 
 33 
 
 ceptance by the Americans of the proviso given by Dr. 
 Fitz, that the movements must be "balanced by full 
 movements on the opposite side or in the opposite di- 
 rection." I claim that the fact that everybody now 
 admits these chest compressors to be injurious with- 
 out counteraction is due to the activity of the 
 Swedes. I thus claim it as a particularly Swedish doc- 
 trine which Dr. Fitz and a host of others have been 
 forced to accept after a vain struggle of nearly a hun- 
 dred years. I claim that anyone who endeavors to make 
 it appear that this statement is directed against the 
 Swedish gymnasts shows a really sublime ignorance of 
 the historical development of the subject. 
 
 The Swedes, in general, further claim that even in 
 our day, notwithstanding the acceptance in words of 
 this genuine Swedish doctrine, a great deal of the gym- 
 nastic practice contradicts it. Which shows that the 
 love expressed for the doctrine is only skin deep and 
 has not entered into the very souls of our gymnasts. This 
 statement of course can not be proven by mere words. 
 The proofs must be gathered on the floor. But go into 
 a gymnasium, and you will see small children bending 
 their heads and necks forward as an exercise, when they 
 are doing that same deforming exercise hundreds of 
 times in their schoolrooms, their homes, and on the play- 
 ground. You may see the same little tots stretching 
 their arms forward as an exercise, before they have 
 eained such control of their shoulder girdles as to be 
 able to prevent the shoulder-blades to get out of their 
 proper places. You may see a man lying on his back 
 on the floor without support for his feet trying to raise 
 his body, thereby necessitating compression of the chest 
 as an exercise. You may see boys vying with each other 
 in chinning, every one of them compressing his chest 
 
34 WKy Do We Teach Gymrvastics 7 
 
 instead of expanding it, because it is simply a ques- 
 tion of setting a record in the number of times the poor 
 fellows can raise themselves. Nobody will for a mo- 
 ment contend that it is "really harmful" to fold the arms 
 behind the back, but everybody with a vestige of sense 
 would nowadays object strenuously to the habits of 
 some years ago of demanding that the school children 
 should maintain that posture during recitations. And 
 I am sorry to say that the habit still prevails here and 
 there even in our best school systems. Nobody claims 
 that it is "really harmful" to place a wand behind the 
 shoulders and bend forward to the position shown in 
 Fig. 1. But I for one believe sincerely not only that no 
 need of the organism is served, but that it is "really 
 harmful" to make sixteen such movements in sequence 
 in one lesson, as Mr. Reuter recommends in his "Wand 
 Exercises,"' from which the figure is borrowed. I be- 
 lieve it is "really harmful" because it is conducive to bad 
 posture. Nobody will maintain that any one of the pos- 
 tures or movements depicted by Mr. Ballin" and of 
 which a few examples are here reproduced, as figures 2, 
 3, 4, 5 and 6, is "really harmful" if taken occasionally, 
 but deliberately to practise them as exercises I hold to be 
 decidedly detrimental to the proper development of the 
 body. 
 
 I believe it will be well to quote from Mr. Ballin's 
 book in order that we understand the position taken by 
 him and many others. He says : 
 
 "Now, every logical thinker will be far from demand- 
 ing that the school should be an orthopaedic institu- 
 tion. A system, which provides for exercises on the 
 
 1. Gymnastics. A textbook of the German-American system of 
 gymnastics. Edited by W. A. Steelier. Boston, 1896, p. 69. 
 
 2. Hans Ballin: Gymnastics in the schoolroom. Erie, Penn. 
 1891. 
 
Fig. 1 
 
 Fig. 3 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 B^ 
 
 ^^/jHwji 
 
 
 flB 
 
 ^^^^H^^ft iT' 
 
 ^[[ 
 
 ^^^^^^^■- - a:"' 
 
 ^2M'\ 
 
 rf^^jBBHB 
 
 ^-^^m. ^n 
 
 ■^M?.' ^^«fiPf*»si^^is — \:^ 
 
 
 ^--ASiii^ 
 
 ?--'e'^^^»i"-3 
 
 .H.^T^ 
 
 HBHSbBRMB^^ X"-''''''i<cA>')^ja^*« . 
 
 Fig. 3 
 
 Fig. 4 
 
 Fig. 5 
 
 Fig. G 
 
;WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 35 
 
 sanitary principle only, is of injury in the schoolroom, 
 and its advocates have never been aware of the many 
 educational demands necessary in the instruction of 
 physical culture. Though exclusive orthopaedic exer- 
 cises, as represented at present by some so-called sys- 
 tems, should unmercifully be expelled from the school- 
 room, yet provision should be made to not instruct the 
 pupil intellectually at the expense of his health, nor 
 weaken him by the exercise of the necessary discipline. 
 Health, by the practice of bodily training, shall rather be 
 maintained than restored." 
 
 There is nothing in these words to which anybody 
 can take exception. There is no "so-called system" 
 which uses "exclusive orthopaedic exercises," -but if 
 there were, all would agree with the author that they 
 should "unmercifully be expelled from the schoolroom." 
 The author does not mention any system, though he, of 
 course, means the Swedish, which he thinks "provides 
 for exercises on the sanitary principle only," and the 
 advocates of which, he thinks, "have never been aware 
 of the many educational demands necessary in the in- 
 struction of physical culture." All Swedes agree with 
 Mr. Ballin's words. None of them will agree to his 
 thoughts as manifested by his book. They claim that 
 such exercises as those given in the reproduced pictures 
 do not "maintain health." They breed disease. They 
 are "of injury in a schoolroom." They must "unmerci- 
 fully be expelled." They are examples of "really harm- 
 ful" exercises, in spite of Dr. Fitz's contention that no 
 such exist. They interfere with the normal functions of 
 the body. They create deformities. They are beautiful ex- 
 amples of what rational gymnastics ought not to be. To 
 bar them out and to substitute others which better assist 
 the normal growth and development of the pupils, is not 
 
36 WKy Do We Teach Gyrrvrvastics? 
 
 to use "exclusive orthopaedic exercises." It is sim- 
 ply to help in the maintenance of health, which Mr. 
 Ballin says is his object, and which certainly ought to be 
 the object of every teacher. 
 
 Perhaps some will claim that the pictures do not rep- 
 resent Mr. Ballin's ideas of how the exercises should be 
 executed, that he himself would be the first one to object 
 to the erroneous forms which appear in such large num- 
 ber in his book, and of which the reproduced pictures are 
 only examples, and, further, that it is merely a fault- 
 finding propensity of the present writer which finds its 
 expression in such criticism as this. But such errors 
 are altogether too common, not only in the numerous 
 books published, but in the schoolroom and the gym- 
 nasia, to permit us to think that they depend merely 
 or to a great extent upon the difficulties which always 
 meet us when we wish to secure absolutely correct pict- 
 ures. And the author in question, himself, claims that 
 "the great advantage of this book over all other books 
 of the same character is that the many illustrations do 
 away with long explanations," while nowhere does he 
 call attention to possible errors in these illustrations. 
 He allows and encourages the public school teachers, 
 for whom the book is intended, and who have no tech- 
 nical knowledge, to draw their inspiration from these 
 pictures. It seems, therefore, as if Mr. Ballin, who at 
 the time had the responsibility for the gymnastics in a 
 public school system, was perfectly satisfied with these 
 forms, i. e., that he could not distinguish between a 
 beneficial and a "really harmful" movement. 
 
 The short meaning of this long discussion, then, is 
 that there exist "exercises" which are really harmful, 
 and that hygienic principles must serve us as guides in 
 our selection, as contra-indications of what not to use. 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymrvastlcs? 
 
 37 
 
 The criticism is frequently made against the Swed- 
 ish system of gymnastics that its advocates conjure up 
 imaginary dangers, that they make their selection with 
 such anxious care that their work becomes a mere tis- 
 sue of formalism and pedantry, that it becomes poverty- 
 stricken, that there is nothing left for the active child or 
 youth to work on. Here is not the place to take up 
 these charges. They are only brought forth in this con- 
 nection to emphasize the fact that to the Swedes 
 hygienic principles are of great value as contra-indica- 
 tions. The statement regarding chest depression is only 
 an example. Whether the application of hygienic prin- 
 ciples in this particular instance, or generally, when 
 there is question of selection to guard against injurious 
 exercises, is right or wrong, must be left to each indi- 
 vidual teacher to decide for himself. 
 
 But the Swedish school of gymnastics claims that 
 hygienic principles shall serve, if possible, a more impor- 
 tant role than merely the negative one of guarding 
 against injuries which may be contracted within the 
 walls of the gymnasium as an immediate result of the 
 exercises being composed of "really harmful" move- 
 ments. Education having for its purpose to make the 
 most of what there is in man, to draw out his powers, 
 to develop them for activity in life, it would indeed be 
 well if we had it in our power as teachers to guard him 
 also against such evil influences which in the form of 
 unsanitary and unhygienic conditions meet him outside 
 the gymnasium, by increasing his powers of resistance, 
 his vigor, by increasing the powers of the organs serving 
 the various nutritive functions. The teacher of Latin 
 and mathematics, history and music can do little or 
 nothing in that direction. His work is mainly negative 
 so far as hygiene is concerned. The gymnastic teacher, 
 
38 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 however, has at his disposal a hygienic agency which 
 can make itself felt outside the gymnasium. Therefore, 
 and because health precedes education in importance, it 
 is the basic dogma of tlie Swedish gymnasts that no 
 system of gymnastics which does not strive for the very 
 highest degree of health can be called a rational one, or 
 have any claim to recognition. They believe, and strive 
 to make their belief live in their practice, according to 
 their ability, that we have no right to limit ourselves to 
 the mere passive care which consists in applying 
 hygienic principles merely or mainly as contra-indica- 
 tions against what not to do, but shall use them also to 
 the extent of our powers in a more active manner as 
 indications of what to do. This, they claim, is the only 
 correct foundation upon which a system of gymnastics 
 for any civilized people can and shall be built. 
 
 Is this an erroneous conception of the purpose of 
 gymnastics in our educational institutions? I ask Dr. 
 Edward M. Hartwell, whom I suppose we all recognize 
 as one of the foremost students of gymnastic questions, 
 and he answers : "The ends of exercise may be charac- 
 terized, in a general way, as first, the promotion of 
 health, and second, the formation of proper habits of 
 action.'" I ask Dr. Wm. T. Harris, United States 
 Commissioner of Education, and surely one of our lead- 
 ing pedagogues, and from him come the words : "Physi- 
 cal training, I take it, is a part of the subject of 
 hygiene," ' and again, "The student now studies this 
 problem broadly, and focuses his attention on this rela- 
 tion of the voluntary to the involuntary, and tries to dis- 
 cover whereby the vital organs, — the lungs, the heart, 
 the stomach, all the digestive organs, the kidneys, — in 
 
 1. American Physical Education Review. Vol. II., p. 140. 
 
 2. Report of the Physical Training Conference in Boston, 1889, 
 p. 1. 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics 7 39 
 
 short, how all the functions that are involuntary in their 
 action may be assisted and influenced by voluntary ac- 
 tion and motion.'" I ask the pedagogues and school 
 officials who have been instrumental in introducing 
 physical training into our school systems for the rea- 
 sons moving them. I ask the parents what they be- 
 lieve to be the benefits to be derived from school gym- 
 nastics. I ask the teachers of gymnastics themselves 
 what they are trying to gain by their work. From prac- 
 tically all of them comes the answer, plain, strong, unani- 
 mous, unequivocal : "We want to preserve the health 
 of our pupils. We want to maintain and increase their 
 vitality. We want to preserve them from the physical 
 deterioration which so often follows sedentary school 
 life. We want to keep the color in their cheeks, the elas- 
 ticity in their steps, the straightness in their backs, all of 
 which the school life threatens to abolish." That is the 
 purpose of gymnastics. That is the aim we seek. That 
 is the object for which we work. Not exclusively, to be 
 sure, but so overwhelmingly important, when compared 
 with any other, that we may well speak of the latter as 
 mere extras. 
 
 Would that each individual teacher of gymnastics 
 might ask himself earnestly for what purpose he works. 
 I am sure that the great majority, whatever the system 
 according to which they frame their exercises, will agree 
 with me that they seek primarily and directly the 
 health of their pupils, that the various mental faculties 
 can be and are favorably influenced directly by their 
 physical work, but that the main benefits accruing to 
 the intellectual and moral life of the pupils are gained 
 indirectly as a result of their increased health and vi- 
 tality." 
 
 1. Loc. cit., p. 3. 
 
40 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 But if there is such a consensus of opinion as to the 
 main object of the gymnastic instruction, and I beheve 
 there is, we might perhaps take it for granted that this 
 is the object we ought to seek. I beheve we could do so, 
 were it not for the fact that of late years a few authors 
 with influential names have appeared who have pro- 
 claimed, more or less distinctly, that gymnastics in 
 our schools is not primarily or mainly for hygienic pur- 
 poses; that it has the same essential purpose as other 
 branches, Latin, mathematics, history, etc., viz. : directly 
 and immediately to be a lever for increasing the mental 
 powers. The foremost of these men are Germans, Dr. 
 E. H. Arnold and Dr. Henry Hartung. And it is the 
 same thought which is detected in Mr. Ballin's words, 
 quoted a couple of pages back. 
 
 A few words of history here. Upon the crushing of 
 the revolution of 1848, a large number of German Tur- 
 ner, who had served the cause of liberty in accordance 
 with the principles inherited from the days of Jahn, came 
 to the United States, and, with the accession of other 
 arrivals, founded here Turnvereine, in which they per- 
 petuated their exercises, physical and mental, and which 
 they made centra of German language and German 
 habits. Here and there a German was called to take 
 charge of the physical training in educational institu- 
 tions, but being perhaps somewhat clannish, they kept 
 mainly to themselves and had no great direct and per- 
 sonal influence upon American gymnastics, which, how- 
 ever, in an indirect manner, was enriched by a large 
 number of gymnastic forms, not used here till they were 
 seen practised by the Germans. About 1880 fresh winds 
 were beginning to blow among the Americans. Physical 
 training as an integral part of the course of instruction 
 for the public schools was being agitated as never be- 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 41 
 
 fore. The Germans were, of course, interested in this 
 matter and assisted its progress. During this period of 
 budding Hfe there arrived in the country two Swedish 
 gymnasts. Posse and Enebuske. They immediately 
 threw themselves into the fight. They worked with all 
 their might to convince Americans that the system of 
 Swedish gymnastics was the one which should be 
 adopted in this country. Nothing could have been more 
 suitable to stir the Germans into life. It behooved them 
 now not only to help in the good work of introducing 
 physical training into the schools, but to prevent if pos- 
 sible the introduction of a sham, a system, which, many 
 years before, had been proven false in Germany, which 
 had unceremoniously been killed by Du Bois Reymond 
 and Virchow, but which now rose as a ghost from times 
 past. And thus we had, at all the meetings of gym- 
 nastic teachers, inevitable discussions regarding the 
 merits and demerits of the respective systems. These 
 discussions, of course, led to no result. The Americans 
 listened to them, took part in them, observed the prac- 
 tical demonstrations. A few of them became converts 
 to one system or the other. The great majority, how- 
 ever, considered that neither party was in possession of 
 the whole truth, and that a system for America could be 
 founded by borrowing ideas and gymnastic forms from 
 both and modeling them into a whole, held together by 
 new ideas born of the study of the physiological and 
 psychical development of the child. A conference of 
 physical directors was held under the auspices of the Y. 
 M. C. A. in 1891. A report of this was published in the 
 "Physical Education," a monthly edited by Dr. Luther 
 Gulick. In this report acknowledgment was made to 
 both the Swedish and the German system. Mr. Wm. 
 Stecher, in behalf of the organization of German gym- 
 
42 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 nasts, endeavored, in a letter, to show that in reahty 
 comparatively little of what had been credited to the 
 Swedes by this conference was due them and empha- 
 sized, on the other hand, such as came from the German 
 system. Editorially, Dr. Gulick answered, saying in 
 substance that we Americans want the best. We do not 
 care from where it comes. If it is Swedish, let us have 
 that. If it is German let us adopt it. But the fact is 
 that the Swedes have tried to convince us, while the Ger- 
 mans have to a great extent held aloof. We must, how- 
 ever, all pull together. Again, Mr. Stecher wrote that 
 he was sorry that the German system w"as not so well 
 known among the Americans as might be desired, which 
 was attributable in part to the fact that the Germans 
 do not believe that gymnastics can be studied from 
 books, and circumstances had never driven them to give 
 a complete exposition of their system and its methods in 
 the English language. Dr. Gulick acknowledged the 
 truth of this, but claimed that, after all, "principles can 
 and should be stated." Thus directly challenged, Mr. 
 Stecher wTote a new letter, to which Dr. Gulick re- 
 torted: "It does not seem to us that Mr. Stecher has 
 stated the principles at all. At least he has not given 
 us anything which would correspond to the principles 
 that were given as underlying the Swedish system — 
 nothing which would correspond physiologically to the 
 Swedish Day's Order, or the gymnastic progression. 
 We wish we might secure such a statement, if the prin- 
 ciples exist." ' Now entered upon the arena Dr. E. H. 
 Arnold, of New Haven, Conn., and read, at the tenth 
 annual meeting of the American Association for the 
 Advancement of Physical Education, 1895, his paper. 
 
 1. Those who are directly Interested in this controversy are re- 
 ferred to the "Physical Education," Vols. I-II. 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymr\astlcs? 43 
 
 "Some of the Principles that Guide INIe in Teaching 
 German Gymnastics," "in answer to many requests for 
 a statement of the principles underlying" this system. 
 
 The following questions and answers were exchanged 
 between Dr. Gulick, who had exerted the main influence 
 to bring forth this paper, and Dr. Arnold : 
 
 Dr. Gulick — I would like to ask Dr. Arnold if I understand 
 tliat this is a statement of the principles of the German system 
 of gynmastics, as understood and taught at the normal school 
 and as carried out by the teachers of gymnastics of the German 
 schools, or is it his owTi? 
 
 Mr. Arnold — In general, it may be said to be that of the 
 g}Tunastic school at Milwaukee. In detail, perhaps, it is my own. 
 
 Dr. Gulick — These principles have been formulated and are 
 taught at the German school at Milwaukee? 
 
 Mr. Arnold — That I do not know. 
 
 Dr. Gulick, apparently, was not satisfied with this 
 answer, but addressed an inquiry to Mr. Ballin, the then 
 editor of "Mind and Body," which represents German 
 gymnastics, who returned the answer that the German 
 gymnasts do "not believe in censorship," and that "no 
 single individual is considered an absolute authority." ' 
 And thus ended the endeavor to get from the German 
 organization or its leading men an authoritative state- 
 ment of the fundamental principles for which they, as a 
 body, would stand. Inquiries were met with generalities 
 and evasions. We have no declaration of principles by 
 the Germans. Is it because they have no common 
 ground upon which to stand? Is it because there is 
 no German system f I consider it a matter of principle, 
 this question of the object in view, and would consider 
 it of extreme importance to know the German position 
 in the matter. But the Germans seem unwilling to state 
 it unequivocally. They do not repudiate Dr. Arnold's 
 
 'Mind and Body," Vol. II, p. 57. 
 
44 
 
 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 views, but neither do they indorse them. The principles 
 in his paper still remain his, not those of the Germans. 
 
 But as he is one of the leading German gymnasts ; as 
 no repudiation comes from their organization ; as Dr. 
 Hartung maintains essentially the same position, even 
 using to a great extent the same expressions ; as a 
 number of other Germans have hinted in the same di- 
 rection, we may suppose that the official German posi- 
 tion is essentially that of Dr. Arnold, though I may 
 state as my personal opinion, based upon conversations 
 with a number of their teachers, that they are gradually 
 breaking loose from it and arranging themselves with 
 the Swedish confreres as to the object in view. 
 
 I refer my readers to Dr. Arnold's article, which I 
 consider a most remarkable production, and will only 
 here quote his contentions as to the aim of gymnastics : 
 
 "With me, gymnastics are mainly an art, or a science, if you 
 wish, which teaches the use of our muscular apparatus in the 
 most efficient way; i. e., adjust motion and locomotion so that 
 the greatest amount of work may be done with the smallest expen- 
 diture, of course." 
 
 In other words, his aim is co-ordination, and for this 
 purpose he educates the senses, develops the judgment 
 as to distance, direction, resistance, etc., a purely educa- 
 tional process. Positive hygienic benefits he seeks only 
 incidentally. He practically says : Avoid what is inju- 
 rious, but do not endeavor to formulate your exercises 
 for the purpose of gaining any direct hygienic effects 
 beyond that which results from muscular activity in 
 general. It would be futile. The "specific effects" 
 claimed by the Swedes are imaginary, and, to some 
 extent at least, proven false. 
 
 "I regard all exercises arranged to have specific eflFect on 
 circulation and respiration as futile. I cannot assign to circula- 
 tion and respiration the first place, when considering them for 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics 7 45 
 
 establishing gymnastic principles. They both serve only part 
 of one function, viz.: nutrition. Nutrition is dependent on a good 
 many more factors than circulation and respiration. They ful- 
 fil their mission under guidance of nervous influences. These 
 nervous influences are of a peculiar kind. We have no control 
 over them by Avill. We may interfere with the respiratory move- 
 ments by will, to a limited degree, but we cannot wilfully stop 
 respiration altogether, nor can we regulate it for any length 
 of time. Nor does our interference affect anything but in- 
 halation and exhalation. That is the most crude process in 
 respiration, that might be called outer respiration. Over the 
 exchange of gases from air in the lung to the blood, middle respi- 
 ration, and over the inner respiration, i. e., the exchange of gases 
 from blood to tissue and vice versa, we have no wilful control 
 whatsoever." 
 
 The term "specific effect," which is here employed 
 by Dr. Arnold, was, so far as I know, first used by a 
 Swede — Georgii — in 18-i7. But it has never been gen- 
 erally adopted either in Sweden or Germany. While the 
 German Schreber accepted it as early as 1852, the Swede 
 Satherberg preached against it in 1855. Perhaps it 
 might be well to define the term. When I use it, which 
 is but rarely, I put it in opposition to the expression, 
 general effects. I mean with the general effect of a cer- 
 tain grotip of exercises, that effect which is common 
 to all the exercises of that group, while the specific ef- 
 fect of any one exercise belonging to that group is that 
 by which it is characterized from the rest, that which 
 is peculiarly its own. If a person stands with his arms 
 extended sideward, palms down, and then rotates his 
 palms up, there will be certain effects upon the supina- 
 tors, their nerves and vessels, which will be similar, 
 however the supination be executed. These are general 
 effects. But if he supinates the hands, taking care that 
 the axis of motion is the little finger, there will be a 
 concomitant strong expansion of the chest which does 
 
46 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 not result from a rotation around, for instance, the little 
 finger. That. is a specific effect. All slow trunk bend- 
 ings forward from a standing posture have for general 
 efifect activity of the dorsal muscles. But if the trunk 
 bending is done with one foot advanced and the feet 
 parallel, there will be a specific effect in the extension of 
 the ham-strings of the advanced leg, not noted in trunk 
 bendings with the feet equally advanced. If I lie on my 
 back and raise my legs, it does not matter how I do it, 
 my abdominal muscles must always contract. That is a 
 general effect of these movements. But if I stretch my 
 arms in the direction of the head and there grasp a 
 firm support, the raising of the legs becomes much easier 
 than if I have the arms at my sides. That is the specific 
 difference between the two different starting postures. 
 These examples, which, of course, might easily be mul- 
 tiplied, suffice as explanation of the term. All exercises 
 have some effects in common ; these are general. Each 
 exercise has some effect different from that of every 
 other exercise ; that is its specific effect. 
 
 Now as to the specific effects on respiration of cer- 
 tain exercises. 
 
 The notion is no doubt very general within the ranks 
 of gymnasts of all schools, as well as among the lay 
 public, that more oxygen will be absorbed by the system 
 and more waste products will be given off by it as a re- 
 sult of simple voluntary increase of the air going into 
 and out of the lungs in a given time. I have before me 
 a book on "Respiratory Exercises," ' and I find in its 
 preface these words : 
 
 "By modifying the respiratory movements in certain 
 ways we can produce profound effects upon the organ- 
 
 1. Respiratory exercises in the treatment of disease. By Harry 
 Campbell, M. D. New York, Wood & Co., i839. 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 47 
 
 ism. Not only can we regulate the absorption of oxygen 
 and the elimination of the respiratory excreta. . . ." In 
 the body of the book, speaking of breathing exercises 
 conjoined with various arm movements, the author also 
 says that the enhanced respiratory activity is in con- 
 siderable excess of what the exercises themselves would 
 induce, and furthermore that the blood is kept in a high 
 state of oxygenation and with a low percentage of CO2. 
 I firmly believe that it is the general opinion among both 
 Swedish and German gymnasts that mechanical rhyth- 
 mic motions of the arms in definite directions, called by 
 the Swedes Respiratory movements, will assist the ex- 
 change between the air, the blood, and the tissues. I 
 take the opportunity to deny, in behalf of the Swedish 
 gymnasts, that they consider the greatest value of these 
 exercises to lie in the improvement of the respiration. 
 The main function of these exercises, according to them, 
 is to improve the venous and lymphar return. I de- 
 plore that Posse has, in the synopsis on page 257 of his 
 book, apparently given support to a wrong impression 
 of the teachings of the Swedes. But this wrong impres- 
 sion is, to a great extent, removed by himself because 
 he begins with an expose of the influence on the circula- 
 tion, passes over to the improvement of the lung tissue 
 itself and of the respiratory muscles, and comes in the 
 third place to deal with the changes taking place in the 
 respiration. 
 
 Of these he says : 
 
 "As respiration grows deeper, the tidal volume of air in- 
 creases, and more blood passes through the pulmonary vessels in 
 the same given time. As a result a greater amount of oxygen 
 will be taken into the blood; more energy will be supplied to the 
 
 body; the metamorphosis of tissue will be increased Also 
 
 at exhalation the increased tidal volume carries with it a greater 
 amount of carbon dioxide and water, so that some of the most 
 
4S WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 essential elements of excretion are being eliminated with greater 
 rapidity; waste matter is being removed in gi'eater quantities." 
 
 Posse thus asserts, as Campbell does, as most gym- 
 nasts do, specific effects upon both middle and inner 
 respiration by respiratory movements. This Arnold de- 
 nies. 
 
 We all know that a greater pulmonary ventilation 
 takes place because of these movements. We also know 
 that even after the first few respiratory movements, 
 when this ventilation is completed, there is still an in- 
 creased quantity of CO2 exhaled, which conclusively 
 shows that more CO2 is given off by the blood in a given 
 time. We know that part of this increased CO2 is due 
 to the increased activity of the respiratory muscles. Do 
 we not also know that another part is due to increased 
 excretion of the CO2 previously formed and existing in 
 the extra pulmonary parts of the body? Landois at 
 least says that "ein sichtbarer Einfluss auf die Ent- 
 leerung der im Korper bereits gebildet vorhandenen 
 CO: hat sich zu erkennen gegeben." And when 
 Vierordt shows a change in the CO2 excretion of from 
 258 ccm. to 1392 ccm. a minute, according to the number 
 of respiratory movements, or a change of from 21 ccm. 
 to 72 ccm. in one single movement, according to its 
 depth, it is rather difficult for me to believe that all of 
 this comes from the increased muscular activity. There 
 can be no doubt in my mind that the middle respiration 
 is enhanced as to the excretion of CO2, just as Posse 
 and Landois say. 
 
 Now it seems to me likely, or possible, that Dr. Ar- 
 nold has misunderstood the position of the Swedes in 
 this regard ; that he has thought that they promulgated 
 the theory that by respiratory movements more CO2 
 would be extracted from a given quantity of blood or 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 49 
 
 more O would be put into a given quantity of blood. 
 So far as I know this has never been taught by them. 
 It is worth noting that Posse savs that the increased 
 exchange takes place as a result of thoracic aspiration. 
 If this is not sound physiology, I certainly do not know 
 what is. But even had the Swedes taught that a greater 
 arterialization of any given quantity of blood takes 
 place, they would have some good support for their 
 view. Landois says : "Intensive respiratory movements 
 — even artificial ones — increase the O absorption of the 
 blood to saturation," Under normal conditions the O- 
 solution in the arterial blood is about 90 per cent, and 
 consequently we have it in our power to increase the 
 middle respiration 10 per cent in this regard. Turn the 
 matter in any way I want, I cannot but find support for 
 the position of the Swedes and a refutation of Dr. Ar- 
 nold's stand. 
 
 Pfliiger, v. Voit and numerous other physiologists 
 have apparently established that the number and depth 
 of the respiratory movements have practically no influ- 
 ence on the metabolism. They declare Arnold in the 
 right and Posse to be wrong. But whatever experi- 
 mental evidence may be brought forth, I think it safe to 
 assume that everybody, physiologists as well as gym- 
 nasts, does recognize that deep, powerful respiration has 
 a mighty influence on the general nutrition. It is not my 
 desire to crawl out of an untenable position. But are we 
 not all agreed that even occasional deep filling of the 
 lungs, directly or indirectly, helps to increase our vigor? 
 
 Dr. Arnold also denies that we can gain any specific 
 effects on the circulation. In absence of any denial by 
 him of any particular claim by the Swedes in this regard, 
 I take it for granted that his position here is due to a 
 misunderstanding of what the Swedes do teach. Be- 
 
50 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics 7 
 
 cause Dr. Arnold cannot mean exactly what he says that 
 over circulation "we have no wilful influence, if we ex- 
 clude the interference of wilfully regulated respiration 
 and its effect on circulation by way of thoracic aspira- 
 tion." We certainly can influence the venous and lym- 
 phar circulation differently by different postures and 
 movements. Gravity, change of vascular tension, and 
 the vein-pumps are three factors to the effectiveness of 
 which in this regard Braune has called our attention, 
 and which nobody as yet has successfully denied. We 
 certainly can divert the circulation from the abdominal 
 tract to the muscles and the integument by muscular 
 contraction in general. By localizing this contraction 
 in this part of the body or in that, we certainly can di- 
 rect the arterial flow more or less at will. We certainly 
 can influence the pulse rate differently by different move- 
 ments. We can influence the circulation in hundreds of 
 ways by using different exercises. Are not these specific 
 effects ? If a person comes to the gymnasium with de- 
 ficient portal circulation, and another with a fatty heart, 
 one with tachycardia, the other with a normal pulse rate, 
 does Dr. Arnold give them the same exercises, or tell 
 them that they might just as well go bicycling as to take 
 any prescribed exercises in the gymnasium? I think 
 not. He will choose special exercises for their specific 
 effects. So will we all. 
 
 The only specific effect upon circulation which Dr. 
 Arnold mentions as disproved is "the decrease of the 
 heart's action" by "slow legmovements." He says that Dr. 
 Anderson has disposed of that claim of the Swedes, and 
 Dr. Fitz, in the article to which reference has been made, 
 takes the same position. As a matter of fact. Dr. Ander- 
 son has proven absolutely nothing in the matter, as I 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? ^^ 
 
 shall show when I come to take up the "Leg move- 
 ments." 
 
 I thus claim that each exercise has a specific effect ' / 
 upon both respiration and circulation, and upon a num- 
 ber of other functions as well. I claim that it is our duty 
 to utilize these specific effects for direct positive hygienic 
 benefits, and not to be satisfied with the mere negative 
 benefit of avoiding injury, nor to allow "hygienic rules to 
 determine for us classes and forms oi exercises only 
 generally, not in detail, 4iot the exercises' themselves." 
 In fact, I have pondered long over the meaning of this 
 statement, with the result that finally I have come to 
 the conclusion that it is likely that here, as at so many 
 other occasions, the reason for misunderstanding is to 
 be found in different meanings attached to words, 
 and that the key lies in the words "forms" and "exer- 
 cises." It may mean, and I hope it does, that each exer- 
 cise consists of a number of movements. The form 
 of the latter, that is the movements themselves, is to be 
 determined by hygienic considerations. But the order 
 and the manner in which these different movements are 
 to be taught, individually, in combinations, or in se- 
 quences, that 's the exercises, as distinct from their in- 
 dividual phases, are to be determined on pedagogic prin- 
 ciples. If that is the author's meaning, I am ready to 
 accept it without change, as I shall show when I come 
 to speak of progression. 
 
 Before we leave the hygienic purpose of gymnastics, 
 a few words should be said regarding the "muscle build- 
 ing" tendency of a number of teachers. These belong, 
 to no particular school, but I believe them to be the 
 products of what Dr. Arnold has called the "develop- 
 mental school," and to which I have attached the term 
 the "anthropometric school." To this school the tape 
 
■52 WKy Do We Teach Gymrkastics? 
 
 measure is of the greatest importance. Its members de- 
 light in bringing forth voluminous muscles. They do so 
 ostensibly for hygienic purposes, and seem to believe 
 that a great volume of muscle tissue is synonymous with 
 health. And as a result, our muscular "professors" 
 adorn their advertisements with pictures of themselves 
 as proofs of the superiority of their different "systems." 
 Now, it is a fact that health presupposes well devel- 
 oped, active muscles. But well developed muscles in the 
 true physiological sense are not necessarily large mus- 
 cles. The well developed muscle is characterized by its 
 tonicity, its firmness, its solidity, its small amount of in- 
 terstitial fat. All these qualities are gained by moderate 
 activity, according to the general constitution of the in- 
 dividual. If the activity be increased beyond a certain 
 limit, the volume may increase and thus give the impres- 
 sion of still better development, but it is in reality not a 
 physiological betterment but a true hypertrophy with 
 enlarged and degenerated nuclei, distinguished from 
 pseudo-hypertrophy mainly by the difference in the fat 
 and connective tissue. Such a muscular system drains 
 the other organs of vitality. It is the kind of muscles 
 which deteriorate rapidly as soon as the severe activity 
 which brought them on is given up. It is a condition 
 which does not assist in carrying on the serious work of 
 life, but is good only for strength-tests and the like. It 
 is an actual handicap to the average man, because with 
 the degeneracy of the muscular system goes a degen- 
 eracy of the various vital organs. Our business men, 
 our scholars, our professional men, the men upon whom 
 falls the burden of advancing our civilization, need not 
 large muscles. Neither do those whose duty it is to per- 
 form manual labor need a special training to develop 
 their muscles. This training comes automatically from 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymrvastlcs? 53 
 
 their daily labors, if only their nutritive organs are 
 healthy and nutrition is supplied them. 7\11 need good, 
 healthy, well developed muscles, firm to the touch, rapid 
 to respond, with long range of motion. None needs 
 big- muscles. The teacher therefore shall never see the 
 aim of gymnastics in building up masses of muscular tis- 
 sue. He must look beyond, below the muscles. He 
 must see to the harmonious development of the vital 
 organs. 
 
 Some pages back I put the question whether there 
 are any special duties as to hygiene and therapy which 
 fall to the lot of the teacher of gymnastics. I have tried 
 to the best of my ability to show that he certainly has 
 very positive hygienic duties. But how about the ther- 
 apeutic field? Shall he treat diseases? Shall he be a 
 kind of mechanical doctor to whom John and Jane may 
 go for their aches and pains, for their crooked backs 
 and flat chests, for their breathlessness and their head- 
 aches ? I answer most emphatically, that the gymnastic 
 teacher, as teacher, has no duties whatsoever in this re- 
 gard, except the very pressing one to keep his hands off. 
 He must not compete or interfere with the family physi- 
 cian. I wish to put that statement in the strongest pos- 
 sible terms. It requires a special training to take 
 therapeutic measures, a training which the gymnastic 
 teacher has not and needs not. Whenever he steps from 
 his own field as a teacher to dabble with disease, of 
 which he knows nothing, he is a quack, and should be 
 repelled with just as much energy as he himself should 
 show when a physician endeavors to direct gymnastic 
 exercises of which he knows nothing, upon the fallacious 
 plea that his medical training gives him an insight in 
 gymnastics. 
 
54 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 But if the gymnast shall not practise therapy, he 
 must frequently hover on the boundary line to that field. 
 His main duty is hygienic, and hygienic measures are not 
 only preventative, but curative as well. As a teacher he 
 stands to some extent in the place of the parents. The 
 mother has a right and a duty to care for the children 
 in their small ailments. So the teacher can and shall 
 give advice. If the mother is right in giving a hot bath 
 and tucking the little one into bed when he has a cold, 
 the teacher has an equal right and duty to advise the 
 pupil to take some special exercises when he sees the 
 latter going around with his chest on his back. This is 
 not to pose as an expert in therapy. It is only the appli- 
 cation of common sense. If the teacher has not got too 
 elevated opinions of his own far-reaching knowledge, 
 but keeps well within his limitations, there need be no 
 trouble. He may, of course, make a mistake now and 
 then, but no blame need attach to him on that score any 
 more than it falls to the mother who in a particular 
 case would have done better to send for the physician 
 immediately, instead of trying home remedies. We 
 must recollect that the public does not consult physi- 
 cians before they are obliged to do so, and we cannot 
 make them do it. Common sense and hearty co-opera- 
 tion between teacher, parents, and the physician will 
 solve the problem. 
 
 But if the therapeutic activity of the teacher is mini- 
 mal when the question is of the individual and his ail- 
 ments, it grows in importance when it concerns the class 
 as a whole. Take for instance a class in a public school 
 of one of our large cities. The pupils are frequently 
 to a great extent of the same race, subject to essentially 
 the same environment, breathing the same air, eating 
 the same kind of food, keeping the same hours, dwelling 
 
WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics 7 56 
 
 in the same kind of tenements, playing the same games, 
 sitting the same number of hours on the same school 
 benches occupied with the same kind of work. What 
 wonder then that the class as a whole is representative 
 of a definite physical type with the same excellencies, 
 the same deficiencies. It is a fact, is it not, that in a 
 class of fifty, it is nothing unvisual to find half the number 
 more or less kyphotic, about an equal number having 
 lordosis, 10-15 per cent showing a tendency to pronated 
 feet, quite a few having habitual headache, or nose bleed, 
 or cold feet. Now, as I have said, I may advise each 
 one, though I do not think that I ought to treat them 
 individually. But should I not also see to it that I give 
 the whole class such exercises as have a direct bearing 
 upon the prevailing defects ? Should I not even divide 
 up the class into sections according to the types in ex- 
 istence, so as to be able to differentiate the work some- 
 what in accordance with the needs of each ? You may 
 sneer at this as practising therapeutics at wholesale, but 
 after all is it not the duty of the teacher? He knows, 
 we all know, that the great majority of these cases will 
 not come under more competent hands than our own, 
 except in case the incipient defects get time to develop 
 into serious troubles. If each school had a school phy- 
 sician, if to each gymnasium there were attached a prac- 
 titioner of therapeutic gymnastics, the problem would be 
 different. But these conditions do not exist, and the 
 teacher shall therefore do what little he can do. It is, of 
 course, true that the teacher is supposed to deal with 
 normal children. But the normal child, that is, the aver- 
 age child, is deficient in many directions. The deficien- 
 cies are more or less incipient, to be sure, but that is just 
 the reason why something may be hoped from the 
 otherwise inefBcient actions of the teacher. To abandon 
 
56 WKy Do We Teach Gymnastics? 
 
 all corrective measures for the children depicted by Mr. 
 Ballin for fear of making an orthopedic institution of the 
 school is preposterous. I do not believe he speaks for 
 the rank and file of the German gymnasts, because I 
 believe his conception of the duties of the teacher of 
 gymnastics in this regard to be fundamentally wrong. 
 I knouf that his conception has never found resonance 
 among the Swedish gymnasts. And I believe that the 
 school authorities of our land never have and never will 
 subscribe to his ideas. As proofs of this I quote the fol- 
 lowing questions submitted by the Board of Examiners 
 to candidates for positions in the high schools of New 
 York City : What exercises would you prescribe for a 
 sunken chest (1899) ? Give a specific instance of some 
 physical defect or deformity that is susceptible of cor- 
 rection by gymnastic exercise. What exercise would 
 you prescribe for such defect of deformity (1899) ? 
 Mention three cases requiring corrective gymnastics 
 likely to arise in high school work. Prescribe exercises 
 for each (1900). Describe the effects on the bodily func- 
 tions of kyphosis. Explain the causes of lordosis. Men- 
 tion three ways of treating scoliosis (1900). 
 
 These and similar ones show conclusively that the 
 Board of Examiners expect the teacher to do something 
 to correct common defects. Are they wrong in this ? I 
 think not. Do they want to make orthopedic institu- 
 tions of the schools ? I think they only want the teach- 
 ers to apply common sense. 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 The prime purpose of gymnastics in our educational 
 institutions, including not only schools, academies, col- 
 leges, etc., but also voluntary associations, like the 
 Turnvereine and the Y, M. C. A., is hygienic. 
 
WKy Do We Teaoh Gymnastics? 57 
 
 Together with sports and games it must supply such 
 an amount of activity as to keep high the general vigor 
 of the system in spite of the deteriorating influence of 
 the sedentary life connected with study and business. 
 
 Every posture and movement has eflfects in various 
 directions which distinguish it from every other posture 
 and movement. Some of these "specific effects" may be 
 injurious. Such injurious postures and movements 
 must, in accord with the hygienic purpose of gymnas- 
 tics, be excluded. Other "specific effects" are distinctly 
 beneficial in regulating, in some way or other, one or 
 more functions included in the general term nutrition. 
 These must be utilized. The general invigorating activ- 
 ity must not, therefore, consist of any and all kinds of 
 movements, but each movement used as an exercise 
 must be selected for a definite hygienic purpose. 
 
 The hygienic purpose includes, to a certain extent, 
 the aim to alleviate common defects and deformities. 
 But curative measures against actual disease do not be- 
 long in the general gymnasium. 
 
 By raising the general health of the pupil ^fc gym- 
 nastics shall indirectly assist in true educational work, 
 making possible better mental development upon the 
 basis of a better physique. This shall be done more di- 
 rectly by the application of pcfikigwjigic principles in the 
 teaching of this as well as every other branch, so that 
 the material, selected upon hygienic grounds, is pre- 
 sented in such a manner an 4 sequen ce as to correspond 
 to the gradual uftfekhyg of the mental powers of the 
 pupil. ^v^fl^k^i^ 
 
 To speak of education in sense perception, attention, 
 judgment, reasoning, etc., as the chief object of the gyrft - 
 i^astie' instruction under normal conditions is a mistake 
 which should be deprecated, because thereby the hy- 
 gienic purpose may be overshadowed. 
 
Return .o desk from which borrowed. 
 
 This book is DUE on 
 
 a,e last date stamped below. 
 
 21Nqv'55KC \^pO ^ 
 ;^. MAY12P.M^1 --c^^T\^^* REC'DLD 
 
 Utl6'- 
 
 37^0^' 
 
 Mt* 
 
 JAN 81 
 
 64«*^ 
 
 LD21 
 
 _100,n-9,'47(A5702sl6)476 
 
YD Cb324 
 
 '^"■^ — : — 
 
 ^39766" 
 
 " GV3 
 
 7: 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 
 '%^: