Sunday, March 14, 2010

One Thing Leads to Another: Pt. 3 - Finding Something to Do


The moral of my last post (One Thing Leads to Another - Pt 2 Trouble in Paradise) was:


Never let other peoples' opinions come between you and your horse. Never.... be shy, embarrassed, ashamed or afraid to take your horse's side, to give him the benefit of the doubt -- even in the face of traditional wisdom and expert opinion. If you're not on his side, who will be? If you don't speak up for him, who will?


That “moral” was written with benefit of hindsight. Hilary, in her comment, was nice enough to give me kudos for sticking up for my horse. I wish I could take credit for being wise or kind at the time (nearly 20 years ago). I wasn’t really. I was just innocent and open-hearted in my love for Khemo, my First Horse, my dream-come-true. I liked him, loved him, and wanted him to like me. I wanted him to be healthy and happy, and I was committed to do whatever I could to help him be healthy and happy. It was that simple.


Somewhere further along in my horse journey I lost a lot of that childlike innocence and simplicity. I didn’t notice all that I was losing as it was happening. That is something that only became fully clear years later, as I looked back on things. But I don’t want to get ahead of myself in the telling of my story, so I’ll go back to where we were, those early days of having Khemo in my life....


There were about 20 other boarders at Whipporwill Valley Farm. In the first few years of our stay there most of them were showing in hunter-jumper, a few were riding dressage. Two men belonged to a hunt club. One or two riders were cross-training between disciplines. I seemed to be alone in my lack of a discipline. The horses were mostly warmbloods, and thoroughbreds. There was one Morgan, and then there was Khemo, "the Arab", and, for a few months Khe’s dam, Pililani, "the Arab mare".


It seemed that every one of my fellow boarders asked me the same question upon meeting me: “What are you going to do with him (meaning Khemo)?” My dream of having a horse did not include a particular discipline, so I was at a loss for an answer.


Had I taken the time and made the effort to summon up my childhood dream in greater detail, I would have noticed that not only was it lacking a particular discipline, but riding itself wasn’t a critical factor. Yes, sometimes I rode the (saddle-less, bridle-less) Dreamhorse. But mostly we were walking side by side, running around, playing, lazing in the shade of a tree.... It was the connection, the friendship with the Dreamhorse, that was my heart’s desire. But, in those early days with Khemo that detail went unnoticed. I never once questioned the whole idea of riding. I had a horse, so of course I was going to ride. That’s what horses are for, right?


Usually I replied to my new acquaintances: “Well, the first thing I want to do is re-learn how to ride. It has been a long time since my last lesson.” A long time indeed. It had been nearly 20 years since I went away to college and ended the formal riding instruction that had been such a big part of my life between the ages of 7 and 17. Years of working behind a desk and expense account lunches and dinners, not to mention stress, late nights, and other bad habits, had left me fat and out of shape. I had no fear of being on horseback, I was not tense, nor was I afraid of falling, but I knew I needed to improve my seat and refine my riding style. In my young years I had jumped, done a lot of trail riding (albeit on groomed bridle paths in Lincoln Park) riding both western and English, ridden saddleseat... My instructor had taught all of that -- it was all riding. It seemed the world had changed since then. When I asked my fellow boarders for referrals to riding teachers, I was answered with a question, the same question I had been unable to answer the first time around: “What do you want to do with him?”


Hmm. It took me a while to understand that people no longer had riding teachers -- they had trainers. And the trainers only trained in a particular discipline -- for the purpose of showing. If you didn’t show, you weren’t “serious” and you were not taken seriously. You were a pleasure rider, a "backyard" horse owner.


Hunter-jumper trainers were pretty thick on the ground in Monmouth County, New Jersey in the early 90's, but jumping was something Khemo had no desire to do, and therefore neither did I. I had discovered during our trail rides that, when given a choice between jumping even a small log or finding a way around it, Khemo would almost always choose the go-round. At the time, I didn't look deeper into the reason for this. Had I done so, I might have discovered things, aside from a simple dislike of jumping -- things like a badly fitting saddle, a horse's inability to fully feel his feet because of iron shoes, or any number of other factors in addition to me, the rider, the heavy, often unbalanced, load on his back. But learning about saddle fit and shoeing, as well as dentistry, biomechanics, the effect of emotional well-being on a horse’s health and soundness -- all that was still in the future. At the time, I only knew that Khemo did not want to jump.


So, he and I continued with our unserious trail riding and I continued my search for that mythical beast -- a riding teacher. One day, in a chance meeting with the Morgan's person, I learned that she was new to horse and had only recently begun learning to ride. I asked if she was taking lessons. Yes, she was. Jumping? No, she had a dressage trainer coming in weekly. I asked if her “trainer” would take on another student. She inquired, and, as it turned out, the dressage trainer was willing to teach a second lesson on Saturday mornings, since she was coming to the barn anyway.


And that, dear Reader, is how Khemo and I came to be "doing dressage."


*******











There's no moral to this part of our story. Instead, as I examine my memories of this time, I have an observation and a question.


What is glaring to me now, with hindsight, is how absolutely pervasive was the notion that we have to "do something" with horses. And, that the "something" must involve riding. No one has ever asked me what I do with the cats who share my life. It is just assumed that I have them living with me because I enjoy their company. (I assume it is the same for people who share their lives with dogs.) But with horses it is very different. Why is that? Why does it seem so radical, so outlandish to simply want to be with horses because we like them and enjoy their company?





9 comments:

  1. Hi Kris,
    I was hoping that someone else would jump in with an attempt to answer this question, but since several days have gone by and no one has, I thought I'd have a go at it. (Blogger won't accept it in one fell swoop, so I have to make it a two part answer, okay?

    Here was your question:
    "Why does it seem so radical, so outlandish to simply want to be with horses because we like them and enjoy their company?"

    My answer kind of goes waay back and then comes more forward and it may seem part of what I feel in this answer is ludicrous , but so be it! ;-)

    My intuition tells me that our first relations with horses were vastly different than what they are now. I continually get a sensation (from who knows where...Lynne's Little Shop of Fantasies, perhaps?) that human's first relations with horses were absolutely a product of admiration, respect, and companionship...and later came to be usurped by those humans who had a dominator mentality.

    Let's propose that that some humans, initially vegetarian, became scavengers of the flesh of animals and likely there were many carcasses of horses to be pilfered from true omnivores. A greater and greater dependence (or gastonomical preference?) on animals, fouls, and the flesh of fishes for sustenance instead of all the rest of Nature's bounty (which pretty much falls into our open hands) little by little altered the chemical and behavioral make-up of humans. Human lust for flesh to eat provoked them to take up "hunting to kill for flesh" versus "scavenging already dead flesh" and in the process they evolved more dominant and predator like behaviors than they had before. It was only a matter of time when their horse friends became a source of food rather than just companionship. The same can be said for all animals, fish and foul alike--that in the early days of evolution, humans were delighted by the companionship of all these creatures, and shared life with them in harmony and joy...but then the mood of humans shifted toward gastronomical preferences which made "meat" from their former friends.

    end, part one.
    continued in part two.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Part Two:

    Not to worry! Recognizing their "taking" from these very companions in an inappropriate manner, they created rituals, reverences and such to "atone" and "placate" these former companions...which seemed to have worked for awhile during the early stages of such interactions when the animals, foul and fishes felt respected, even glorified by humans and their numbers were never over "harvested".

    Then came distinct domestication, which further altered the dynamics between humans, animals, fishes and foul (and the green kingdom and the fungi world likewise)...even still the early domesticator humanoids were reverent and there seemed to be an acceptance and even sometimes a particular benefit of participation in the human domesticatory porocess. Animals, fishes and foul were still glorified and respectfully "harvested".



    But because this was I believe a sickness that took hold early on, when humans accepted flesh as part of their diet, all that eventually got more and more perverted--domesticated animals lost their identities as companions and became "livestock".

    Once humans came to look upon horses as livestock, lovely to look at, interesting to commune with--but far more beneficial to eat or force in to slavedom as "beasts of burden", well the feeling that "just to be friends" with a horse became a thing to be ridiculed. Instead, humans expected horses to "serve" them.

    Though we no longer (at least in our western societies) require the horse to serve us as a source of food, or as a beast of burden, we still figure she ought to "earn her keep" and so the mindset prevails that if one has a horse in his life, she must serve him in some way, as a sport tool, or pleasure mount, etc.

    I'm just now coming to a place where I "see" how twisted humans have become regarding where they fit into the rest of creation.

    I think your question is a priceless one, Kris, and I hope other readers are contemplating that maybe some rethinking needs to be done regarding how we relate to horses.

    Please, keep up your blog, Kris...it is a source of inspiration and contemplation!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you for posting your theory Lynne! I was wondering if anyone would acknowledge the question and venture an answer....

    It seems to me this question of why it is almost "taboo" in our culture to have horses in our lives just because we like them and enjoy their company has many underlying "reasons". One of them might well be, as you state, that making meat part of our diet made us ill, sickened our spirit.

    Still, I know of at least a couple of lifelong vegetarians who use their horses quite unthinkingly as "riding-machines"... and I know of at least a few meat eaters who, despite their willingness to eat pig, piglet, lamb, sheep, cow (beef), calf(veal), and all manner of winged and finned creatures treat the horses in their lives with love and respect... even reverence. Perhaps these people are exceptions to the rule -- or, maybe, there is something else at work here. Many somethings. While human greed for flesh in the diet may indeed lead to a lot of evil in the world -- factory farms and over-fishing the earth's waters are just the tip of the iceberg -- it does not seem to me to be the only factor affecting the way we view horses.

    I've wondered what influence religion has had on our treatment of the earth and its creatures, specifically the views that mankind is superior to all other life forms and that (therefore) man has dominion over the earth and all its creatures. These general beliefs are shared by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. (I'm not sure about some of the other major religions. )

    Then there is the "worship" of cold reason, the idolization of the left brain while relegating the right brain and the heart with its feeling-based knowledge to lesser status. For centuries we have been taught that our feelings are "bad" and our logical thinking is "good". To live in such a culture a person has to shut down, ignore, repress, hide, a huge part of him/herself. This greatly affects how we view the world and how we treat our fellow creatures... it closes us off. But what it has to do with how we treat horses versus how we treat cats, for example, is something I'll have to think about some more and continue in another comment since this one is getting too long for Blogger's taste.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kris, this question is huge. Where do you begin unraveling it? And when you look at factors like religion and/or diet (a strange combo to be sure), are they causes or effect? It is easy to blame Christianity for the mess we have created in the natural world and turning every living thing into a resource to be exploited. But such religion originated and took hold of mind that may have already ingested to much flesh and therefore found this kind of thinking appealing. In the end you go around in circles.

    What puzzles me is my own memory of how I got infatuated with horses as a 6 year-old. We lived in a city, stone and brick buildings everywhere. Nature grew in the bombed out lots marked with big signs: "Vorsicht Fussangeln. Eltern haften fuer ihre Kinder", which we took to mean: come in and explore....

    The first horses I fell in love with were pulling the carts with the lumber to set up the booths at the farmers market. I was glued to that place. The mighty beasts in harness, metal shoes, sad resigned eyes behind the blinders. I remember the first time that one of he young guys setting up the booths lifted me up and set me on one of the horses. It was incredible, I felt myself merging with the soft warm body and when the horse moved I felt my tiny 6-year-old self magnified beyond expression. Needless to say I was hooked... Through my teenagge years, hopping on a barebacked horse and flying with him through space was heaven. There was nothing else comparable to that feeling of elation.

    I grew up in a tight bubble raised by a pair of idiosyncratic parents, so I don't quite see how this experience was mediated by historical and other stereotypes or images.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "No one has ever asked me what I do with the cats who share my life. It is just assumed that I have them living with me because I enjoy their company."

    I would think the answer here is again partly historical and partly rooted the nature of these animals. The horse magnified human power and ambitions, the cat was demonized, or worshipped as a god. Cats have managed a symbiosis with humans that gives them the best of both worlds (or so they think), while the horses allowed themselves to be enslaved by man in ways the feline race never has. And the big cats have basically resisted domestication altogether. Not a small feat...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good point about which came first, Eva... the "flesh diet disease" or the thinking that made it seem okay for human beings to exploit their fellow creatures, to kill them for food. Whichever came first, humankind has been "lost in thought" or, more accurately, lost in wrong thinking for a long, long time. That wrong-mindedness (and closed heartedness) on our part has led to our separation and even alienation from the rest of creation. That's a fact. We would not, we could not, behave as we do toward the earth and our fellow creatures if we actually felt ourselves to be part of the web of life.

    So (however or why ever it happened) humankind has alienated itself from the rest of creation and feels a sense of entitlement to use the earth and her creatures as it sees fit. That goes a long way toward explaining our centuries long abuse of horses (among others). But it still does not clarify for me why, these days, we see the horse so differently than we see cats and dogs (for example).

    Is it simply the weight of history and tradition? It certainly could be.

    What if suddenly a decree was issued by the powers that be in the universe and human beings were told that they could still associate with horses, but they could never again use them for work, or transportation, or recreation? Can you imagine that? The horses had been re-designed by Mother Nature to transform into shooting stars at the first touch of a harness or bridle or saddle or rope or a human's weight on their backs. The human attempting to harness or ride a horse would die -- after which the horse would re-emerge as his old self and re-join his herd. If something like that happened, if that were suddenly how the world worked, how many people would still keep horses?

    At this point in my life, I know I would. In fact, I do. And when I was a little girl I would have, too. Somewhere in between I got very lost for a while.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I am not even going to try to bring any new aspects in answering your question, as Eva and Lynne have already done good job in it. I just wanted to thank you for having this blog, and also huge thanks for translating Imke's book which is "my bible" :)

    So, just wanted to let you know that I love reading about your journey <3

    br,

    Jenny from Finland

    ps. Does "Lynne's Little Shop of Fantasies" have a web shop? :D

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hello Jenny from Finland!

    Thank you for stopping by... I love it when readers let me know they're here.

    Best,
    Kris

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yup. Our new filly arrived last week (2 yrs old), and already I've been asked, "What are you going to do with her ?" My answer is, "Well, I'll wait and see what she wants to do." Although sometimes I'll mumble something about dressage. Besides, we're already doing stuff, aren't we? - Hanging out, getting to know each other, going for walks. When you have a new baby, people aren't all, like, "What college program are you planning to sign her up for?"

    Maybe it's the expense of a horse - people feel they need an extra justification for owning one. You'll notice that mini-horses often get an exemption from the requirement of usefulness.
    But, really, when I think of all the horses I know, most of them are, in fact, what is rudely termed "pasture ornaments." Actually I think the idea of all these sporting horses is wishful thinking. Case in point: Our barn: 27 horses, of whom only eight are in regular work. A lot of people just have horses for the sake of having them - they just don't own up to it! We need to help them come out of the closet!

    Re Lynne's "fantasy" history. I don't think it's a fantasy at all. I'm one of those people who believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. So in the beginning, nobody ate anybody - even after the Fall. Not until after the Flood. Adam didn't need to work - fruit just dropped out of the trees into his hand, the weather was always perfect, and he never got sick. So if the animals were "given" to him, it wasn't for their utility, but for the joy of their companionship. (Although not quite as joyful as the companionship of Eve.)

    Has anyone noticed if horses prefer vegetarians? (Because presumably meat-eaters have a distinctive smell.)

    ReplyDelete