What is "Pilates" these days anyway?

What is “Pilates”? It’s a big question. I see a lot of very interesting & useful exercises being taught by teachers as “Pilates” — but they’re not actually something that Joe ever taught... & sometimes it’s a major stretch to even call it a “modification”. 👀🤭

I’m not saying they’re not good... but they’re not really part of the system that Joe had in mind for the method that bears his name, & in my opinion, it’s inappropriate to label something as “Pilates” when he isn’t around to say otherwise. People get really defensive about this, but it’s nothing personal. This isn’t those mean “Pilates police” coming for you. It’s just straight from Joe’s mouth here, friends. I’m not a classically trained teacher. I do use modern/contemporary movements or even my own creations at times, & I’m ok with that. BUT I am now very careful when doing it that I clearly differentiate it from Contrology. To do otherwise confuses people & dilutes the method. By all means, get creative with your Apparatus or whatever. But do you really feel ok with labelling your awesome new exercise as “Pilates”? 🤔 Maybe it could just be it’s own cool new thing? When you’re programming or taking a Pilates class, is the focus on what’s “fun” or “new”? Does it fit the logic of the Pilates method, or would Joe classify it as “haphazard”? The other thing this quotation reminds me of is the WHY behind the workout. Is it to “feel the burn”? Is it “for the gains”? Joe was a very strong & well-built man, but he is saying here that wasn’t the main goal behind his method. His goal was for people to be healthier & to have better control of and connection to their bodies. If you’re labelling your work as “Pilates”, I believe you have a responsibility and obligation to also honour the intent behind the system and the method. The #gainz are just a side perk. The approach & intention of the work are part of what makes it “Pilates”... & isn’t that what we’re here for, in the end?