This section only covers criticisms of Alexander’s character, his personality traits. For other criticisms see below.
Criticism of personality
Leonard Wolff wrote in his diary that ‘he [Alexander] was a quack but an honest and inspired quack.’[1]
Ludovici in his Religions for Infidels (1961) reported on his first impression of Alexander:
Altogether, I thought him too reminiscent of a showman, and there and then decided to have nothing to do with him.[2]
Neal Katz asserted that Alexander was a compulsive gambler:
F. M. Alexander was a brilliant genius and innovator; he was also a compulsive gambler and a racist. [3]
Criticism of Alexander not supporting projects
Alexander has been criticised for failing to support other people’s effort to scientific research into the Technique, the efforts to create a society of teachers, and other efforts to promote the Technique
Lulie Westfeldt relates how Alexander pulled out of Miss Lawrence’s project to buy a house in Cromwell Road for the Technique.[4] She also relates Alexander’s objection to a society in which he could be outvoted.[5]
F. P. Jones reported that:
. . . Dewey undertook to find foundation support for a scientific investigation of the Technique. He succeeded in obtaining a commitment from the Rockefeller Foundation, but Alexander set up so many requirements for his own participation that the project fell through.[6]
See also Criticisms of teaching the Alexander Technique, Criticisms of Alexander’s writings (including his racism).
For criticisms of specific concepts and teachings, see respective individual entries on these.
