I was very excited to have been interviewed by The New York Times for an article about Doga. After all, how on earth did the NYT find me and YogaDudes? After 15 minutes on the phone with the most delightful writer I really looked forward to seeing the article in print. But I have to say, I was a little disappointed.
The article made me sound much more negative than I really was. To recap, I did agree that calling the activity "yoga for dogs" was ridiculous. Being a firm believer in the very real art and science of yoga I do find it degrading and fad like to try to involve a pet. However, with that said, there was nothing wrong with a group of dog lovers getting together on a sunny afternoon to socialize their dogs. I believe that all the participants had a good time and enjoyed the hour of 'doga.' I guess I would feel better about it if 1) they called it something else that had no connection to yoga, and 2) the organizers didn't charge $15 per class. That just seems outrageous to me. After all, anybody without real yoga training could lead a doga class. I think it would make much more sense if a group of dog lovers got together and a fellow dog lover led a session on a voluntary basis. Then it would be all about the social aspect and the love of dogs and less about making an easy buck.
2 comments:
Also, "Peanuts" you "retired racer greyhound", "he" ate treats?
Check your facts Bethany Lyttle! That was a terrible article.
But still, exciting to have your name in the NYT. Congratulations!
Gotta say, ridiculous as I find "doga" as well, I wouldn't mind learning some techniques for doing yoga in the same apartment with a hyperactive springer spaniel who sees any instance of getting down on the mat as an invitation to wrestle....
Post a Comment