“Many thanks go to Sydney Frasca and Jeffrey Maitland for their editing assistance, to Tina Layton for her secretarial abilities, and to Adam Clark for his computer and research skills without which getting this paper off the drawing board would have been horrendous.””…simple, everyday, run-of-the-mill, bipedal walking is among the most crucial and defining elements of human nature. Humans, in fact, are the only mammals on the Earth designed to walk in a habitually upright position,… So unique is the notion and the architecture of bipedal walking that it may very well be the hallmark of our species: We are, in essence, the way we walk. “M. GamesOmni Magazine, January, 1993

This article is a response to Dr. Serge Gracovetsky’s presentation to the Rolf Institute® Annual Meeting in 2008 in Boulder, Colorado. Because it is the job of Rolfers to understand healthy function of the muscular/skeletal system, as well as to observe the impediments to it, we are interested in a comprehensive model of walking that explains what that is. We, the authors, believe that maps and models influence our perceptions and our behaviors. In the interest of finding a model of understanding the complex coordination of human ambulation that could serve our profession, we wish to raise some points in which Gracovetsky’s model and our model seem to differ. We cannot presume to assess the full breadth and depth of Gracovetsky’s knowledge on this subject, and there are many places of agreement that we will not be elucidating. In a nutshell, we believe that the body will not reveal the full elegance of its design if we continue to see its movement from a lever/pulley muscular model. Just as Dr. Rolf needed to view the body from the vantage point of connective tissue in order to share her perceptions, we are offering a vision of walking that need not be either linear or segmented. Within this model, which we call “Natural Walking,”1 movement is non-hierarchical with each aspect of the body and the design of joints and tissue participating in equal measure. As much as we agree with and appreciate the clarity and specificity that Gracovetsky has brought to spinal function in walking, we are seeking a view that integrates the elegance of spinal mechanics with the pelvis and legs. Natural Walking is more than just our theory about walking. It is an understanding of human movement that can lead a principledriven Rolfer’s diagnosis of structure and function, and assist in directing the Rolfer’s intervention. We are presenting much of this material in our classes. The technical details are important, but mostly we wish to emphasize that there is something here that is useful, practical, and true. Three points are being raised for the benefit of creating further distinctions in a model of walking as we envision it and to stimulate further inquiry within our community. We then present theoretical and practical aspects of our Natural Walking model.