Anyone who has viewed Peter Fiasca's Classical Pilates DVDs or attended a training session with him will easily agree on one thing: he is passionate about Classical Pilates and defends it with the ardor of a religious apologist. In that regard, his newly-released book, Discovering Pure Classical Pilates, does not disappoint. And like a religious apologist, he is bound to confront and challenge fundamental beliefs, for if there were no grounds for disagreement, there would be no need for apologetics! He has, in fact, called himself an "apologist for Classical Pilates."

Discovering Pure Classical Pilates is a look into the method's "foundations, goals, movement qualities and benefits" with special attention "given to the ways in which market forces, individual creativity or ambition lead to deterioration and commercialization of the traditional Pilates method."

Peter wastes no time in declaring his three key points. In terse, plain-language style, reminiscent of Martin Luther's 95 theses, Peter declares:

• There is only one Pure Classical Pilates — Joseph Pilates' traditional method.
• There are many derivative approaches incorrectly or falsely called Pilates.
• "Contemporary Pilates" is a contradiction of terms.

Peter assures us that the method Joseph Pilates passed down to the likes of Romana Kryzanowska and Jay Grimes is sufficiently complex and allows for almost infinite modifications and variations to meet the needs of the individual and will reward a lifetime of study. Any change to the system passed down will necessarily dilute it, he says.

Why does he consider Romana and Jay the chief "bearers of the flame" of Pilates? Because unlike many of his other protégés, Joe Pilates taught them the full method and they chose to preserve it. Others, he says, either chose to change his method or were trained in the context of their own limitations and special conditions and, therefore, did not learn the whole system as he intended for the normal, healthy body.

However, Discovering Pure Classical Pilates goes beyond the defense of the traditional method, and provides rewarding reading even to those not inclined to consider Peter's arguments.

For instance, his explanation of how Pilates relates to Paideia directs the reader to a deeper understanding of the method than considering it as mere physical conditioning. Acknowledging that the widely circulated biographical sketches of Pilates are of questionable origin, he suggests that Pilates' writings parallel the tradition of Paideia, which was the Hellenistic process of educating humans into their true form, their real and genuine human nature. And a consideration of these parallels leads to the conclusion that Joe Pilates intended his method to promote citizenship and productivity in society.

Peter also takes on the task of explaining how the Pilates method engages the whole body, mind, and spirit. He shows how Joe Pilates "wanted us to have a more responsive body, a more facile mind, increased vitality, and a greater capacity to cope with problems in everyday living." To facilitate experiencing the mind-body components to the method, he suggests using the seven principles of Pilates as metaphors for living. Slightly modifying the six well-known principles handed down from Friedman and Eisen, Peter has us consider how Centering, Concentration, Control, Correctness, Core Strength, Cardiovascular Conditioning, and Cadence have metaphorical parallels in our daily lives. For example, he would have us ask, "Am I applying the principle of Centering in my daily actions analogous to the ways I achieve centering during a workout?"

As to the spiritual component to the method, he searches for parallels with numerous religious texts that examine the connections between spirituality and the body. Ultimately, though, Peter concludes that Pilates himself did not describe his understanding of the spirit; therefore, "in the absence of more specific information from Joseph Pilates himself, Contrology can be construed as a physical ritual and a philosophy of health."

But to get to the bottom line, everyone wants to know, "Is it a good book?" or "Will I like it?" or "Is it worth $20?" And my answer is "it depends."

Taken as a staunch defense of pure Classical Pilates, Peter's three key points are surely as shocking to an adherent of "contemporary Pilates" (remember, a contradiction in terms!) as Martin Luther's 95 theses were to the religious status quo of his time. But taken as a passionate plea to benefit from the method in the way Joseph Pilates intended it to be, it is a book from which everyone can derive benefit.