# Do you believe EPAK was finally complete?



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Mar 24, 2004)

Mr. Parker was constantly modifying and changing the technical cirriculum for kenpo, his active mind always looking for deeper and more multiplicated applications of techniques.

Some of the old break-aways even quoted their reasosn for leaving as "I didn't want to re-learn the entire systems requirements for the third time", and the like.

I've seen comments in threads where folks insist that a lack of absolute faith in EPAK to have all the answers reflects a lack of understanding the depths of kenpo. IMHO, this reflects a blind faith that SGM had created a final, perfect product, with no room for change or improvement. I believe...and I have no hard evidence to back it up, just my own views...that if Mr. Parker had not been taken so soon, we would have seen one, maybe two more "re-writes" of kenpo before simple aging returned him to the stars.

Was denkst du? Is kenpo a perfect, finished product? Had SGM Parker reached the limits of his creative and rational abilities with the "final edit" of AK we were left with?

Dr. Dave


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 24, 2004)

Great minds think alike...

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8597


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Mar 24, 2004)

Old Fat Kenpoka said:
			
		

> Great minds think alike...
> 
> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8597


Right on. Glad to know I'm not the only heretic in the inquisition.


----------



## Doc (Mar 25, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Mr. Parker was constantly modifying and changing the technical cirriculum for kenpo, his active mind always looking for deeper and more multiplicated applications of techniques.
> 
> Some of the old break-aways even quoted their reasosn for leaving as "I didn't want to re-learn the entire systems requirements for the third time", and the like.
> 
> ...



We must stop talking as if "kenpo" is this single defineable entity that is the same for everyone. It has not ever been the same for everyone, It is not the same for everyone, and never will be the same for everyone. The gene pool is deluted by the commercial version that is purely conceptional, leaving it wide open for as many interpretations as there are students - as intended by Parker for that particular vehicle.

That being said - in answer to your question, not even close. Not even the same solar system close.


----------



## Les (Mar 25, 2004)

Since Kenpo is a system designed and intended to be continually updated, how CAN we ever consider it complete?  :idunno: 

I'm not doing the same Kenpo I was five years ago, ten years ago etc. and I'm certainly not doing the same Kenpo I was when I started out with it in the 70's.

By the same token, I don't expect to be doing the same Kenpo in 5 years time, or 10 years time.

Les


----------



## Shiatsu (Mar 25, 2004)

Well said Doc and Les :asian:


----------



## MJS (Mar 25, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Mr. Parker was constantly modifying and changing the technical cirriculum for kenpo, his active mind always looking for deeper and more multiplicated applications of techniques.
> 
> Some of the old break-aways even quoted their reasosn for leaving as "I didn't want to re-learn the entire systems requirements for the third time", and the like.
> 
> ...



Very interesting post, and I'm more than sure it'll start some very interesting debates.  I am big believer in always trying to better yourself.  If that means crosstraining, taking up another art in addition to your base art, or whatever, then do it!  What do you have to lose?? NOTHING!!!!  I've had the chance to have a few very interesting chats with Clyde, and he has opened my eyes to many different things.  After talking with him, I did realize that your Inst. or who you train under, does make a big difference.  The unfortunate thing, is that not everyone can have the chance to train under someone like Larry Tatum, who was fortunate enough to spend many years with Master Parker.  

I do believe though, that no matter what, there is always room to improve something.  Even if the entire art is not changed, if you can do something, as I said above to better yourself, then why not do it?  

I believe that if Parker was alive today, that, yes, there would be changes or additions made to the system.

Mike


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 25, 2004)

There was a thread on the KenpoNet very recently about "What would you say to or ask Mr. Parker?"  I think it is probably on page 2 or 3 now.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 26, 2004)

What I think, first, is that framing this question in terms of "complete," vs. "not-complete," is a complete dead end, just as I think this nonsense about, "innovators," vs. "traditionalists," is a complete dead end.

So far on any of these forums, I've seen absolutely nothing to indicate the slightest general evolution, innovation, progress or whatever in the system I've got some acquaintance with. All the "timing drills," "flow drills," "groundwork," etc., so far that I've seen, are simple adaptations/developments of what's already on the table. 

Does this mean change is impossible. " Course not. For one thing, it's very clear that many people have personally developed--evolved, if you prefer--in remarkable ways. It's also pretty clear that a few people--far less than one might prefer, but a few--have developed as teachers beyond what Mr. Parker was able to do. 

But real change in the system as a whole will have to wait for the next big accident. Forcing "it," to grow is about as useless as trying to grow your own Shakespeare at home...ain't gonna happen. And, it'll look just as silly as those 
dances or martial arts of the future you sometimes see in science fiction--and for the same reason, too, it'll have no true ground in culture and history.

Mr. Parker was not only in some ways a brilliant martial artist, he "happened," to be born into a particular time and place that made certain things possible. When we get someone equally gifted, born into a new time and place that makes change possible (personally, I hope it's a girl...THAT'D piss off lots of kenpoistas), we'll get genuine innovation. 

Until then, who cares? Lots of practice to do, lots of work-outs, lots to learn. I say, let the appearance of the Next Big Thing take care of itself...especially given the ego thing that rears whenever we see those declarations of the Next Great Leap Forward.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Mar 26, 2004)

> When we get someone equally gifted, born into a new time and place that makes change possible (personally, I hope it's a girl...THAT'D piss off lots of kenpoistas), we'll get genuine innovation.
> 
> Until then, who cares? Lots of practice to do, lots of work-outs, lots to learn. I say, let the appearance of the Next Big Thing take care of itself...especially given the ego thing that rears whenever we see those declarations of the Next Great Leap Forward.



I think it's funny that the biggest traditionalist on the board, who is also one of the greatest opponents to change, is telling us about ego and how we should act.   



> So far on any of these forums, I've seen absolutely nothing to indicate the slightest general evolution, innovation, progress or whatever in the system I've got some acquaintance with. All the "timing drills," "flow drills," "groundwork," etc., so far that I've seen, are simple adaptations/developments of what's already on the table.



You apparently have your own definition of evolution, innovation, and progress.  So why don't you share so we can all see what we are doing so wrong.  Near as I can tell, there are a number of organizations that are innovating, evolving, and progressing the art of kenpo (i.e. through positive change).


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 26, 2004)

Robert, I was wondering how long before you subscribed to this thread...

OK, now...I'm not going to rehash all of our previous debates...

I am just going to say one thing...but it is rather long...and you might have to stretch to understand it.

It starts here:  Mr. Parker was a revolutionary.  EPAK was a fantastic innovation.  But, should Kenpo freeze itself in 1990?  Let me point to a historical precedent:  the Hasidic Jews.

Did you know that the Hasidic movement was revolutionary in its day?  That's right, those people we think of as self-segregating, close-minded, long-bearded, black-coated, dead-language-(Yiddish)-speaking religious fanatics were innovators.  

The Hasidic movement was founded by Rabbi Israel ben Elizer (aka Baal Shem Tov) in the mid-1700's.  Contemporary Jewish (and Catholic) worship focused around academic biblical study and the ritual observance of pre-set prayers.  The Hasid's innovated by making worship a joyful participatory experience.  The Hasids worshipped with song and celebrated the minutae of everyday living. They made Judaism accessible to the the common (Jewish) person.  

And they dressed in the hippest most modern way.  Think about it...mid 1700's...big white wigs, waist-coats with long tails, tight-white breaches, 3-corner hats.  The Hasids wore pants, coats, and flat-brimmed hats--the 18th century equivalent of the zoot suit.

So how did they go from being hipsters to being the Jewish equivalent of an urban Amish?  They fixated.  They stuck on the Baal Shem Tov, froze in the mid-1700's, and refused to change.

Robert:  Do you think Ed Parker wants Kenpo to become the martial arts equivalent of Hasidic Judaism?


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 26, 2004)

Sorry, I was busy shaving my head and donning a wig.

Ah yes, the same sterile fantasy. I AM an innovator. Me evolutionary. You dead traditionalist. Looked up binary opposition yet? Let me refer you to Jacques Derrida, "Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences," most easily available in his collection titled, "Writing and Difference."

I suepct that I have rather a better handle on evolution as a concept than y'all do. Y'all might want to read: a) Darwin, "Origin of Species and the Descent of Man," in order to understand what classical evolution means, then something like Stephen Jay Gould's "Wonderful Life," in order to get a bit of a handle on more-modern concepts; b) some of the cultural criticism by people like Frances Barker and Stephen Greenblatt to better understand "evolutionary," reformulations of fundamental concepts of the body in the Renaissance; c) various attempts to understand "radical," ideas in their cultural/historical context such as the old Kuhn book, "Structure of Scientific Revolutions," or something like Ian Watt on the rise of the novel and Lukacs on art in economic-historical context; d) some of the placements of martial arts as historical phenomena available in "Journal of Asian Martial Arts."

Yelling, IT'S NEW!! IT'S EVOLUTIONARY!! does not make it so, and curiously, nobody ever seems to both a) explain exactly what these Big Things are, and b) come up with stuff that  I haven't already seen in one form or another. 

Accusations about what you fantasize--and it is a fantasy for at least three major reasons--is my hide-bound traditionalism does not make it true, or invalidate  my arguments--which I see you've once again avoided altogether, either with generalizations about the Hassids or ad hominem attacks. 

It remains funny as hell that a couple of you cling so tightly to the notion that I'm some big traditionalist. Hell, I don't even see myself as KNOWING enough about tradition to hang onto it all that tightly. Or is it just that I have a certain faith in training and hard work (of which I don't do enough, I'm sorry to have to say), in part because I consider them a helluva lot more important than fretting over Who's Got The Biggest...ah, Innovation, or the ever-vital question of How Do I Get To the Top of the Big Kenpo Mountain? 

You see me as a dead traditionalist. OK, nothing I can do about that. At the moment, I see your ideas (there's a difference there, incidentally) as derived entirely from a consumer culture that, as the true kenpo great Tom Waits noted, is always offering us something, "NEW!! ONLY A DOLLAR!!"

It's exactly analogous to all the folks I have to deal with who think PowerPoint and WebCT are NEW!! INNOVATIVE!!! EVOLUTIONARY!!!! teaching technologies that will obviate the necessity to siddown, read a book, actually learn something, and struggle to articulate what they've learned. What y'all really are talking about is doing away with practice. Funny how nxt, there erupt all the rhapsodies about the Good Old Days...themselves commodifiable.

Oh yeah...don't follow leaders...watch yer parking meters.

By the way, it's simple to refute all this. Leave the personalities out of it, and without using words like, "evolution," "creativity," "change," "leadership," and similar psychobabble, simply explain precisely what developments you have in mind that do so much more that the Parker system, whatever the hell that is. Just explain. Clearly, precisely. Just explain.


----------



## Michael Billings (Mar 26, 2004)

Keep it polite guys.  

 -Michael


----------



## pete (Mar 26, 2004)

great taste... _less filling_.  
great taste... _less filling_.  
great taste... _less filling_.  
great taste... _less filling_.  

either way: more beer!  :cheers:


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 26, 2004)

Okeedokee Robert.  

Don't want to do a rehash.  There is a pretty good thread on MartialTalk this week entitled "Sport vs Street ending the debate forever" which details most of the arguments people have been writing and you've been ignoring for the past year or so.  :duel: 

Haven't read some of the books you mentioned.  I've read Darwin, I've read Kuhn.  I am perplexed though that you are so smart, so intellectual, so well read, yet so reluctant to explore non-Kenpo martial arts ideas.  :idunno: 

Sliding dangously offtopic:  I will take issue with your analysis about PowerPoint and the Web...I think these have an impact on our communication style that is more subtle--yet more pervasive--than you realize.  Think about this...Microsoft's spell-check dictionary and thesaurus is now the most widely used source of English language spelling and definition.   Good thing Bill Gates is not Hasidic.


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 26, 2004)

> Keep it polite guys.



We are, right?


----------



## Shiatsu (Mar 26, 2004)

I only saw one person not being polite.  You know the one who thinks kenpo is the end all martial art. Check out the thread that OFK was talking about.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 26, 2004)

Please show me where exactly it is, in anything I've written here at all, that I've refused to "think my way," through an idea. I simply don't think about them the way YOU do, and it appears to be easier for you to play j'accuse than to deal with the ideas. And, from time to time I get tired of these dumb personal judgments. 

I agree with you about PowerPoint and the rest having an effect. I think the overall effect sucks, because I think it's just one more example of what Marx identified as Taylorization: the capitalism-driven push for more and more efficiency, less and less reward for workers.

Or to put it another way, I think of these NEW! and INNOVATIVE! kenpos as exactly analogous to what's going on in colleges and universities: part of a "two-tier," educational system in which the poor and the working class get empty fantasies of efficiencies, and the wealthy schools educate what amounts to the ruling class in the same old way.

I do not think for a minute that any real evolutions in kenpo, or anywhere else, will come from those proclaiming their evolutionariness. That's just marketing, nothing more. Of course, one of the dirty little secrets is the extent to which Mr. Parker was himself a magic marketer. (And don't comments like that just jibe perfectly with the notion that I'm just a kenpo worshipper?)

Fortunately, martial arts also make available a species of "personal," evolution that does not have to have anything to do with the market. 

And again, I'm still waiting for exact descriptions of these NEW!! INNOVATIVE!!! EVOLUTIONARY!!! methods that aren't part of kenpo (whatever the hell THAT is) already. So far, whenever I've asked I get pretty much the routine that the Amazing Randi gets from your average cheezy psychic healer...up to and including, "your doubt and cynicism are obstructing the astral plane."


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 26, 2004)

Well, we do disagree.  I think I have tried to explain ideas and differences in other arts.  I've posted on training methods, on techniques, on the evolution of styles.  But you've pooh-pooh'd it all.  Others have done so as well. 

On the KenpoNet a Kenpoist posted about Renzo Gracie's Mastering Jujitsu book and his theory on three phases of combat.  You said


> Ah says......that I agree, that the generalizations are easy and pretty much useless, and I have no interest in fighting.
> 
> Robert



In other words, you believe that principles and concepts are easy and pretty much useless, and you have no interest in applying them anyway.  Right?   

Did you get anything out of that book?  Did you read it?

So let's say that Mr. Parker is the smartest Martial Artist who ever lived, or who ever will live.  Does that mean that nobody else ever has or ever will add anything worthwhile to the martial arts?


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 26, 2004)

Nope, not even close. What I said--if you'll go back and put the quote in context--was that as described, as described, the Gracie book only had cliches I've heard more than many times to offer. What I said no to was the notion that generalization equals innovation. I'm also saying no to a lot of the excessively-macho attitudes in regard to "combat." And I'll bet you a shiny nickel that I've read as much about other martial arts styles, and ma philosophy in general, as you have. It's part of the reason I am less than convinced by these general claims about INNOVATION! EVOLUTION!!

I'm still waiting to hear specifics. And I'm dying to hear how my elevating Mr. Parker to godhood could possibly mean a rejection of, "concepts and principles," a phrase which--last time I checked--is straight out of Mr. Parker's books.

I realize that it's easy to create these artificial oppositions. Not what I'm saying at all, as a re-read of my point about cultural and historical context should illustrate. Nor am I saying that I can actualize everything in kenpo, any more than you can. Nor am I arguing (or have ever argued) that Mr. Parker was the end of "evolution," in the martial arts. Quite the contrary, if you'll actually read what I've written.

Any way you slice it, I simply am not arguing what you insistently claim I'm arguing. And I take it as a sign of the dead end in your own thinking that you refuse to recognize that. It is possible to be the sort of hidebound conservative who claims evolution and innovation, you know, two words that appear far too often for my taste in kenpo talk-talk.

Sorry, but you're offering a reductionist view of my ideas on the matter. And I don't see how jamming what I'm saying into a little tiny box and throwing a set of cliches and generalizations at that box is going to represent an advance.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Mar 26, 2004)

Robert,

I suggest that you give *your definition* of what it means to be innovative, progressive, etc. so that we can know what the heck it is that you want.  Several people have explained things that they believe to be truly innovative to kenpo (innovative meaning to add something new).  Some have added things or expounded upon vague subsets of kenpo all of which they believe will make the art of kenpo better (more efficient and more effective).  So unless you have a different definition I don't see how you can continue to argue your particular position.  

I recently became aware of an idea referred to as Cognitive Dissonance.  This seems to explain your obstinance towards new ideas (quite well actually).


----------



## MJS (Mar 26, 2004)

Kenpo Yahoo said:
			
		

> Robert,
> 
> I suggest that you give *your definition* of what it means to be innovative, progressive, etc. so that we can know what the heck it is that you want.  Several people have explained things that they believe to be truly innovative to kenpo (innovative meaning to add something new).  Some have added things or expounded upon vague subsets of kenpo all of which they believe will make the art of kenpo better (more efficient and more effective).  So unless you have a different definition I don't see how you can continue to argue your particular position.
> 
> I recently became aware of an idea referred to as Cognitive Dissonance.  This seems to explain your obstinance towards new ideas (quite well actually).



Yup. That would be nice to see.  Unfortunately, I dont think we'll ever see it though.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Mar 26, 2004)

Robert-  You say that you're still waiting for explainations, methods, and ways that things have changed.  Well, many people have given ways.  Unfortunately, you dont seem to like them very much.  Anytime someone talks about a different way of training, your typical response is, "Well, its already in there.  We already do it."   

I agree with KY.  I'd like to see YOUR defination of these things.  You always say that you're waiting, and then people do give something and all you do is comment of that, but fail to give your own explainations.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Mar 26, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Nope, not even close. What I said--if you'll go back and put the quote in context--was that as described, as described, the Gracie book only had cliches I've heard more than many times to offer. What I said no to was the notion that generalization equals innovation. I'm also saying no to a lot of the excessively-macho attitudes in regard to "combat." And I'll bet you a shiny nickel that I've read as much about other martial arts styles, and ma philosophy in general, as you have. It's part of the reason I am less than convinced by these general claims about INNOVATION! EVOLUTION!!



Well Robert, I went back and looked at that post OFK was talking about, and regardless of what you say, the fact of the matter is, is that ANYONE looking at it, would probably be able to tell that it sounded like you had a VERY negative attitude about the book.  Nobody can read your mind and know exactly what it was that you were talking about, or what you really meant.  

And, as I've said MANY times before, we all train for different reasons.  You obviously have NO interesting in fighting, though, any time you need to defend yourself, you'll be fighting, so I've yet to understand your thinking on that one.  



> I'm still waiting to hear specifics. And I'm dying to hear how my elevating Mr. Parker to godhood could possibly mean a rejection of, "concepts and principles," a phrase which--last time I checked--is straight out of Mr. Parker's books.



And we're all still waiting for YOUR specifics.  Of course, I'm sure you'll say something like, "I've already posted them."  Well, if thats the case, please post them again, because I dont remember reading any.

Mike


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 26, 2004)

My specifics? Got 'em right below my feet, as I write: the LTKKA Accumulative Journal. And the forms. And the sets. And the basics. And some years (not that many, really) of mat time. And a fair amount of reading. But all that isn't summarizable in a few snappy phrases.

Since we've again regressed to ad hominem arguments, reductionist claims that I must have meant things I didn't say, and the general assertion that You Pointy-Head Liberal Intellectuals, yew always tear down but you never biuld up, and since I cannot get you to actually read what I'm writing, let me simply exacerbate the situation:

1. I am perfectly willing to accept change and innovation. I am simply waiting to see it.

2. Much of what y'all are kvetching about speaks for a general binarism in Parker's kenpo, which a) claims to be absolutely innovative and radical, b) constantly insists upon arriving where it's going by traditional means.

3. The claims about "fighting," speak to something essential in martial arts, of course. They also come out of male fantasy.

4. The, "innovators," have just as many cliches and shibboleths as anybody else. They are just as stubbornly unwilling to examine those cliches and shibboleths as anyone else.

5. Most of the talk about evolution and innovation is advertising, and comes out of a consumerist culture/capitalist economy.

6. This "efficiency," claptrap comes out of a generalized, histocial and culturally localizable, fantasy about skipping blithely over the necessity of long slow work. Similarly, in one of my home towns, Boulder, Colorado, some folks teach a Buddhism without the necessity of meditation, "right living," or surrender of desires.

7. "Cognitive dissonance." Wow. Takes me back to Peter Ossorio's psychopathology classes. In 1978. But hey, thanks for the brand new insight. Interestingly enough, Ossorio had this whole thing about structuralist understanding of the psyche...a little like Lacan, a little like Mr. Parker's system.

8. I don't have to argue about what evolution is, because I never claimed to be the Next Big Wave, or even to be standing next to it. I wrote that I didn't know what it would look like, and doubted that the times had occasioned "evolution," in the martial arts just yet, and noted that force-growing such evolution was not going to work. 

9. Still waiting to read what this innovation is. Still haven't seen anything brand new. Still noting a lot of, "your doubt is disturbing the psychic continuum," responses. 

10. Still believing in individual evolution in the martial arts, won through hard practice. Still suspect this can happen with any half-way good martial arts system, let alone something as good as kenpo, or judo, or solid aikido, or one of the others. Still don't believe in short-cuts.


----------



## MJS (Mar 26, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> My specifics? Got 'em right below my feet, as I write: the LTKKA Accumulative Journal. And the forms. And the sets. And the basics. And some years (not that many, really) of mat time. And a fair amount of reading. But all that isn't summarizable in a few snappy phrases.
> 
> Since we've again regressed to ad hominem arguments, reductionist claims that I must have meant things I didn't say, and the general assertion that You Pointy-Head Liberal Intellectuals, yew always tear down but you never biuld up, and since I cannot get you to actually read what I'm writing, let me simply exacerbate the situation:
> 
> ...


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Mar 26, 2004)

Robert:

I will offer you a specific, sans ad hominem.  (aside, have read Darwin, Kuhn, Popper, etc.)

American Kenpo, referring specifically to the body of information left behind by SGM EKP and sanctioned by the IKKA prior to his death, did not -- in my own opinion -- deal with grappling or ground fighting issues sufficiently.  If this were true...which for me it is, but does not have to be for you...the eclectic approach used by Mr. Parker throughout his life would dictate that kenpoistas 1) locate exemplars of the key components of effective ground fighting, then 2) steal the information like raccoons at a campsite and incorporate it somewhere in the body of a future kenpo release (MS.AK 3.4?).

Another area I personally found lacking in my experiences with kenpo were sufficient exposure to joint manipulation (i.e., wristlocks, arms bars, and similar entanglements for upright combat).  I took it upon myself to learn traditional Japanese jujutsu, Shorinji Kempo (the Dosshin So version that wear swastikas on their lapels), and Aikijujutsu, becaue they represented a specialized focus on the skill of appendage entanglement.

I now practice a Kenpo which includes the most logical additions from these systems (some of the wristlocks seem just plain silly). I also include in MY kenpo the fundamentals of BJJ, because, based on my own combat experiences in multiple no-rules challanges matches and _hundreds_ of altercations as a bouncer, I found it combined quite nicely with Kenpo and Judo for a more comprehensive approach to personal combat.

Please note: I am not selling anything.  I don't have a school, a tape series, and only teach a small band of students...FOR FREE, so the Marketing dog don't hunt here.  I have made these changes because, between 1971 and 1990, I did not see in kenpo the resources necessary to adequately address what I percieved as systematic deficits. While you have the LTKKA binder under your feet, I have an old copy of the IKKA manual in my closet, on the shelf, dog-eared and tired pages highlighted and footnoted from years of study and exploration. I also have the Training Journals from people who broke away from kenpo over the years, some for financial and selfish reasons, some to make what they percieved as needed changes.

Am I anti-kenpo? Anti-Parker? I placed some plumeria and gardenia on his plot today, wishing I had a chance to say good-bye, as he passed while I was in Europe...fighting challenge matches and under-ground NHB bare-knuckle bouts, using Kenpo and kickboxing while standing, BJJ and Judo in a clinch, and grappling on the ground if it went that far. They complemented each other in application quite nicely.  And having trained in each solidly over the years, I can tell you that a palm-heel take down does NOT have the same effect as an osoto-guruma, even though they fundamentally look the same, and both employ entangling legs accross the body, reaching to the contralateral side and levering the upper body of the opponent over the entangling leg.

I shared these observations with Mr. Parker. I spoke with him specifically about creating a series of extensions ending standard kenpo teks with Judo throws, leading into BJJ positions and transitions to finishing holds.  He said, even then, that it would cause such a wave of protest, but thought the idea interesting.  NOTE: I'm not saying I had his blessing to re-write kenpo, or that he ever intended to based on my ideas...most of our discussions were about NLP and mental precursors to physical performance.  Putting that out there so no one accuses me of trying to bill the inside scoop on this.

IN MY MIND, innovation is making additive changes to a system that complement the existing structure of it, in oprder to enhance its application accross a broader range of circumstances.  That is what I've done, that is what I advocate, and you may now feel free to blast away about binary silly-isms.  I'm gonna go get a kiss from my girlfriend.

Regards,

Dr. Dave


----------



## Les (Mar 27, 2004)

How did this thread change into a previous thread?

Was it evolution, or regression? Or just someone grabbing the excuse to 'knock' something they have not experienced?

Maybe Robert is right, and all our innovations and evolution are just smoke in the wind. Perhaps I don't move any better than I used to before I was given a greater understanding of timing, through the 'new' methods intrduced by my Instructor's and mentors in the Kenpo world. Not just AKKI people, but other 'innovators' from other organisations too.

I may have to re-think my whole future in Kenpo  :idunno: 

I'll get down to that right after I've re-installed Windows95 and changed the oil in my Ford Model T.

Les


----------



## Les (Mar 27, 2004)

Les said:
			
		

> I may have to re-think my whole future in Kenpo  :idunno:
> 
> I'll get down to that right after I've re-installed Windows95 and changed the oil in my Ford Model T.
> 
> Les



OK. It didn't take me long to think it through.

1: The Kenpo System can never be complete.

2: The innovation and evolution I have been exposed to is both real and beneficial.

3: I'm not going to re-install Windows95. Windows has been subjected to innovation and evolution, and while XP might not suit everyone, it has advantages in todays world.

4: I haven't really got a Ford Model T. My tastes in motor vehicles have been subjected to innovation and evolution.

_There are three kinds of people in Kenpo;

Those who *MAKE * things happen.

Those who *WATCH * things happen.

Those who say *WHAT HAPPENED?*_

Les


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 27, 2004)

Well, I waited a while to look at this thread again because I was beginning to get a little pissed off about the personal attacks. Now, I can look at them as the symptoms they are...rhapsodizing about Mr. Parker's grave? All this yelling and distorting of what I actually wrote, which had nothing whatsoever to do with asserting that anybody's practice is, "smoke in the wind?" (Except perhaps my own...) C'mahn...

It's remarkable that there are all these remarks about my invalidating anybody's kenpo practice, or the things they worked on so hard, or their discoveries. Nothing could be further from the truth; if you'll go back and actually READ what I wrote, you'll see that again and again and again, I've supported all that.

I still simply don't see anything mentioned that's not already, "in," (why's that in quotes? go read the "Structure, Sign and Play," essay I recommended) the system I learned. The takedowns? Sorry, they're there, not my fault. But maybe it's just me that calls it the "universal," pattern. And let me repeat: it's my suspicion that everything, "in," kenpo can be arrived at through other good, solid martial arts--with a helluva lot of practice, and more talent than I have.

I'm certainly no expert on wristlocks (or anything else in kenpo), but I did spend an appreciable portion of last Saturday dancing students around the mat with the locks in Gift of Destiny. I've also seen, and tried, folks' suprerior understanding of the range of locks/sequence of locks that the set of Gift techniques teach. If somebody needs to go, "outside," to find them, who would I be to say that's invalid? Are there locks "out," there that I never heard of, and likely never will? I dunno, but my guess is yes.

Why do martial arts take so long? Well, because that's how long they take for most of us. If you're what Bruce Lee was all cracked up to be (and personally, I don't think he was), why then, you can get by faster than I do. And than most others can. Sorry, but you can tell me 'bout NLP and timing drills and this discovery and that, "new," discovery 'till the cows get up and do kata, and I still wonder about hucksterism. And before y'all wind up, I simply wonder. I have no idea what exactly y'all are learning or doing. 

Which (for about the five-thousandth time!) is not to say that there can't be innovations. Of course there can. Hell, if you'll go back and READ, I remarked that the Next Big Thing may be out there now, and I hope it's a girl.

I am actually arguing something pretty simple. Innovations and discoveries in martial arts come out of changes in cultural and historical circumstances. And, you cannot force-feed them any more than you can decide to go out and be Shakespeare. If you disagree with that, OK, cool, your privilege and right and reason. But just because you happen to be unwilling to discuss ideas without launching personal attacks and putting down other people's ideas and practices, that doesn't mean that that's what I'm doing. 

The real argument here is over "individualist," vs. "cultural/historical construction," theories of what causes development in the martial arts, or, "evolutions," if you prefer. 

One thing that made Mr. Parker possible was the spreading of Eastern martial arts into Western culture. Another was the everting of the family and clan and community structures in which so much of Eastern arts had been cooking. Anybody got any comparable events they can mention, rather than yelling at me because I don't see things the same way you do?


----------



## Kenpomachine (Mar 27, 2004)

If I'd believe so, I should also believe that it is dead... and I don't think so.

About the evolution you're all arguing about, I'll add my two cents: kenpo would evolve as an art as *outstanding* people work dissecting what is already there and get it to a new level. That may be by looking for why a certain thing work a certain way and not other, but may also be by *Discovering* something that is already there, right in front of us. Think about penicilin and Pasteur. But then, there has to be a great communicator to convey and spread such information to the rest of the people. Let's not forget what happened with Sony Beta Cam, that being better than VHS didn't spread as much, due to Sony's fear of copying. 

My point is, I can evolve within kenpo, but for kenpo to evolve as well there are too many variables (historical/cultural/personal/whatever).

But we can't forget past mistakes if we want to avoid them in the future. And traditions are a big point of reference to begin asking questions. Moreover, TRADITIONS MUST BE CHALLENGED, but not for the shake of the challenge itself, but to get something better. And that needs a lot of effort and knowledge and work and time and reasoning and inner circunspection. That's why you need years to master and art, but not so many to begin defending yourself.


----------



## Les (Mar 27, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Well, I waited a while to look at this thread again because I was beginning to get a little pissed off about the personal attacks.


Robert, please don't think I'm making a personal attack on you. What I actually wrote was "Maybe Robert is right"



			
				rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> The real argument here is over "individualist," vs. "cultural/historical construction," theories of what causes development in the martial arts, or, "evolutions," if you prefer.


I really thought the discussion, (not arguement) here was supposed to be Do you believe EPAK was finally complete?



			
				rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> One thing that made Mr. Parker possible was the spreading of Eastern martial arts into Western culture.


I'm not sure what you're saying here.



			
				rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> yelling at me because I don't see things the same way you do?


NOBODY should be yelling at anyone for having a different viewpoint. I certainly didn't intend to give the impression I was yelling.

With Respect

Les


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Mar 27, 2004)

I don't remember yelling. And I thought I went out of my way to avoid attacking you, Robert.  Rather, I mentioned my own perceptions and chnages, based on my own experience.  I'm glad you got them dancing with Gift: I, in my own personal sojourns to kenpo schools accross the southwest, have been to more than one where the instructors themselves...most listed right on the IKKA family tree...had no idea how to place a person in the holds they were teaching SD teks against (chicken wing, front wristlock, etc.). I've also seen otherwise excellent kenpo yudansha (pardon the eastern words...I'll try to work on that for you) fall apart on the armbar in Crossing Talons with just the slightest bit of resistance from the uke. Training the crap out of similar joint techniques in Shorinji, I've used that exact armbar against unwilling antagonists who resisted vigorously, dropping their face to the cement, then leading them out of the establishment.  I already posted about the guy teaching Captured Leaves who had no idea about how anyone would ever find themselves in this situation.  If you've got a grip on jointlocks in your kenpo, more power to you.  Yeah, the motions and tweaks can be found in the universal pattern...that's why it's called the UNIVERSAL pattern, anmd not the PARTIAL pattern.  Does that mean kenpo specifically addresses each and every possibility within it?  If it did, there would only be one martial art in all the world, and it would be kenpo.

Hucksterism...hmm. Seems a little provocative for a person bemoaning the use of attacks.  Stay with kenpo only.  You seem to be happy in it. I started the thread to poll the community as to whetehr the overarching impression of kenpo was that it was a done deal; that Parker had considered it a work, complete. So far, I don't think anyone has argued that it was meant to be left right where it was, just as it was at the time of EP's passing.  And I never meant to imply that innovations had to be mine to be valid.  Again, I made mine based on my personal experiences...only hungry peopel search for food. If you're happy, awesome.  I was not, so I looked to other resources.  And the "rhapsodizing" about Mr Parkers site was not to be melodramatic, and seems to me like a cheap shot for making your point. I genuinely admire the man, still, and consider him the standard of measurement for succes not only in the MA, but in life as a mensch. He was genuinely kind; had opinions of his own which he decided sometimes to share and sometimes not; worked dilligently for his place in life; and I pay my respects to his interment on or near the anniversaries of his coming and going (it's not like a trip to mecca...I live around the corner). As a kid in Hawaii, I was exposed to - and embraced - the Shinto idea that the spirits of ancestors, friends, acquaintences, remain active influences in our lives after passing. Not a good Western or scientific belief, but I'm not convinced Western philosophy, science, or religion for that matter are worth the paper written on.

I think it's great you don't agree, and I am more than happy to embrace your right to believe I'm wrong.  But for shytes sake, be nice. You're going to blow a gaskette.  I want you around years from now to argue with about the existence or non-existence of, need for or non-need for, evolution/innovation/change in kenpo.  Maybe it's the beer or fatigue speaking, but dude...you.must.chill.out.

I tried very hard to remain appropriate and non-aggressive in my posting. Allow me to invite you to do the same.  I'm still waiting to hear your positions expressed proactively, instead of reactively.  And I sincerely hope you're right about the next great influence in kenpo.  It would be cool to say when I'm gray that I used to fence with her pops on the web when she was knee-high to a grass-hopper.

Till next time, kids:

D.

PS -- can't find the essay you posted.  Interested in reading it so can reference same page, so to speak.


----------



## MJS (Mar 27, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> I don't remember yelling. And I thought I went out of my way to avoid attacking you, Robert.  Rather, I mentioned my own perceptions and chnages, based on my own experience.  I'm glad you got them dancing with Gift: I, in my own personal sojourns to kenpo schools accross the southwest, have been to more than one where the instructors themselves...most listed right on the IKKA family tree...had no idea how to place a person in the holds they were teaching SD teks against (chicken wing, front wristlock, etc.). I've also seen otherwise excellent kenpo yudansha (pardon the eastern words...I'll try to work on that for you) fall apart on the armbar in Crossing Talons with just the slightest bit of resistance from the uke. Training the crap out of similar joint techniques in Shorinji, I've used that exact armbar against unwilling antagonists who resisted vigorously, dropping their face to the cement, then leading them out of the establishment.  I already posted about the guy teaching Captured Leaves who had no idea about how anyone would ever find themselves in this situation.  If you've got a grip on jointlocks in your kenpo, more power to you.  Yeah, the motions and tweaks can be found in the universal pattern...that's why it's called the UNIVERSAL pattern, anmd not the PARTIAL pattern.  Does that mean kenpo specifically addresses each and every possibility within it?  If it did, there would only be one martial art in all the world, and it would be kenpo.
> 
> Hucksterism...hmm. Seems a little provocative for a person bemoaning the use of attacks.  Stay with kenpo only.  You seem to be happy in it. I started the thread to poll the community as to whetehr the overarching impression of kenpo was that it was a done deal; that Parker had considered it a work, complete. So far, I don't think anyone has argued that it was meant to be left right where it was, just as it was at the time of EP's passing.  And I never meant to imply that innovations had to be mine to be valid.  Again, I made mine based on my personal experiences...only hungry peopel search for food. If you're happy, awesome.  I was not, so I looked to other resources.  And the "rhapsodizing" about Mr Parkers site was not to be melodramatic, and seems to me like a cheap shot for making your point. I genuinely admire the man, still, and consider him the standard of measurement for succes not only in the MA, but in life as a mensch. He was genuinely kind; had opinions of his own which he decided sometimes to share and sometimes not; worked dilligently for his place in life; and I pay my respects to his interment on or near the anniversaries of his coming and going (it's not like a trip to mecca...I live around the corner). As a kid in Hawaii, I was exposed to - and embraced - the Shinto idea that the spirits of ancestors, friends, acquaintences, remain active influences in our lives after passing. Not a good Western or scientific belief, but I'm not convinced Western philosophy, science, or religion for that matter are worth the paper written on.
> 
> ...



Very nice post!  I agree with many parts here, especially the part when you talk about leaving Kenpo right where it was at the time of Parkers death.  I'm sure that if he were still alive, that he himself would be making changes.  What strikes me funny is that it seems like people get so pissed if others make changes, but they seem to forget two things.  One, If Parker was alive he'd be making changes, and two, even when he was alive, he changed the way it was taught to him!  So, basically its ok for one person to modify or make a change but not someone else?  People tend to get into a rut and very set in the same routine over and over and over and over, and think that change is a bad thing....IT ISNT!!!!  As I've said before, we all train for different reasons, and we all want to get different things out of the art that we train in.  And if someone makes a change, who the hell cares!  Is it hurting anyone? NO!  

I could go on more, but why bother.  There are some people that will still, no matter what, ALWAYS dissagree, due to being so stubborn.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Mar 27, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Well, I waited a while to look at this thread again because I was beginning to get a little pissed off about the personal attacks. Now, I can look at them as the symptoms they are...rhapsodizing about Mr. Parker's grave? All this yelling and distorting of what I actually wrote, which had nothing whatsoever to do with asserting that anybody's practice is, "smoke in the wind?" (Except perhaps my own...) C'mahn...



Sorry you feel that way.  I've been on the end of those attacks as well.  Dont let it get ya down, just keep on going.



> It's remarkable that there are all these remarks about my invalidating anybody's kenpo practice, or the things they worked on so hard, or their discoveries. Nothing could be further from the truth; if you'll go back and actually READ what I wrote, you'll see that again and again and again, I've supported all that.



Again, its hard sometimes to really read into what someone is typing.  A little explaination goes a long way.



> I still simply don't see anything mentioned that's not already, "in," (why's that in quotes? go read the "Structure, Sign and Play," essay I recommended) the system I learned. The takedowns? Sorry, they're there, not my fault. But maybe it's just me that calls it the "universal," pattern. And let me repeat: it's my suspicion that everything, "in," kenpo can be arrived at through other good, solid martial arts--with a helluva lot of practice, and more talent than I have.



Again, there are many things that are in many of the arts that are the same.  But, if one wanted to look a little further into something, maybe, just maybe, they'd have to look elsewhere.  Nothing wrong with that.



> I'm certainly no expert on wristlocks (or anything else in kenpo), but I did spend an appreciable portion of last Saturday dancing students around the mat with the locks in Gift of Destiny. I've also seen, and tried, folks' suprerior understanding of the range of locks/sequence of locks that the set of Gift techniques teach. If somebody needs to go, "outside," to find them, who would I be to say that's invalid? Are there locks "out," there that I never heard of, and likely never will? I dunno, but my guess is yes.



And I'm not a master at them either.  



> Why do martial arts take so long? Well, because that's how long they take for most of us. If you're what Bruce Lee was all cracked up to be (and personally, I don't think he was), why then, you can get by faster than I do. And than most others can. Sorry, but you can tell me 'bout NLP and timing drills and this discovery and that, "new," discovery 'till the cows get up and do kata, and I still wonder about hucksterism. And before y'all wind up, I simply wonder. I have no idea what exactly y'all are learning or doing.



Sorry to hear that you feel so negative about Bruce Lee.  I'm not an expert on him, but IMO, the man was very intelligent, had a good understanding of things, and produced many excellent MAs.  

Which (for about the five-thousandth time!) is not to say that there can't be innovations. Of course there can. Hell, if you'll go back and READ, I remarked that the Next Big Thing may be out there now, and I hope it's a girl.



> I am actually arguing something pretty simple. Innovations and discoveries in martial arts come out of changes in cultural and historical circumstances. And, you cannot force-feed them any more than you can decide to go out and be Shakespeare. If you disagree with that, OK, cool, your privilege and right and reason. But just because you happen to be unwilling to discuss ideas without launching personal attacks and putting down other people's ideas and practices, that doesn't mean that that's what I'm doing.



Sorry to say it Rob, but you have been one who gives those personal attacks as well.  I've seen you question the training methods of others and then when they give an explaination, you come back with something negative.  You'll probably deny that, but its the truth.  



> The real argument here is over "individualist," vs. "cultural/historical construction," theories of what causes development in the martial arts, or, "evolutions," if you prefer.



No, the argument here is about Kenpo and if it was complete.  Its turning into a debate of how each ind. does his/her training.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Mar 29, 2004)

Looks like this thread either died or someone got pi**** off.

Mike


----------



## rschoon (Mar 29, 2004)

Maybe.....Mr. Parker took it to a certain level, then left it up to all of us to take it beyond that level???

I do feel that there has to be a certain amount of "adjustment" because I know that if one tech doesn't work for a person than we can adjust it so that it does and that if we have not only the basic principles and concepts of motion but the more advanced down as well, then that is innovation for the individual.

Some thoughts,
Rick


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Mar 29, 2004)

heee heee......

No, it certainly is not complete... realistic Arts usually aren't.  Most people are having enough trouble trying to figure out what is actually available here already, much less being able to evaluate what can be expanded upon.... LOL
 :asian:


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Mar 29, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Looks like this thread either died or someone got pi**** off.
> 
> Mike


Hope he comes back. Forums where everyone agrees on everything all the time kinda lack the interest factor.  He made some good point, and I'm still trying to find the binary-thingy essay he keeps referring to.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Mar 29, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> heee heee......
> 
> No, it certainly is not complete... realistic Arts usually aren't. Most people are having enough trouble trying to figure out what is actually available here already, much less being able to evaluate what can be expanded upon.... LOL
> :asian:


Devilishly subtle.


----------



## Doc (Mar 29, 2004)

Let's look at it this way. Ed Parker's Kenpo in any interpretation was not complete, however what most should be doing is trying to improve THEIR Kenpo, NOT Ed Parker's. Although we may all like to think differently the truth is most can't understand what they have, let alone improve it for someone else. Work on your kenpo and leave Parker's alone. And for the record Bruce was a physical specimen who trained like a mad man, but he was not very knowledgeable. He learned a great deal from Ed Parker, Gene LeBell, Wally Jay, Sea Oh Choi, and Danny Inosanto.


----------



## Seig (Mar 30, 2004)

I think Mr. C and Doc summed it up nicely.  This is the way I explain it to my students, "I am not Mr. Parker, I cannot be Mr. Parker, I do not want to be Mr. Parker.  I am not Mr. C, I cannot be Mr. C, I do not want to be Mr. C.  You are not me....."

Kenpo can only be as complete as the individual studying it.


----------



## Zoran (Mar 30, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> heee heee......
> 
> No, it certainly is not complete... realistic Arts usually aren't.  Most people are having enough trouble trying to figure out what is actually available here already, much less being able to evaluate what can be expanded upon.... LOL
> :asian:





			
				Doc said:
			
		

> Let's look at it this way. Ed Parker's Kenpo in any interpretation was not complete, however what most should be doing is trying to improve THEIR Kenpo, NOT Ed Parker's. Although we may all like to think differently the truth is most can't understand what they have, let alone improve it for someone else. Work on your kenpo and leave Parker's alone.





			
				Seig said:
			
		

> I think Mr. C and Doc summed it up nicely. This is the way I explain it to my students, "I am not Mr. Parker, I cannot be Mr. Parker, I do not want to be Mr. Parker. I am not Mr. C, I cannot be Mr. C, I do not want to be Mr. C. You are not me....."
> 
> Kenpo can only be as complete as the individual studying it.



Common sense?  :erg: 

Please don't mess up my stereo typing of AK practitioners as over complicating things.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 30, 2004)

Not all of us are lucky enough to have a "grandmaster" winking at us, with books ghost written by Senior Grandmasters, and telling us we are on the right track. Sometimes the study of another system is what opens doors where they were not accessible before. To use kenpo as an excuse to stop exploring and expanding does you a great disservice. Half the kenpoists out there stopped listening to Mr. Parker back in the seventies. I have no doubt that another half of the kenpoists he had, he would have lost once he announced his next change. Why seek when your local  "grandmaster" has sought for you?
Sean :asian:


----------



## MJS (Mar 30, 2004)

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> Not all of us are lucky enough to have a "grandmaster" winking at us, with books ghost written by Senior Grandmasters, and telling us we are on the right track. Sometimes the study of another system is what opens doors where they were not accessible before. To use kenpo as an excuse to stop exploring and expanding does you a great disservice. Half the kenpoists out there stopped listening to Mr. Parker back in the seventies. I have no doubt that another half of the kenpoists he had, he would have lost once he announced his next change. Why seek when your local  "grandmaster" has sought for you?
> Sean :asian:



Yes, Thank you!!  My thoughts exactly.  There are some people who dont live close to a Senior, so we pretty much have to go with the hand that was dealt to us.  Faulting someone because they dont have that option, or because we might look elsewhere to supplement what we dont have is also wrong.

Mike


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Mar 30, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Faulting someone because because we might look elsewhere to supplement what we don't have is also wrong.   Mike



Who said that?

 :asian:


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 30, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> Who said that?
> 
> :asian:



I think his name was...oh I'd better just not say anything.


----------



## MJS (Mar 30, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> Who said that?
> 
> :asian:



Not in those exact words, but it was hinted at.  Look at some of the past posts.  I've talked for how long now about the importance of stand up guys learning about the ground.  My answer- "Why do you need to crosstrain when its already in there?"  

Mike


----------



## MJS (Mar 30, 2004)

Old Fat Kenpoka said:
			
		

> I think his name was...oh I'd better just not say anything.



 :boing2:  :boing2:  :boing2: 

Mike


----------



## Seig (Mar 30, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Yes, Thank you!! My thoughts exactly. There are some people who dont live close to a Senior, so we pretty much have to go with the hand that was dealt to us. Faulting someone because they dont have that option, or because we might look elsewhere to supplement what we dont have is also wrong.
> 
> Mike


Sorry, I have to take issue with this.  I do not live within reasonable distance of my instructor.  Not only did I seek him out, I went to considerable effort to not only bring him to me, but to do so on a regular basis.  With the electronic age such as it is, there is no reason other than time that I cannot learn something from him everyday.  Statements like, no one is close are no longer viable.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 30, 2004)

It's also worth considering the notion that after a certain point--fourth/fifth degree, say, after around twenty years in--we might oughta consider easing off on blaming the system, or our instructors, for our own lack of imagination and faith (there's an oxymoron to contemplate), or our own inertia and unwillingness to open up, or own own fetishization and pomposity...

Thank goodness I'm not there yet. Otherwise, I'd be forced to examine myself--which, I'd thought, was a big chunk of what martial arts were all about. 

Oh well. Could be worse...could be English teachers. "The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves/That we be slaves..."

Hm.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Mar 31, 2004)

> It's also worth considering the notion that after a certain point--fourth/fifth degree, say, after around twenty years in--we might oughta consider easing off on blaming the system, or our instructors, for our own lack of imagination and faith (there's an oxymoron to contemplate), *or our own inertia and unwillingness to open up, or own own fetishization and pomposity...*



Hey Pot, the Kettle just called and he has something he wants to tell you!!!

I would move it up to after 1st degree because after your first things get a little more wishy washy as to who knows how or what.  I was under the impression that you were the one who was unwilling to be open to outside ideas.  You also seem obsessed with the evils of binary systems.  Sure life isn't always that simple, but in alot of cases things can get widdled down to left or right, up or down, hot or cold, black or white, and traditional or non-traditional.  I admit that their are times when things might be right in the middle, luke warm, or gray, but this isn't always the case.  You talk about how people are pompous and unwilling to open up, yet you have never even stepped out to see what else is around.  



> Thank goodness I'm not there yet. Otherwise, I'd be forced to examine myself--which, I'd thought, was a big chunk of what martial arts were all about.



That's funny I thought the martial arts were primarily a way to relay methods of self-defense, i.e. to teach you how to fight.  Sure I have several good friends I met in the MA's, and learned a little about life by seeing and helping people get through some akward and tough times. Sure, I get a decent workout when I train, but I started the MA's to learn to fight and I am still motivated by this factor.   If  I wanted to be introspective I would have taken a bunch of philosophy courses.  I should also point out that some of the worst people I have ever met were affiliated, in some fashion, with the Martial arts.  

Robert, I don't know you from Adam, but you kinda strike me as some old fuddy-duddy grandpa who doesn't want to use the new fang-dangled CD player because he would rather listen to his records.  This in itself isn't all that bad, but just because you like your record player doesn't mean that the CD player doesn't offer better sound quality.


----------



## Doc (Mar 31, 2004)

Hey lighten up on the "fuddie duddie granpa's. I have an extensive collection of vinyl records with a turntable, and a bunch of CD's as well thank you. %-}


----------



## MJS (Mar 31, 2004)

Seig said:
			
		

> Sorry, I have to take issue with this.  I do not live within reasonable distance of my instructor.  Not only did I seek him out, I went to considerable effort to not only bring him to me, but to do so on a regular basis.  With the electronic age such as it is, there is no reason other than time that I cannot learn something from him everyday.  Statements like, no one is close are no longer viable.



And that is your choice to do.  Again, just because one is able to do it, does not mean that everyone can.  

Mike


----------



## MJS (Mar 31, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> It's also worth considering the notion that after a certain point--fourth/fifth degree, say, after around twenty years in--we might oughta consider easing off on blaming the system, or our instructors, for our own lack of imagination and faith (there's an oxymoron to contemplate), or our own inertia and unwillingness to open up, or own own fetishization and pomposity...[q/quote]
> 
> Speaking of opening up, you dont seem to open on learning other things Robert.
> 
> ...


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 31, 2004)

Hm. Yep, well, pretty much what I wrote last time. I guess I'd be more receptive if what it's claimed I think were actually what I'm thinking, but no real point in writing anything else in the face of such...analysis.


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 31, 2004)

So, now that we are all pretty much disgusted with each other and done talking...I will take the opportunity to summarize the arguments:

Those who believe EPAK was not complete do so for one or more of the following reasons:
* Didn't have access to a top-notch EPAK teacher
* Study EPAK under a top-notch teacher who thought that Mr. Parker was going to make some changes (like a 16 tech curriculum, more knife fighting, etc.)
* Study EPAK under a top-notch teacher who wants to emphasize/develop some additional and/or different concepts, techniques, or training methods.
* Have been exposed to one or more styles that has something that they had not previously discovered in EPAK or that might actually possibly not already be in EPAK.
* They are now stick-fighters or grapplers spending all their money on UFC Pay-Per-Views and Jiu-Jitsu Instructional videos who can't clearly articulate Kenpo concepts.

Those who believe EPAK is complete do so for one or more of the following reasons:
*  They have access to a top-notch EPAK teacher
* Study EPAK under a top-notch teacher who thought that Mr. Parker would never make any changes to anything ever again.
* Study EPAK under a teacher who spent a lot of time with Mr. Parker and is working valiantly to teach exactly what he was taught.
* Have not been exposed to any other styles in enough depth to discover anything that might actually possibly not already be in EPAK.
* They are now patch-wearing chest-slapping black-gi-wearing hand-over-fist-saluting "oss"-saying Kenpoists pursuing the lifelong path to Kenpo completeness.

Did I miss anything?  Will you flame me for this?  Will you add to or subtract from my reputation points?  Or has everyone crossed their arms and turned their backs on this intruguing but ultimately unanswerable question?


----------



## MJS (Mar 31, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Hm. Yep, well, pretty much what I wrote last time. I guess I'd be more receptive if what it's claimed I think were actually what I'm thinking, but no real point in writing anything else in the face of such...analysis.



What are you talking about Robert? My point is, is that regardless of if you've been in the art for 10 yrs or 20 yrs. the fact remains that some people have noticed something lacking.  If you havent, thats fine, but dont assume that just cuz you train with Larry and dont seem to see any problems, that there really are none.  

Mike


----------



## MJS (Mar 31, 2004)

Old Fat Kenpoka said:
			
		

> So, now that we are all pretty much disgusted with each other and done talking...I will take the opportunity to summarize the arguments:
> 
> Those who believe EPAK was not complete do so for one or more of the following reasons:
> * Didn't have access to a top-notch EPAK teacher
> ...



Looks good to me!!!

Mike


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 31, 2004)

The question is unanswerable--and leads to these same ratholes again and again--because it isn't a very good question. In other words, the way it's phrased, as a simple, "either/or," choice, makes it impossible to usefully discuss the matter. 

In other other words, its construction as a binary opposition--a set of false alternatives, for those of you who like considering rhetorical means--guarantees that nothing is going to get said after a while: it's a dead end.

I simply don't see this as a matter of, "tradition," (dead or otherwise) vs. "innovation," (crappy or otherwise), however insistent others may be on such a construction.

More meaningful questions would include:

What are the origins of these ideas about, "tradition," and. "innovation?"
How do tradition-and-innovation function as advertising slogans in the martial arts?
To what extent has kenpo attempted to institutionalize, "innovation?" as a sort of martial arts, "permanent revolution?"
In what places, and to what purposes, do temrs such as, "tradition," and, "innovation," circulate most prominently?
How does tradition figure into innovation? How does innovation work within so-called tradition?
What is the role of the individual unconscious and its resistances to knowledge in the martial arts, and to what extent do these resistances crystallize around terms such as, "tradition," and "innovation?"
How does the figure of Mr. Parker get emplaced and circulated in contemporary discussions of martial arts?
To what extent does this sort of, "trad v. rad," discussion impose a structure of male fantasy upon the actual history of martial arts?


----------



## Doc (Mar 31, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> The question is unanswerable--and leads to these same ratholes again and again--because it isn't a very good question. In other words, the way it's phrased, as a simple, "either/or," choice, makes it impossible to usefully discuss the matter.
> 
> In other other words, its construction as a binary opposition--a set of false alternatives, for those of you who like considering rhetorical means--guarantees that nothing is going to get said after a while: it's a dead end.
> 
> ...


Finally the real question(s) unfold. To the list I would humbly add one simple inquiry.

"Why is kenpo always spoken of as some kind of single entity that is exactly the same for everyone, no matter when they studied (50's to 2004), how they studied (in person, books, commercial, garage, video, etc.) or whom they studied with (Parker or 10 times removed student after his death)?" Can you say 50 years worth of "telephone games" all running simultaneously delivering the same message at the end (now)? I find the variables so great to make a "single kenpo" discussion virtually moot.


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Mar 31, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> Why is kenpo always spoken of as some kind of single entity that is exactly the same for everyone, no matter when they studied (50's to 2004), how they studied (in person, books, commercial, garage, video, etc.) or whom they studied with (Parker or 10 times removed student after his death)?" Can you say 50 years worth of "telephone games" all running simultaneously delivering the same message at the end (now)? I find the variables so great to make a "single kenpo" discussion virtually moot.



Doc:  You have answered the question posed by this thread.  And you have answered "No."  Thank you.


----------



## pete (Mar 31, 2004)

looks like the same "tastes great, less filling" argument all over again... so i'll just point to a prior post that does move toward finally answering the question... said the chicken to the egg...

http://martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=215101&postcount=51


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Mar 31, 2004)

Old Fat Kenpoka said:
			
		

> So, now that we are all pretty much disgusted with each other and done talking...I will take the opportunity to summarize the arguments:
> 
> Those who believe EPAK was not complete do so for one or more of the following reasons:
> * Didn't have access to a top-notch EPAK teacher
> ...


Are you sure you don't write final reports for qualitative analysis/focus group studies?


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Mar 31, 2004)

Male fantasy in the martial arts?  I don't know about you, but for me that brings to mind girls in Hooters outfits doing BJJ in mineral oil.  You'll have to help me out, Robert.  What do YOU mean by fantasy?

Dr. Dave


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Apr 1, 2004)

> Male fantasy in the martial arts? I don't know about you, but for me that brings to mind girls in Hooters outfits doing BJJ in mineral oil.



SWEET!!!!  artyon: 



> You'll have to help me out, Robert. What do YOU mean by fantasy?
> 
> Dr. Dave



He has been muttering about this for a while now.  Something about how we all want to be Rambo or something.  All I know is that my MA training has served its purpose on several occasions, no fantasy necessary.  I also know many others for whom this is also true.  There are those who take kenpo for the workout or social interaction, but there are those who are interested in learning how to defend themselves.  Apparently with good reason.  In my area of the country we have had numerous cases of road rage, violent kidknappings, rape, murder, and other random craziness.  There are apparently groups of teenagers who walk around movie theatre parking lots just starting fights with innocent patrons.  Several people have been abducted from grocery store parking lots over the last few months.  Of course then there are just the random acts of violence.  Percentage wise you may never get into a fight or have to use what you know, but wouldn't it be nice to know something if you ever needed it?  Kinda like all those people who go through the trouble to get their CHL or CCW and never carry, it just seems a little retarded.  If you aren't going to carry why get the License or buy the gun. Same with karate, all the other stuff is cool but if you aren't learning how to defend yourself then you're really missing something.


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Apr 1, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Are you sure you don't write final reports for qualitative analysis/focus group studies?



Well, actually...I have.   I am also a Six Sigma Black Belt.


----------



## MJS (Apr 1, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Male fantasy in the martial arts?  I don't know about you, but for me that brings to mind girls in Hooters outfits doing BJJ in mineral oil.  You'll have to help me out, Robert.  What do YOU mean by fantasy?
> 
> Dr. Dave



Yes, I agree with KY.  Rob is always talking about this fixation we all seem to have with fighting.  I personally dont see what the confusion is.  I mean, anytime you have to defend yourself, youre gonna be fighting right?  But hey, the BJJ oil wrestling sounds pretty cool!

Mike


----------



## Kenpomachine (Apr 3, 2004)

Old Fat Kenpoka said:
			
		

> So, now that we are all pretty much disgusted with each other and done talking...I will take the opportunity to summarize the arguments:
> 
> Those who believe EPAK was not complete do so for one or more of the following reasons:
> * Didn't have access to a top-notch EPAK teacher
> ...



I consider my teachers to be top-notch, even if they're not first generation and haven't met Parker. And as far as I know, they want to develop good kenpoists, kenpoists who can react in any given circumstance, with a technique from the curriculum or with a technique created ad-hoc, kenpoists who can think by themselves and be different from one another and not clones. Kenpoists who can disect a technique and then extract what can be learn and once understood began internalizing it. 

Where does that leave me?

Kenpo is about personal growing, technical and otherwise. Too many people focus on the martial and forget the art, and viceversa, and lose the balance. Too many people forget students are not clones or robots, and forget that kenpo is different for any of us.

But if I don't misunderstand you, once Ed Parker is dead, EPAK is complete, as it was the works of Ed Parker. But besides, kenpo is alive, ergo it can't be complete and it's changing everyday.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Apr 5, 2004)

I still haven't recieved my reply about Hooters girls in mineral oil...:idunno:


----------

