MartialIntent
Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #21
Henderson said:This sounds an awful lot like a "-do" vs "jutsu" debate.
Point taken though I feel there is potential to create as much art in jutsu as -do and I do not believe jutsu is in any way inferior to -do as we are led to believe.
I think many of us [I might include myself in this] declare ourselves as artists believing this to confer greater sophistication upon us than by being "mere" practitioners of a martial science.Henderson said:And for the record...I am a martial artist.:asian:
Martial ART is what many of us allude to but perhaps do not yet practise. Presumably many of you do though! Let me be clear, I in no way wish to belittle what we practise. Martial science and martial art have equal merit but they are still discrete concepts for that.
What I'm getting at here might be better illustrated by example. Ueshiba [Aikido forefather] was the architypal martial artist. He learnt the scientific tenets of his chosen disciplines through a variety of sources. However, he then transposed those principles into what could only be classified as art. Through Aikido he created and gave the community something wholly unique. Similarly Bruce Lee, Royce Gracie and a hundred others [you know them] but artists nonetheless. Art is something unique that cannot be replicated. And I think therein lies the key: creation and uniqueness, that's the art and they are artists.
Aikido is an art, Muay Thai is an art, Ilustrisimo, BJJ, the great and the good, they're all arts. However, we are not made artists by virtue of the fact that we practise an art. I think there's maybe a degree of conceit in all of us practitioners of the martial disciplines.
FWIW, I would envisage myself as martial scientist [with