Creating New Martial Arts

[MarkBarlow]

Does the founder of a new system have a truly unique approach or perhaps a new and more practical way of teaching an old style? If not, I think it's often more about ego than innovation. Sadly, there are fewer and fewer team players out there.

 

[mwd0818]

Well, English lacks the "you" plural that exists in many other languages. (Ustedes in Spanish, for example.)

I think you would know better than that being in Virginia. . . although maybe it is too far from here and things are different.

Kentucky has "Y'all".

*shaking head* Maybe these rednecks do know a thing or two besides how to catch catfish with their bare hands . . .

 

[Milt G.]

Milt, thank you, but something you said has got me thinking and I have a follow up question.



What about Parker who certainly did not have 30 years in one system when he created his new kenpo.

What about Chow? He did not have 30 years in kenpo-jujitsu before creating his own methodology and teaching it in 1944. Heck, he was only 30 at the time!

Morihei Ueshiba the founder of Akido had split 29 years of training between Tenjin Shin'yō-ryū Jujutsu, Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu, Gotō-ha Yagyū Shingan-ryū, Gotō-ha Yagyū Shingan-ryū, Judo, and various other arts. And it was Aiki-jūjutsu that he used as his base and transformed and he started training that in 1912, that means he only had 15 years in the art before he transformed it into Aikido.

Chan Heung was only 30 when he created Choy Li Fut....

Hello,

I did not count, or consider, the ground floor "developers" of the systems widely popular today when I answered your post. Everything is much more sophisticated, and scrutinized these days. Ed Parker's Kenpo could have had 10 techniques and two kata, total, and would still be accepted as a system, IMO. That would not happen these days, I think. Everybody knows more about the arts, in general, these days.

I think Ed Parker, and many of the other ground floor "founders", had the skill, connections AND the ability to be "at the right place, at the right time". So much of opportunity is based on that, it seems. The "earth" was much more "martial art" fertile in the 50's and 60's!

I was referring to new systems of Kenpo developed after the base systems we have now. The "revisions", if you were. There are too many systems and styles these days. It was much easier to develop and "sell" a system when there is little or no competition.

Along with skill, all those you mentioned had the "right product", at the "right time". These days it is more practical and easier to pick an exsisting "art" and study it, then it is to develop your own. There is so much to choose from. I think there is pretty much something for everybody if you are willing to be somewhat flexable, as related to location, and take the time to look around.

I think credability and practicality should be big concerns when one developes their own Kenpo, or other martial art. I recommend students find an art rather then to "fabricate" one. So many with only a few months of "this art, and or, that art" are trying to put together their own systems. The depth should be the key, not the "variety". Not to mention all of the new 10th Dans...

I know, bla, bla, bla...

Thanks,
Milt G.

 

[jks9199]

I think you would know better than that being in Virginia. . . although maybe it is too far from here and things are different.

Kentucky has "Y'all".

*shaking head* Maybe these rednecks do know a thing or two besides how to catch catfish with their bare hands . . .

While I'm in NORTHERN Virginia, we're still far enough south to use y'all. Or I could borrow from my kinfolk in Pennsylvania and go with "you'uns". But neither is common to written English...

But we are diverting from the thread topic...

I'll rephrase my original point: If one desires to create one's own new martial art, I would suggest simply developing one's personal style and trying to teach it -- and leaving the "creation" an organic process that will either be passed on or not.

 

[Xinglu]

Well, English lacks the "you" plural that exists in many other languages. (Ustedes in Spanish, for example.)

Sure it does! Just go to Jersey - "yous" is common place in the language

 

[Carol]

I really try to avoid "you" in the 2nd person plural. Instead I might say "tell me what you folks think" or "If you and your team could do xxxx please"

Usually if someone has to read something "official" from me it is evening or late at night in a statement that contains a lot of technobabble...and the reader may not speak English as their first language. It can be a little cumbersome, but sometimes the extra clarity can go a long way.

 

[tuffy]

I certainly don't, and please, I kindly ask that you don't suppose more than what was asked. I'm only interested in opinions for the sake of exploring this topic, it was interesting to me and really got me thinking about the formation of Kenpo as we know it and how fast "new styles" of Kenpo popped up and continue to do so. So let's not make me out to have any hidden agenda.

While my Kenpo is unique to me because of the influences from the neijia arts I train in, I have no interest in become a Sijo of any art. If I ever find myself in such a position, I shall promptly stop teaching. I personally don't feel I have much to "tea" to offer the art of Kenpo. Perhaps I'm selling myself short, but in truth - I aspire to be nothing more than a simple Sifu who enjoys training and exploring the arts. Who knows, maybe if I train hard enough I will become a "master" in the next life So until then - let me be perfectly clear that I am not asking for any other reason than to hear opinions and explore those opinions further. Pure academia.

Didn't you already create your own art and go by the title "Sijo"?

 

[Xinglu]

Didn't you already create your own art and go by the title "Sijo"?

What strange question, you must have dug a while to find this thread as it is over 6 months old now. I will answer the question, though I suspect you are here to troll, and I have already been clear on this thread that I have no interest in such a thing.

I have neither created any art or do I go by any such title. I organize a small training group where ideas are exchanged and I go by my name, otherwise I train with my Shifus.

Perhaps in my next life I will have enough knowledge, skill, time, and physical health to create something unique and call it my own. As for this life, I am content to learn from established systems and established methods. If I ever do open a commercial school, I will be teaching in my Shirfu's name, not my own. But such a thing is unlikely.

Peace be with you.

 

[KenpoDave]

Well, English lacks the "you" plural that exists in many other languages. (Ustedes in Spanish, for example.)

They use the plural in New Jersey...

 

[pmosiun1]

This thread really got me thinking a lot about new styles or incarnations of Kenpo or any MA for that matter. From the responses on there it seems a polarizing issue (and those fascinate me) and I would like to explore it a little more in depth.

So I pose the following question: What makes a person, in your eyes, qualified to create a new style of Kenpo or a new MA? For example (but not limited too) is it their ability to fight that proves it? The quality of students they produce? The depth of knowledge in the arts blended? A combination? If a combination of things, what are they and why?

You don't need other people's validation. Believe in yourself.

 

[Danjo]

So I pose the following question: What makes a person, in your eyes, qualified to create a new style of Kenpo or a new MA?

There's an old saying that goes, "The gift is the call". In other words, those that are gifted enough to form their own martial art and perceive the need to do so, will.

I think that the last century was a very fertile time for martial arts creation. There was a new occidental exposure to asian arts and people were like kids in a candy store. A combination of limited exposure to the arts in both variety and depth lead many that were talented enough to create their own art. This was largely done by either blending exisiting arts together (ala Kajukenbo) or else re-imagining/re-tooling an existing one (ala Gracie Jiujitsu).

The lack of variety due to isolation (especially in the pre-internet days), caused those who had trained in something like Karate to add things like grappling etc or boxing to it to round it out. Thus you would have the eclectic blends that have emerged.

The lack of depth (mostly resulting from GIs coming back with only a few months of training in a foreign country to teach what they had learned in the USA) also lead to the need to innovate in order to cover the preceived gaps in the art (as far as they had learned it). In other words, the art may have been complete, but the GI's training wasn't, so he did his best to add to what he knew.

The question now is do we really need new martial arts? I am hard pressed to find gaps in ranges or need that haven't been pretty thoroughly covered by what exists out there now. Just do a Google search and you'll find something to cover your needs. Most "new" systems these days result from eogmaniacs needing to be the boss of their own system and they want to place themselves on the same pedestal as those from the previous century who really did need to innovate and create.

 

[Xinglu]

You don't need other people's validation. Believe in yourself.

I think you missed the entire point of this thread. Thanks anyways.

 

[Xinglu]

There's an old saying that goes, "The gift is the call". In other words, those that are gifted enough to form their own martial art and perceive the need to do so, will.

I think that the last century was a very fertile time for martial arts creation. There was a new occidental exposure to asian arts and people were like kids in a candy store. A combination of limited exposure to the arts in both variety and depth lead many that were talented enough to create their own art. This was largely done by either blending exisiting arts together (ala Kajukenbo) or else re-imagining/re-tooling an existing one (ala Gracie Jiujitsu).

The lack of variety due to isolation (especially in the pre-internet days), caused those who had trained in something like Karate to add things like grappling etc or boxing to it to round it out. Thus you would have the eclectic blends that have emerged.

The lack of depth (mostly resulting from GIs coming back with only a few months of training in a foreign country to teach what they had learned in the USA) also lead to the need to innovate in order to cover the preceived gaps in the art (as far as they had learned it). In other words, the art may have been complete, but the GI's training wasn't, so he did his best to add to what he knew.

The question now is do we really need new martial arts? I am hard pressed to find gaps in ranges or need that haven't been pretty thoroughly covered by what exists out there now. Just do a Google search and you'll find something to cover your needs. Most "new" systems these days result from eogmaniacs needing to be the boss of their own system and they want to place themselves on the same pedestal as those from the previous century who really did need to innovate and create.

Thanks, great thoughts, and thank you for sharing them! I feel much the same way, with some much offered in my area, I really can't see the need for a new art at this time either. Then again there is a difference between a new art and a new system all together. Systems split and split some more. I mean Kenpo is wrought with such examples, however they all still teach kenpo (and not a new MA altogether) granted that keno has evolved or changed a bit but it is still kenpo. This can be done for many of the same reasons you've stated for the formation of a new art too.

Every-time I look at something like your art it amazes me to see the genius behind such a formation. I think your right, a calling is a good way to describe it, as it seems like it only happens like that a couple of times in a century.

 

[James Kovacich]

There's an old saying that goes, "The gift is the call". In other words, those that are gifted enough to form their own martial art and perceive the need to do so, will.

I think that the last century was a very fertile time for martial arts creation. There was a new occidental exposure to asian arts and people were like kids in a candy store. A combination of limited exposure to the arts in both variety and depth lead many that were talented enough to create their own art. This was largely done by either blending exisiting arts together (ala Kajukenbo) or else re-imagining/re-tooling an existing one (ala Gracie Jiujitsu).

The lack of variety due to isolation (especially in the pre-internet days), caused those who had trained in something like Karate to add things like grappling etc or boxing to it to round it out. Thus you would have the eclectic blends that have emerged.

The lack of depth (mostly resulting from GIs coming back with only a few months of training in a foreign country to teach what they had learned in the USA) also lead to the need to innovate in order to cover the preceived gaps in the art (as far as they had learned it). In other words, the art may have been complete, but the GI's training wasn't, so he did his best to add to what he knew.

The question now is do we really need new martial arts? I am hard pressed to find gaps in ranges or need that haven't been pretty thoroughly covered by what exists out there now. Just do a Google search and you'll find something to cover your needs. Most "new" systems these days result from eogmaniacs needing to be the boss of their own system and they want to place themselves on the same pedestal as those from the previous century who really did need to innovate and create.

I agreed with you until you reached your last paragraph. A lot, and I do mean a lot of new systems "just happened" over time. A good example is my wifes uncle (who I've been training under for awhile now) and his instructor Ray Subega (who was certified by both Sam & Mike) who relunctantly named what they created over the roughly 35 +or- years since they left their instructors Sam Brown-Hawaiian Kenpo and Mike Inay-Inayan Eskrima. What "they now have" is related but neither. There are many others who just trained over the years and now have a lot to offer and are in the category of "eye opening."

 

[Danjo]

I agreed with you until you reached your last paragraph. A lot, and I do mean a lot of new systems "just happened" over time. A good example is my wifes uncle (who I've been training under for awhile now) and his instructor Ray Subega (who was certified by both Sam & Mike) who relunctantly named what they created over the roughly 35 +or- years since they left their instructors Sam Brown-Hawaiian Kenpo and Mike Inay-Inayan Eskrima. What "they now have" is related but neither. There are many others who just trained over the years and now have a lot to offer and are in the category of "eye opening."

Well there may be exceptions, but you have to admit that most of what pops up as a "new" system or art is just renamed for the sake of the Soke's ego.

 

[James Kovacich]

No doubt, but the truth always prevails and sooner or later someone will experience the new system and see it for what it is, good or bad. It also could be separated between by the terms "new system" or "new style." I believe that (generally) those that use the terms "new system" or "their own system" are walking a cleaner path on their journey where one is always the eternal student.

 

[dianhsuhe]

Daniel- Are you going to return the book I loaned you?

 

[Danjo]

Daniel- Are you going to return the book I loaned you?

Which Daniel are you talking to?

 

[dianhsuhe]

Sorry Dan...LOL

Dan as in Xing Lu has my copy of "Ki In Daily Life" and no matter what I try he won't get it back to me.

Also, this does fit in this category as Xing Lu did found his own Martial Art awhile back Sho-Kai I believe? So I wanted to know how THAT is going and also intel about my book.

Thanks!