Only an opinion: spare me.

[KangTsai]

Hello. I know hardly anything about what one learns when practising jeet kun do. I have no training experience in any related arts. Here's a small thought.
If Bruce Lee created JKD with the foundation of a style-less art of his own, isn't it hypocritical to teach JKD as a style? Something Bruce Lee directly opposed?

 

[Charlemagne]

Hello. I know hardly anything about what one learns when practising jeet kun do. I have no training experience in any related arts. Here's a small thought.
If Bruce Lee created JKD with the foundation of a style-less art of his own, isn't it hypocritical to teach JKD as a style? Something Bruce Lee directly opposed?

It's a fair question in my view, and one that has been beat up on many a MA forum over the years.

Not everyone teaches it as a set style. For example, Dan Inosanto and his students often teach what they refer to as JKD Concepts, and are quite willing to blend in other things as they find them. Most guys in his lineage are using Thai kicks these days rather than kicks from Savate for example. He teaches a separate system of Jun Fan Kung Fu, which seems to be more the set style that Lee taught. There are other first generation JKD instructors teaching it more as a set system, and they will argue with those who don't see it their way.

Jeet Kune Do Concepts or Original/Jun Fan Jeet Kune Do? • /r/jkd

 

[Xue Sheng]

From Bruce Lee

I have not invented a "new style," composite, modified or otherwise that is set within distinct form as apart from "this" method or "that" method. On the contrary, I hope to free my followers from clinging to styles, patterns, or molds. Remember that Jeet Kune Do is merely a name used, a mirror in which to see "ourselves". . . Jeet Kune Do is not an organized institution that one can be a member of. Either you understand or you don't, and that is that.

There is no mystery about my style. My movements are simple, direct and non-classical. The extraordinary part of it lies in its simplicity. Every movement in Jeet Kune-Do is being so of itself. There is nothing artificial about it. I always believe that the easy way is the right way. Jeet Kune-Do is simply the direct expression of one's feelings with the minimum of movements and energy. The closer to the true way of Kung Fu, the less wastage of expression there is.

Finally, a Jeet Kune Do man who says Jeet Kune Do is exclusively Jeet Kune Do is simply not with it. He is still hung up on his self-closing resistance, in this case anchored down to reactionary pattern, and naturally is still bound by another modified pattern and can move within its limits. He has not digested the simple fact that truth exists outside all molds; pattern and awareness is never exclusive.

Again let me remind you Jeet Kune Do is just a name used, a boat to get one across, and once across it is to be discarded and not to be carried on one's back.

With that said, I trained JKD only briefly on the original side of the fence. I have thought about the above quote quite a lot, especially this part of it

Again let me remind you Jeet Kune Do is just a name used, a boat to get one across, and once across it is to be discarded and not to be carried on one's back.

But after training the original I see it like this. It is looked at as a style, but it is not taught like many styles. I have yet to see a mass produced version like you see in TKD. And my short exposure to it taught me volumes about the other styles I had trained and was training at the time. I am rather happy there are still those teaching he original because it then gives you better insight into what you are doing and for me it showed me what was meant (IMO) as the classical mess.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Hello. I know hardly anything about what one learns when practising jeet kun do. I have no training experience in any related arts. Here's a small thought.
If Bruce Lee created JKD with the foundation of a style-less art of his own, isn't it hypocritical to teach JKD as a style? Something Bruce Lee directly opposed?

If it has principles that organize what makes parts work together, then it's a style (IMO). If it doesn't, then I'm not sure it's anything you can teach or even talk about in any organized fashion.

 

[Touch Of Death]

On many levels, style of no-style, is just a sales pitch.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

On many levels, style of no-style, is just a sales pitch.

It is now, anyway. I'm unsure if Lee meant it only as such, or if it was simply a more Eastern way of saying it's an open style based on principles rather than a specific set of techniques. I tend to think he meant the latter, and that's something that can be taught as a system without violating his original intent.

Take all of my opinions on this with a large-ish grain of salt, since I'm not a student or practitioner of JKD - just a martial artist who digs around in various styles for new insight.

 

[Kickboxer101]

I always saw it the same as mma. Mma isn't a set style e.g karate is a set style because every school in that style of karate will learn the same exact moves and katas, but mma gyms are different. Some may focus more on striking, some more on jiu jitsu, some on wrestling so while mma is a style it's not a set style that everyone will do the same way.

 

[Buka]

Have to call it something, I guess. Even if it was called "stuff" or "fight stuff we do", that would be calling it something.
One of the best seafood restaurants in Boston is the No Name. Which, of course, has been called the No Name by everybody forever.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Have to call it something, I guess. Even if it was called "stuff" or "fight stuff we do", that would be calling it something.
One of the best seafood restaurants in Boston is the No Name. Which, of course, has been called the No Name by everybody forever.

I have always found the name rather ironic.... I'm referring to "No Name".... not JKD

 

[Tez3]

I have always found the name rather ironic.... I'm referring to "No Name".... not JKD

in Erewhon?

 

[Xue Sheng]

in Erewhon?

In Boston

 

[Juany118]

Have to call it something, I guess. Even if it was called "stuff" or "fight stuff we do", that would be calling it something.
One of the best seafood restaurants in Boston is the No Name. Which, of course, has been called the No Name by everybody forever.

The problem is a pissing match of "school politics" has evolved around this very issue. On the one side what they call "Original JKD". This is the last form of JKD Bruce Lee taught closed door students and certified them in. The instructors of this style (yes it is a style) say that the Tao of Jeet Kun Do is on the practitioner. In essence when they become skilled enough they take what works best for them from the style they were taught. Thing is the JKD Lee taught at the end was not the same as the JKD Lee taught Inosanto in the beginning (Guro Dan was his first student and first to be certified in both JKD and Jun Fan again.). Guro Dan in one interview said there were periods where Lee was changing JKD on a monthly basis.

JKD concepts also keeps the JKD essence on the Instructor side. As @Charlemagne said, "Original JKD" often uses Savate style kicks, JKD concepts has more Muay Thai style kicks, the Instructors have continued the evolution of the art, while keeping it grounded in the roots of Kung Fu that was the original Foundation of Lee's JKD.

Btw I don't think one is better than the other I think they both honor Bruce Lee but in a different way. I think "Original JKD" honors Bruce Lee directly by teaching the JKD he taught at the time of his death. Having read the Tao of Jeet Kun Do many times I think JKD Concepts honors Lee indirectly by still evolving the art and thus honoring his expressed Philosophy.

However sadly, and ironically, the JKD community followed in the Foot steps of the first art Lee learned in part, Wing Chun. We have people not simply saying we follow in the spirit of Yip Man (who actually modified the WC he was originally taught over the years) instead we have people arguing over whether Wong Shun Leung, William Cheung etc is teaching "true" Yip Man WC. Silly arguments. It's like two brothers arguing over who is Mom and Dad's "favorite."

PS to say "in part" was not an insult to Lee but it is a fact that his parents sent him off to the US before he had completed learning the system.

 

[Buka]

The problem is a pissing match of "school politics" has evolved around this very issue. On the one side what they call "Original JKD". This is the last form of JKD Bruce Lee taught closed door students and certified them in. The instructors of this style (yes it is a style) say that the Tao of Jeet Kun Do is on the practitioner. In essence when they become skilled enough they take what works best for them from the style they were taught. Thing is the JKD Lee taught at the end was not the same as the JKD Lee taught Inosanto in the beginning (Guro Dan was his first student and first to be certified in both JKD and Jun Fan again.). Guro Dan in one interview said there were periods where Lee was changing JKD on a monthly basis.

JKD concepts also keeps the JKD essence on the Instructor side. As @Charlemagne said, "Original JKD" often uses Savate style kicks, JKD concepts has more Muay Thai style kicks, the Instructors have continued the evolution of the art, while keeping it grounded in the roots of Kung Fu that was the original Foundation of Lee's JKD.

Btw I don't think one is better than the other I think they both honor Bruce Lee but in a different way. I think "Original JKD" honors Bruce Lee directly by teaching the JKD he taught at the time of his death. Having read the Tao of Jeet Kun Do many times I think JKD Concepts honors Lee indirectly by still evolving the art and thus honoring his expressed Philosophy.

However sadly, and ironically, the JKD community followed in the Foot steps of the first art Lee learned in part, Wing Chun. We have people not simply saying we follow in the spirit of Yip Man (who actually modified the WC he was originally taught over the years) instead we have people arguing over whether Wong Shun Leung, William Cheung etc is teaching "true" Yip Man WC. Silly arguments. It's like two brothers arguing over who is Mom and Dad's "favorite."

PS to say "in part" was not an insult to Lee but it is a fact that his parents sent him off to the US before he had completed learning the system.

One of my old black belts has been training under Richard Bustillo for twenty five years now. They always kicked my butt when we hooked up. I don't remember what they called it, we just called it working out.

But, the No Name Diner has some seriously good chowder. I mean top notch.

 

[Xue Sheng]

One of my old black belts has been training under Richard Bustillo for twenty five years now. They always kicked my butt when we hooked up. I don't remember what they called it, we just called it working out.

But, the No Name Diner has some seriously good chowder. I mean top notch.

During my short exposure to JKD I have to tell you, politics were never disgust and it was called "working out" or "training".

As for No Name, I have heard that before

 

[Kickboxer101]

The problem is a pissing match of "school politics" has evolved around this very issue. On the one side what they call "Original JKD". This is the last form of JKD Bruce Lee taught closed door students and certified them in. The instructors of this style (yes it is a style) say that the Tao of Jeet Kun Do is on the practitioner. In essence when they become skilled enough they take what works best for them from the style they were taught. Thing is the JKD Lee taught at the end was not the same as the JKD Lee taught Inosanto in the beginning (Guro Dan was his first student and first to be certified in both JKD and Jun Fan again.). Guro Dan in one interview said there were periods where Lee was changing JKD on a monthly basis.

JKD concepts also keeps the JKD essence on the Instructor side. As @Charlemagne said, "Original JKD" often uses Savate style kicks, JKD concepts has more Muay Thai style kicks, the Instructors have continued the evolution of the art, while keeping it grounded in the roots of Kung Fu that was the original Foundation of Lee's JKD.

Btw I don't think one is better than the other I think they both honor Bruce Lee but in a different way. I think "Original JKD" honors Bruce Lee directly by teaching the JKD he taught at the time of his death. Having read the Tao of Jeet Kun Do many times I think JKD Concepts honors Lee indirectly by still evolving the art and thus honoring his expressed Philosophy.

However sadly, and ironically, the JKD community followed in the Foot steps of the first art Lee learned in part, Wing Chun. We have people not simply saying we follow in the spirit of Yip Man (who actually modified the WC he was originally taught over the years) instead we have people arguing over whether Wong Shun Leung, William Cheung etc is teaching "true" Yip Man WC. Silly arguments. It's like two brothers arguing over who is Mom and Dad's "favorite."

PS to say "in part" was not an insult to Lee but it is a fact that his parents sent him off to the US before he had completed learning the system.

I hate all that the politics in martial arts I don't care about any of that stuff. I don't care what lineage I'm from, I don't care if my style is pure whatever,I don't care if it's an offshoot. As long as what I'm learning works when it's needed (and so far it always has done ) I'm good and happy.

 

[Juany118]

During my short exposure to JKD I have to tell you, politics were never disgust and it was called "working out" or "training".

As for No Name, I have heard that before

Oh it won't be in a specific school where everyone is training together but just google "JKD Concepts vs Original JKD." The rivalry is there.