Problems with "traditional arts" part 2

[drop bear]

I agree...but you changed the topic. IMHO Wing Chun is just fine the way it is. And I imagine there are good folks out there passing it down just as it was/is designed; without adding flying knees to it.

There is a thing on YouTube that shows Christmas as it is celebrated today is a mash up of Christian, pagan and roman beliefs.

Yet we consider it a Christian holiday.

When we look at what is or isn't chun it is only based on our biases.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You can't depend on a good king to lead a country. If you have good constitution, any average president can lead that country.

IMO, if a MA system is designed well, any average instructor should be able to pass it down to the next generation.

I’m not convinced a system -no matter how good - can overcome the mediocrity of an instructor.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Sparring is a drill.

Yes and No. It just depends on what type of sparring is being done. For me it was a 50% drill and 50% applications training in the context of a resisting opponent. The only reason I say that the applications training wasn't a drill is because nothing was predetermined in terms of random attacks, evasions, and defenses. I don't train like kung fu wang by forcing myself to do a specific attack or defense. For me that often makes me and students force techniques. My training belief is that one should be able to use kung fu from any position that they find themselves in, which is the reason why I have so many videos demonstrating my ability to do various types of techniques and concepts. I

Depending on how someone uses sparring it will either be a drill or it won't be. For me drills are things that are done over and over in the context of repetition of a technique. Only using a sweep during sparring would make it a drill for me.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Drill is like "making love". Sparring is like "raping someone."

I must honestly say that this doesn't fit me at all. I laugh and smile a lot when I'm sparring. lol.

You can't depend on a good king to lead a country. If you have good constitution, any average president can lead that country.

ha ha ha.. I know where my mind went right away lol.

IMO, if a MA system is designed well, any average instructor should be able to pass it down to the next generation.

A few years ago I would have thought the same thing, but an average instructor could vary. The question becomes, "Average in what?"

Let's take the example of your leader. If you leader doesn't understand how processes actually work, then all you'll get is a leader that will tell you a bunch of theories of how he or she thinks things work. This often becomes a problem because it's not grounded in a realistic understanding of the methods, concepts, nor of the opponents.

This is exactly what is happening with many of today's martial arts masters. They understand how to do the technique and they know a lot of techniques, but they don't have enough understanding of the technique to apply the techniques.

So when you say "Average Instructor" one has to put it into context of "Average in what? From what I've been told of TMA and what I'm learning. Anyone who has the ability to use the techniques in sparring and against different systems is far from being average.

Anyone who is a good teacher is far from being an Average teacher.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

"Average in what?"

Can we write down all information from any given MA system in great detail? Can students learn directly from those information? If it's possible then average instructor won't even be needed.

If we can teach a robot how to fight, we should be able to teach a human being how to fight.

 

[Anarax]

I'll go a step further, Anarax. While this can be useful information, I'm not sure how important it is. I'll use my primary art as an example. Because I know NGA has roots in Daito-ryu, most likely taught by Kitaro Yoshida, I know it has near-direct links to Ueshiba's Aikido, more direct links to all the current lines of Daito-ryu, and some pretty thin indirect links (through Kitaro) to Yanagi-ryu. That's useful information, but I'm not sure it's that important. I've talked with students who, though they had to know that at some point to pass their yellow belt (first colored belt) test in the NGAA, have long since forgotten it or confused it. Why? Because it doesn't really matter to their training. It matters for those of us investigating to look for where principles came from (usually, because we either don't really "get" a technique, or because we're looking for a better way than what we know), but to the average student, it's just trivia. A clear case is the fact that we are almost sure Kitaro is the source of the Daito-ryu base of NGA, but we can't be sure. A knowledgeable instructor in another art tried to help us with researching that, but the Daito-ryu records are somewhat fragmented and might not even be complete at this point. His final response to us was (paraphrased), "I wouldn't worry about it. It doesn't really matter whether Morita trained under Kitaro, or he invented NGA entirely on his own from a bunch of made-up techniques. It's the effectiveness of the art that matters. Go train."

This is why it bugs me when I see so much emphasis on lineage. It doesn't seem important enough to really deserve the air time it gets. My "lineage" in NGA is interesting, but I've only ever used it to help folks understand what to expect (some known differences between the two men who were once the ranking active NGAA instructors). If someone were to claim to have learned their NGA from Bryce Lee (who left the NGAA and probably stopped calling it NGA some 20+ years ago), that wouldn't really tell me anything useful.

I think having a base knowledge of what your style(not just the name) is and where it comes from is important. Being able to recite all the masters in your lineage by date isn't really important at all.

I mostly approach it from a contextual perceptive when it comes to style history. Being able to answer questions about Kali like "why do you guys start with weapons?" or "why don't you guys have high kicks?', I can answer them as a practitioner of that art. I think students should be aware of the how the historical background shaped the technical components of the art.

 

[drop bear]

There is a thing on YouTube that shows Christmas as it is celebrated today is a mash up of Christian, pagan and roman beliefs.

Yet we consider it a Christian holiday.

When we look at what is or isn't chun it is only based on our biases.

 

[now disabled]

Traditional Arts :- My limited knowledge (japanese arts) would make me say that alot of the arguments over them has come more in the late 20th to early 21st century and that probably has more to do with the way society has evolved as in it is easier to check now than it ever was. Also there are far more "researchers" out there now who dig into things sometimes for their own good sometimes for the common good (I do use that term loosely) than ever there was.

I was always told that no matter the tradition claimed or not all the arts evolved over time so what it started out as, will have changed eg. what started out as a battlefield art changed when there were no battles (or it ceased to exist) ... Instructors had to earn a living so they adapted this to the time they were in.
Lineages I have seen some very very heated arguments over and it never gets settled fully, personally I do look at the lineage (I have time now) but always with an open mind as to it might not be exactly as it claimed or has embellishments added, be they back in history or be they fairly modern. I also would add that when reading old scrolls (translations) you are dependent on the translator getting it right (not only the right word or words but the right context and the context at the time it was written not the context of today) and not adding their own to it or taking away from it.

Really are their any traditional unchanged arts?

 

[APL76]

Traditional Arts :- My limited knowledge (japanese arts) would make me say that alot of the arguments over them has come more in the late 20th to early 21st century and that probably has more to do with the way society has evolved as in it is easier to check now than it ever was. Also there are far more "researchers" out there now who dig into things sometimes for their own good sometimes for the common good (I do use that term loosely) than ever there was.

I was always told that no matter the tradition claimed or not all the arts evolved over time so what it started out as, will have changed eg. what started out as a battlefield art changed when there were no battles (or it ceased to exist) ... Instructors had to earn a living so they adapted this to the time they were in.
Lineages I have seen some very very heated arguments over and it never gets settled fully, personally I do look at the lineage (I have time now) but always with an open mind as to it might not be exactly as it claimed or has embellishments added, be they back in history or be they fairly modern. I also would add that when reading old scrolls (translations) you are dependent on the translator getting it right (not only the right word or words but the right context and the context at the time it was written not the context of today) and not adding their own to it or taking away from it.

Really are their any traditional unchanged arts?

I have it on good authority that the Tenshi Koden Katori Shinto Ryu's secret scrolls are really KFC vouchers.

 

[TSDTexan]

A lot of that seems more targeted at TCMA than TJMA, in my view.

Which raises a question... why are the traditional Chinese martial arts being targeted at a higher rate then the Japanese ones?

And this also raises a parallel question. Why do some forms of Japanese ju-jutsu get a lot more heat and criticism than other JJJs?

 

[TSDTexan]

I would say some MA do not spar, nor should they.

I will give two examples
Kyudo and Iaido.

Both use sharp live steel.
I cannot see a means to safely engage in fully resisting arrows being shot at me, or someone quick drawcutting a 3 foot long two handed razor at me.

They are both effective martial arts, in their specific roles, without the needs of fully noncompliant and resisting opponents.

 

[now disabled]

I have it on good authority that the Tenshi Koden Katori Shinto Ryu's secret scrolls are really KFC vouchers.

yep if your looking at those scrolls then they will be ummm suspect lol...

However if your looking at Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu ...you may get a few more folks arguing lol

 

[now disabled]

Which raises a question... why are the traditional Chinese martial arts being targeted at a higher rate then the Japanese ones?

And this also raises a parallel question. Why do some forms of Japanese ju-jutsu get a lot more heat and criticism than other JJJs?

TCMA that could be more a political thing than any other reason and some forms of JJJ to me things like that go in cycles as in like what I posted earlier things are being "dug up" and contested and argued over or merely some studying one form see it as superior to another (go back in time and there was always (imo) competition (if that the correct word) between ryu, It was probably easier settled then lol as in whose students lived longest lol ...ok that is tongue in cheek...)

 

[APL76]

yep if your looking at those scrolls then they will be ummm suspect lol...

However if your looking at Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu ...you may get a few more folks arguing lol

Yeah, it was just a funny story a friend of mine who has been training in it for aover 20 years told me.

 

[APL76]

Just in case I get accused of keeping secrets to myself.


My friend had already gotten some (?? one of?? I don't know) of these scrolls, another guy had just been given one, and a third guy, who didn't have any was desperate to know what was in them. He asked my friend who told him he wasn't allowed to tell him, then the other guy (who had just gotten one) said to the third guy something like "hay, I’ll tell you what’s in them". The third guy got excited thinking he was about to be let in on the secret and eagerly went to hear what was in these secret scrolls and was told "they are vouchers for KFC", much to his disgust and everyone elses amusement.

 

[now disabled]

Just in case I get accused of keeping secrets to myself.


My friend had already gotten some (?? one of?? I don't know) of these scrolls, another guy had just been given one, and a third guy, who didn't have any was desperate to know what was in them. He asked my friend who told him he wasn't allowed to tell him, then the other guy (who had just gotten one) said to the third guy something like "hay, I’ll tell you what’s in them". The third guy got excited thinking he was about to be let in on the secret and eagerly went to hear what was in these secret scrolls and was told "they are vouchers for KFC", much to his disgust and everyone elses amusement.

Oh good old human nature lol... Everyone wants to know secrets lol... maybe what folks should think of is if you do get given a scroll from a school then (if you have studied there) then you already have the "secrets" (up to the level you have attained ...kinda ...sorta...).

I am sure as time passes scrolls will turn up in the public domain that will be translated and marketed as secret teachings ...are they secret ...yes and no lol ...but certainly they will not in any way give anyone any more "power" than anything else lol if they are in fact genuine then for what ever school or system they were written all they give is an insight to the past at the time they were written and the not a whole lot else

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Everyone wants to know secrets lol...

I would like to know the formula of Coca-Cola.

 

[now disabled]

I would like to know the formula of Coca-Cola.

would that be the original one or the one that has evolved lol?

 

[TSDTexan]

I would like to know the formula of Coca-Cola.

Coca-Cola (Coke) had cocaine in it, in varying amounts, from 1886 – 1929. At the time cocaine was legal and treated as a otc medicine.

 

[Anarax]

The student should take responsibility for this, but so should the instructor. Best outcome is if the instructor is using sparring as a teaching tool, and the student is using sparring as a learning and vetting tool - especially if the latter includes extra-art sparring.

Sparring is probably one of the most misunderstood components for MA beginners. What I've seen many times is new students too eager to begin sparring. They overlook the importance of learning the movements and techniques first. Not to say they need to master the techniques before sparring, but at least understand the fundamentals for safety reasons. Basic stances, break falls, etc.

For example, one of our beginners wanted to spar after class and he "blocked" a very slow kick with a "technique" we never taught him. He broke two of his fingers and is now out of training for a while because of it. I've checked kicks from beginners with my shin and unintentionally hurt them.

Sparring is crucial, but there should be a basic understating of the fundamentals or they'll hurt themselves. I agree that sparring or other additional training after class is a great idea. I sometimes ask my instructor if I can spar after class and he always obliges.