Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 48

Thread: Traditional vs Modern

  1. #1
    chris davis 200 Guest

    Default Traditional vs Modern

    Hi people,

    This was recently posted in another forum.

    a lot of trad martial arts give you some poor concepts that can definitely hinder you in a real life situation
    The majority of non Traditional practitioners seem to think that traditional MA's are not effective in real life.

    We had a 'modern' JJ instructor come to our club recently - he had practiced 'modern' JJ and self defence for 15 years and Wado Ryu Karate (modern school) for 10. After his first lesson training with the high grades he said to me personally ' Fair play, i dont know a thing - i thought the modern approach would be best but it just lacks vital content, I am supprised!' (thats about the jist of it). This guy is a very humble and nice guy and did not mind admitting this to me - He now trains regularly at our school.

    Peoples common misconseption is that Traditional methods are not really applicable in a modern age. Why do people think this? people DID punch kick and grapple in ancient Japan and China too! If they didn't we would not have oriental arts Full stop. We still have two arms and legs, we still punch, kick and fight dirty, all this was around when these arts where created! These traditional methods where created to deal with LIFE or DEATH situations so they must be effective - if they weren't then they would not have been used again and would have been discarded! The only difference between now and then is the introduction of firearms.

    This is my opinion on that comment - what do you guys think.

    Thankyou
    Chris

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    311
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Ancient or modern doesn't matter

    It's the teacher that makes the difference.


    Amir
    Amir Krause

  3. #3
    chris davis 200 Guest

    Default

    Agreed.


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,714
    Likes (received)
    153

    Default

    Where "traditional" can get bogged down, is in the ritualizing of training methods. Instructors who focus too much on formula punches and attacks, wrist-grabbing and similar stuff are limiting their students' abilities to deal with realistic attacks and situations. Those who see the importance of stress-based training use the ritual stuff as "training wheels" to instill basic skills, but then ramp up the attacks and methods to allow students to hone their eye and their skills.

    You're right -- it's the instructor. The classical arts, as Chris pointed out, are full of real-life application based on sound principles. They were used for life-or-death, not as hobbies and recreation. It's the way in which successions of practitioners have done to the training methods that have lost soundness of application along the way. It takes are some clear-sighted individuals to reinstill it in their training systems -- which is possible as long as the original principles of the art remain intact.
    Cady Goldfield

  5. #5
    kusanku Guest

    Default

    And for this to happen, the original principles must be clearly and openly taught to at least all students of that art, and preserved in whatever other ways possible such that none of them are lost for whatever reasons.

    Its already happened in some arts.

    Recently in a dojo near me, I met a young person who was at brown or black belt level in Tae Kwon Do, who paroted some things I hear all the time on this ebudo, not here but other forums, about how BJJ and Muay Thai were the closest thing you could get to a real fight.

    I started laughing, and said, do you read e-budo?He said, yeah.I said, hey, I'm kusanku.He said, no sh*t?

    I said, yes, and let me show you some things you didn't know were in your forms. I did, and fifteen minutes later, he said, 'well, I thought that was corect,, but I guess I was wrong.'He had studied BJJ, muay Thai, and tkd, and thought he knew how to fight.

    I told him, if you correctly understnad and master your own basics and forms, his forms are ATA and actually contain the maneuvers similar to Okinawan and chinese forms, ' you will learn how this stuff works.

    I had him try all his stuff on me first, then neutralized it, then showed him what was lurking in his own forms.

    One more person out there who knows how to get from there to here.

    Shame so few do know.

    DR, well, thats an even darker area.I do understand though, why.Arts from feudal eras do perpetuate feudal attitudes but I do see evidfence of changes, such as thiis forum, where many lruk who hope top glean the secrets, ie basic principles, of DR AJJ.Each for their own reason.Ya Hah Hah.

  6. #6
    kusanku Guest

    Default

    Insights occur once every five minutes, somehwere on the planet.One got me between yesterday and today.

    No answer here, just a question: How does a traditional martial or other art, makes no difference, get started?

    Answer that question, answer a lot.

    History and legend both do, but we see it and go our way firmly covinced that that could not be true, not in this day and age.

    Naw.

    But what if?

    How does one get started?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Colo Spgs, CO USA
    Posts
    377
    Likes (received)
    2

    Default

    "Where "traditional" can get bogged down, is in the ritualizing of training methods. Instructors who focus too much on formula punches and attacks, wrist-grabbing and similar stuff are limiting their students' abilities to deal with realistic attacks and situations..."

    I'm in basic agreement with Cady - however there are some hidden or grey areas concerning the value of traditional methods that are still not completely understood by many people (imo). If I may expand on these thoughts a bit:

    Let me start with one example from history. Terada sensei of Nakanishi/Ono-ha and Tenshin Itto-ryu. He practiced strictly kata and kumi uchi he did not train in shiai geiko and in fact advocated against such practice, yet he could always beat everyone, among his students were other masters like Shirai, Nakanishi, Chiba, etc...
    Another example comes from my own experience. After training in Daito-ryu for only one year in the Roppokai method which consisted of over 80% grabbing and what most would consider "unrealistic" attacks, I returned home and even worried a little about my ability to handle more realistic attacks punches and kicks etc... that my friends and previous dojo mates liked to use - they were keen to test me after I'd been in Japan. But I found to my surprise that I could read their attacks better than before and that they even seemed slower to me.

    I think my own ability to deal with such attacks actually increased without having practiced much at all against those kinds of attacks and I attributed my improvement directly to the increased sensitivity I gained from primarily training against "unrealistic" grabs. Later after another year in Japan and after returning to the States, Okamoto actually began teaching and even inventing other techniques against modern realistic attacks (that's not traditional or is it?), especially in his seminars in Santa Cruz and Hawaii as well. So these may be practiced a little more on a regular basis in branch dojos outside of the hombu in Japan, but even still I recall Japanese members saying that Sensei began doing more when he returned from these early trips. I personally still prefer to keep close to the method in which I learned in Japan, because I think it works and reflects the genius of both Okamoto sensei and each generation of DR masters before him, but still the way I learned also included the way he taught us in America too.

    I should also say that the Roppokai training method is considered by many to be a completely "modern method" within Daito-ryu, and it is - in that it progresses beyond the "traditional approach" and skips over much of the basic and advanced jujutsu kata in favor of the more advanced aiki waza. Some basic essentials of jujutsu and important basics of aiki are stressed, but beyond that emphasis is largely on oyo waza. I'm not convinced however that the method of teaching and training such aiki waza is all that modern - I think it derives from and is still faithful to the way Sokaku taught aiki to Horikawa sensei, and Horikawa in turn taught Okamoto. In this sense the method is still very traditional (imo).

    For example: Taiso Horikawa had a menkyo in Shibukawa-ryu Jujutsu, and Kodo had learned jujustu from his father, when Sokaku began to teach them he quickly focused on aiki. Incidentally, when Okamoto sensei came to Santa Cruz for the first time, it was to give a seminar to a roomful of mostly experienced martial artists, practitioners and instructors of numerous different arts. Among his first words were "Since I think most of you already know some jujutsu I'll start by teaching aiki..." Therefore the Daito-ryu instructor who is most known for being "progressive" and "modern" proceeded to "keep the tradition" in which both he and his teacher was taught - even though it differs greatly from the traditional start with jujutsu beginning with ikkajo and proceeding to nikajo, sankajo, etc...

    Every participant in that seminar and indeed in all his classes receives hands on attention again preserving the koryu standard of direct transmission. In Santa Cruz he started with basic aiki techniques and came back and emphasized only a few important jujutsu basics, and then continued with numerous exercises and variations, throwing in self-defense applications as well as very advanced applications of aiki against multiple opponents.

    The seminar format (and a whole roomful of novices) broke-up some of the usual continuous flow of nagare practice as it's normally done in the hombu, but still it was traditional. Sensei taught and explained principles through techniques, demonstrated some weapons work and even taught classic Daito-ryu strategy, he showed zatori and tachi ai as well as ne waza, he also engaged in some randori, and freestyle exchanges, and demonstrated famous techniques that Sokaku was known for. It may have looked a confusing mixture of traditional and untraditional, and it certainly differed from the usual practice in Japan, and yet later it was made clear to me the methodology and reasons for doing what he did, and they were systematic and consistent in principle as always.

    I'm not sure if the nagare geiko sort of line practice we do in the Roppokai is really new or not - I was told that Okamoto sensei developed it (and he may have indepently because he had no prior or other martial arts experience or other influences to draw from), but it could be that it was the method or among many methods he was taught and that he simply favored it and because of his emphasis, he made it more popular. But I have seen similar practices in other branches of Daito-ryu, and even in aikido (I don't know if others adapted the practice after he began to publish videos or not though - incidentally I heard Okamoto sensei's first MUAV video was the top-selling budo video in Japan for several years straight). There are very compelling and systematic reasons anyway for his emphasis of it though.

    "Those who see the importance of stress-based training use the ritual stuff as "training wheels" to instill basic skills, but then ramp up the attacks and methods to allow students to hone their eye and their skills."

    Again I agree wholeheartedly - some however, might not see or understand how the traditional methods whether kata training or the nagare geiko as used in the Roppokai do infact create stress. Even though primarily done against various grabbing attacks, the nagare geiko method does teach and instill attributes for coping effectively with stress. Still the nagare geiko method differs in this regard from strict kata training and perhaps holds a middle ground between traditional kata and modern jiyu waza or freestyle training. In any case attacks are indeed ramped up as students progress and the seniors play an important role in that now as they did traditionally, athough the amount varies somewhat among individual practitioners.

    If you train with a large group there's also the added benefit of training with all kinds of people with different levels of experience, different backgrounds, different purposes for training and different attitudes about training you get the whole kit and kaboodle or gamut. Likewise it's also my opinion that classical kata training is not very well understood anymore or practiced the way it originally was when the koryu were being developed, and so the benefits of truly classical kata training are largely unpracticed nowadays if not largely lost and misunderstood even among most koryu systems. And hence the relative ineffectiveness of a vast majority of the remaining traditional ritualized kata methods. They do seem to be forever stuck riding around with their "training wheels on".

    "You're right -- it's the instructor. The classical arts, as Chris pointed out, are full of real-life application based on sound principles. They were used for life-or-death, not as hobbies and recreation. It's the way in which successions of practitioners have done to the training methods that have lost soundness of application along the way. It takes are some clear-sighted individuals to reinstill it in their training systems -- which is possible as long as the original principles of the art remain intact."

    Agreed again. A key point is "they were used for life and death, not as hobbies, and recreation." Now however, that is a different story and that will greatly differ from school to school and from teacher to teacher as well among individual practitioners. I do think the training system or method is the teacher's responsibility though, and so individual students will get out of it proportionately according to what they bring and put into it - however if they bring a bunch of baggage from preconcieved ideas, they might not get as much, for such obscures their clear-sightedness. In addition to clarity of sight/vision they have to also be receptive and open, those go things go hand in hand. You have to trust and have confidence in the training method for it to work. It's not a blind faith however, but a reasoned faith, based on the skills and character/reputation of the instructor and the tradition he possesses.

    Very much like Cady said, if any teacher fails at some point to bring all that he's learned and received to the present practice method, then yes, students will have difficulty interpreting the tradition's teaching soundly and with clarity - the result will be a loss of some aspects of the tradition. So barring the clear-sighted reinstallation of those aspects, according to the principles of the tradition, then the traditon will get bogged down in the ritualization of it's remaining training methods and practices, and it's ability to deal with realistic attacks and situations will falter.

    Sadly I think this is the case with many "classical" arts and systems today. In truth they've ceased to be traditional (imo) by leaving out and/or losing important aspects of their practice methods.

    Please pardon this post for being way too wordy (that's my tradition!) - Amir put all much more succinctly:

    "Ancient or modern doesn't matter - It's the teacher that makes the difference." Perhaps I should have left it at that. Oh well, the whole tradition vs modern thing is always an interesting and hotly contested subject anyway.

    Brently Keen
    Last edited by Brently Keen; 22nd November 2002 at 03:15.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA USA
    Posts
    2,565
    Likes (received)
    46

    Default

    [ THE FOLLOWING POSTS WERE MERGED FROM THE "Body Conditioning / Dan Harden" thread: ]

    "Always" the student's fault? In my long response to you I stated:

    Sure there are bad teachers, those that run businesses, or those who don't have interest in others learning. That is why prospective students are encouraged by most in the arts to carefully select an appropriate teacher. I checked out all my teachers prior to asking to become their student. If a teacher changes in negative ways over time, then maybe it is time to reconsider. Unfortunately, the human element is the one thing that is most difficult to manage when dealing with physical arts. It is usually a matter of "do what I say, not what I do", which is simply how many live.
    In other words, while there are bad teachers - in fact, we could probably say A LOT of bad teachers, I personally believe there are more dojo members that do not conduct themselves as students in the TMA sense. They do not, or are for any number of reasons unable to, adapt their mindset and behavior to fall in line with the rest of the group. Doing so involves a certain amount of risk for the new student, who is forced to place trust in the teacher. Scary stuff. But many have no problem saying "you only live once - screw it, I'll try something new and see what happens". Many TMA are acquired tastes, kind of like coffee and beer. As such, you may have to commit yourself to study an art for a reasonable period of time before realizing the benefits. I've probably learned to enjoy training in TMA as much as I've learned to enjoy coffee and beer, personally.

    So while I acknowledge that there is plenty to gripe about in regards to many teachers, commercial dojo, fraudulent misrepresentation, etc., I personally believe that it is incumbent on the prospective student to do a bit of research before joining a dojo/art, and that a bigger problem - at least for those legitimately teaching TMA - is finding students who are willing to show up to the dojo on a regular basis, sweat, and become a "student" in good standing. The funny thing is that it really isn't that hard. It just requires some trust, faith, a hunger to learn, and perseverance.

    Many students come from a commercial dojo atmosphere, in which they paid a fee in exchange for learning techniques. Or, they have no prior training but simply cannot fathom getting something for nothing (or virtually nothing). For example, my partner at work told me he wanted to seriously study aikido from me, and asked how much it would cost to train and rank up eventually. I told him that since we could work it in mostly during our work time, it wouldn't cost anything. He really had a hard time accepting this idea, and kept looking for "the catch". I told him the catch is that he has to practice what he I teach him when we're not together, and at some point, find someone else (preferably from work) who is interested in being his training partner. It looks like these simple requirements may be too much for him, even though it is costing him nothing to receive formal training in an art that could have a significant impact on his life.

    Regards,
    Last edited by Nathan Scott; 9th August 2008 at 23:28. Reason: Merged threads
    Nathan Scott
    Nichigetsukai

    "Put strength into your practice, and avoid conceit. It is easy enough to understand a strategy and guard against it after the matter has already been settled, but the reason an opponent becomes defeated is because they didn't learn of it ahead of time. This is the nature of secret matters. That which is kept hidden is what we call the Flower."

    - Zeami Motokiyo, 1418 (Fūshikaden)

  9. #9
    Dan Harden Guest

    Default

    I totally agree with that, Nathan, without having to change my views at all.
    Maybe we were both "stressing" one side or another or reading just one side, to further a point, I dunno. As I said before, for the most part we usually agree on most things, so I'm not surprised there was a middle ground here.

    I would also like to say that there are several Koryu that are adjusting their teaching model a bit. And while making adjustments to bring Koryu to the west, they are none-the-less adhering to requirements that students learn the language, mindset, culture, and understanding of the arts in both their previous era and currently.
    This stands next to another model that I have seen twice now. Where Koryu have dispatched teachers to the west and told them in no uncertain terms to make the arts their own. I imagine that in keeping with Shu-Ha-Ri those masters had no trouble whatsoever with seeing the art westernized, even with some westerners defending...can we sing with the fiddlers on the roof...Tradition....tradition!!
    Some retain every element of tradition, while others adopt the dan-i system, or more modern dissemination methods-giving very high rank in 6 to 8 yrs, and even teach their koryu in a commercial dojo (which I personally dislike). I don't try to "out Japanese the Japanese," (no, not saying you are either, bud) but instead just try to look at it all and see what the hell is going on.
    Have a great holiday
    Dan
    Last edited by Dan Harden; 28th June 2008 at 15:30.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA USA
    Posts
    2,565
    Likes (received)
    46

    Default

    Yeah, I realize that many koryu these days modernize to some degree, or adapt in ways that make them less "standardized" when compared to the traditional koryu model. Most often when communicating in the written word, it is necessary to generalize. It is the only way to make text readable. When a disclaimer is really necessary, it should be given, otherwise readers should take into account that there is an exception to every rule without listing every exception to every example given.

    Part of why I adhere so much to the traditional koryu teaching/training model is that it seems to have worked in the past, and, it is a method of transmission that may be lost if everyone discards it in favor of the more popular teaching methods. That means instead of having the choice of apples or oranges, we would only have apples to choose from. Would anything really be lost by this? People will still learn, so it's hard to say for a fact. But are there certain developmental skills that are learned better one way than another? Having been exposed to both methods personally, I happen to think so. We're all the next generation, so to a greater or lesser degree, what we think and do will have a significant affect on the future of these arts. As such things like this seem worthy of discussion and experimentation.

    Regards,
    Nathan Scott
    Nichigetsukai

    "Put strength into your practice, and avoid conceit. It is easy enough to understand a strategy and guard against it after the matter has already been settled, but the reason an opponent becomes defeated is because they didn't learn of it ahead of time. This is the nature of secret matters. That which is kept hidden is what we call the Flower."

    - Zeami Motokiyo, 1418 (Fūshikaden)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    217
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nathan Scott View Post
    That means instead of having the choice of apples or oranges, we would only have apples to choose from. Would anything really be lost by this?
    As long as oranges are still desired they will still be available. When oranges are no longer desired they will no longer be available. Simple as that. At the turn of the 19th century the occupation of cobbler was in the top 10 most popular of all occupations. This has not been so for many decades. Due to this loss/change do you feel a significant loss in your life? Is society somehow weaker or missing the big picture?

    For the record I am not promoting apples over oranges or cobblers over programmers, it simply is the way of the world.

    Take care,

    Mark J.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    The Old Dominion
    Posts
    1,590
    Likes (received)
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Jakabcsin View Post
    As long as oranges are still desired they will still be available. When oranges are no longer desired they will no longer be available. Simple as that.
    I think it's a bit more complicated than that, Mark. Even if people, on the whole, stop desiring the "oranges" of koryu doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep them around. Sixty years from now someone might really wish that there were still some oranges left, and feel rather disappointed that no one was working "against the grain" to make sure that the oranges were preserved.

    Of course, at the moment there are such people. I think that part of Nathan's point-- and I don't want to put words in his mouth, of course-- is that these arts are very important, and it is hard for us to know which parts of these arts are necessary to the art as a whole. For that reason, there is a definite need for some people to be ultra-traditionalists, to be the ones who insist on doing it exactly the way that it has always been done.

    Perhaps the art can survive a lot of innovation. But if we have a mix of people who insist on tradition and people who innovate, we ensure that the original art survives as well as the modified strains. It's good to know that, whatever happens to the modified strains, there will always be a preserved form of the art so that we can go back to the source when it becomes necessary to evaluate the purity of the strains that have developed. Just my opinion, and my signature line makes it clear how much that is worth these days
    David Sims

    "Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum." - Terry Pratchet

    My opinion is, in all likelihood, worth exactly what you are paying for it.

  13. #13
    Dan Harden Guest

    Default

    Well it’s a mistaken impression to conclude that the Koryu have ever really been stagnant. In their time they were innovative, over, time they have been innovative. They are an interesting collection of stories and histories, all evidence of change; recreating and borrowing strategies from other arts into their own, research into recreating lost waza, some gradual morphing; sometimes due to modern students cross training in judo and kendo -corrupting the original intent and movement, sometimes due to prolonged influences of simply training on wooden floors, sometimes losing vigor and context due to men with lower level understanding, being picked for political reasons over the more technically brilliant student-with them leaving, and sometimes just flat out changing for a better understanding from some brilliant head honcho, One example had an art adopt almost the entire syllabus from another and still call it by its old name. And then we have my aforementioned example of adepts going to the west and actually being TOLD to make the art their own.
    Each one of the above has president and pertains to specific ryu's and their own representatives discussing their own history BTW. So, I try to remember we are not the koryu police. These arts are not dead, and never have been. They will continue to strive, compete, opt out and not compete, and sometimes gradually change over time. But even the oldest among them has recognized that their school has flowed and been influenced by the genius or lack of visions of any given master in his own time.

    With DR one of the best discussions on DR I have ever had was with Ellis, he had recognized the apparent complexity and depth of the syllabus (and wrote about it previously and is about to do it again), and noted how, many men had studied for various periods of time and then left to form whole arts from parts of DR-this is well in keeping with Koryu history-see my last comments below. While I have never been a fan of the pretzel logic of DR, -being that IMO much of the jujutsu is either too complex for the realities of grappling, or else was not trained properly to deal with more live pressure, or other times inane for modern combatives lacking weapons, I none-the-less was a fan of its aiki. It’s aiki is the real power generation source of the art, and what makes it head and shoulders over much else there is out there. It’s aiki will stand in modern combatives; judo, wrestling, BJJers, PKers, weapons, pretty much anything. Only trouble is finding it and or being taught it.
    So while preservationists will attempt to preserve Koryu intact, many will still take pieces as their own vision, (or lack thereof), leads. It’s always been that way with Koryu. TSKSR was studied and is credited with the formation of many later Koryu. And all without much wining and complaining, as there were always those who remained to study the whole art, while others innovated with one new vision or another. I can hardly look at Judo and not recognize that it is still a Japanese Koryu based art, even with its innovation, and try to appreciate it for what it is.
    So, we have many old arts having adepts leave and form new ones. Mining them for information has been happening since the Koryu were all brand new ryu. In 600 yrs, it hasn’t caused them to die.
    It's allowed them to flourish.
    Cheers
    Dan

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,394
    Likes (received)
    84

    Default

    DDATUS
    Dan

    Excellent points!

    Diversity in the martial arts is a good thing overall.

    I'd say more, but you already said it.
    Chris Thomas

    "While people are entitled to their illusions, they are not entitled to a limitless enjoyment of them and they are not entitled to impose them upon others."

    "Team Cynicism" MVP 2005-2006
    Currently on "Injured/Reserve" list due to a scathing Sarcasm pile-up.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA USA
    Posts
    2,565
    Likes (received)
    46

    Default

    Mr. Sims,

    For that reason, there is a definite need for some people to be ultra-traditionalists, to be the ones who insist on doing it exactly the way that it has always been done.
    Actually, while I may come off as an "ultra-traditionalist", I don't believe that the classical arts should necessarily be passed down "exactly" as they have always been. The koryu arts do tend to vary to some degree in how they were passed down, and in most cases have adapted their transmission methods to fit within the times to a greater or lesser degree.

    On the other hand, there is a point where the vast majority of koryu arts ceased to develop in a practical sense to keep with the times (in most cases around the Haitorei of 1876). In other words, there aren't many koryu extant that have incorporated handgun retention and disarming techniques, fighting with folding knives or improvised shanks/shivs, counter-terrorism methods, or self-defense against street gangs or parolees. Many koryu HAVE, on the other hand, continued to develop within the context of their arts using their historical methods and largely obsolete attacks. Apparently some researchers in Japan are of the opinion that Japanese martial arts and culture began to westernize on a national level from about 1854, and this was at the direction of the Japanese government. Prior to that, many koryu had already been influenced through periodic contacts with western combative methods. So to a large degree, when I speak of the "traditional" method of koryu transmission, it may be more accurate to say the method generally popularized prior to 1854.

    So if a student of koryu must first learn the traditional kata and historical methods before translating the operating principles and tactics to modern day situations to be considered practical, then why study them? In my opinion, because the depth of knowledge and teachings can be superior to modern methods, and in many cases the arts are time tested over many generations. These two things are significant benefits that come from an art that has been developed for so long. Some might say that the lack of modern weaponry and situations limits the art from a practical standpoint, but for me personally, I've found that my training in swordsmanship has helped me the most so far when dealing with real-life conflicts. Sword techniques such as reading the opponent, applying pressure (seme), "kiai" vocalization, quick taisabaki and ashisabaki, and various other physical methods that can be adapted from swordsmanship have proven to be invaluable. And I can't think of a modern weapon system or method that would develop these particular skills better, even though I won't be using a sword any time soon on the streets.

    Basically, I'm in favor of maintaining the essence of the traditional teaching model within traditional arts. But that doesn't mean that nothing can be changed to fit the times. For example, I teach very traditionally in one art, but I offset it by explaining why we are training in the way we are, and what the students can expect to gain from such training. Nobody ever explained these things to me, and as a result there were many times I thought about quiting several arts, prior to discovering the genius of these unspoken teachings. So I've found that I can teach using this traditional model without losing students as long as they understand what is going on. That is one of my "modernizations" of the traditional teaching method.

    Dan,

    So, I try to remember we are not the koryu police.These arts are not dead, and never have been. They will continue to strive, compete, opt out and not compete, and sometimes gradually change over time. Mining them for information has been happening since the Koryu were all brand new ryu. In 600 yrs, it hasn’t caused them to die. It's allowed them to flourish.
    While I agree with the rest of your post about koryu, I don't agree with this section. First of all, I believe that anyone seriously studying a koryu has a vested interest in seeing the arts survive, if not at least the one(s) they are studying specifically. In that regard, I believe if more koryu people spoke up to defend their methods against the many voices of modern arts, the public might be better informed as to why they might want to consider taking the time and effort to study a classical art instead of the art next door. Call it "koryu police" if you want, but I see no problem with the type of debating I've been doing with regards to koryu arts.

    I also disagree that the koryu arts will continue to strive over time if left alone. They have already changed gradually over time, for better and for worse (mostly worse), so that is a given. Splintering away from a main line of an art has proven to weaken the main line, while creating "puddles" that generally dry up after no more than one or two generations. The result is a weaker main line art with break offs that do not have the strength to survive on their own. Strip mining the arts has also proven to weaken a main line art, especially now when information can be spread so widely so easily. As the teachings of the art become public, and opportunists offer a "quicker, easier" way to learn the same thing, the main line loses prospective members to those who typically end up training short term in a watered down version under the belief that it is basically the same thing.

    In any event, you can count on one hand how many koryu can document a survival of 600 years. The vast majority were founded in the mid to late Edo period, or in the Meiji period that followed. Many hundreds of these arts have already died, leaving only a small percentage of these arts surviving into the present day. The majority of koryu extant only have maybe 1 to 4 people training in them, and most of these exponents are not serious about participating in the survival of the art. With all due respect, I think it would be foolish to think that the koryu arts are not dying just because a handful of those that have survived have modernized or obtained popularity in the 20th century. Simply flipping through the Bugei Ryu-ha Dai-jiten will overwhelm the reader with the amount of arts (not all of which are documented in this book) that once existed in Japan. The koryu arts as a whole are in fact dying, and the traditional methodology is dying even faster than these arts, as those koryu intent on survival attempt to modernize to remain competitive. Thus in my opinion, quietly training in koryu has proven to not be in the best interest of the classical arts.

    Regards,
    Last edited by Nathan Scott; 3rd July 2008 at 22:16.
    Nathan Scott
    Nichigetsukai

    "Put strength into your practice, and avoid conceit. It is easy enough to understand a strategy and guard against it after the matter has already been settled, but the reason an opponent becomes defeated is because they didn't learn of it ahead of time. This is the nature of secret matters. That which is kept hidden is what we call the Flower."

    - Zeami Motokiyo, 1418 (Fūshikaden)

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14th August 2003, 06:46
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 9th August 2003, 11:45
  3. Strength Training: Modern, Traditional or both
    By Ginko in forum Budo and the Body
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 17th April 2002, 00:49
  4. Striking and traditional vs modern...
    By Neil Hawkins in forum Jujutsu
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 19th January 2001, 07:59

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •