View Full Version : Tradition, Martial Arts, act 3
The pole says it all!!! ;)
What part of the art would be lost?
Would combat efficiency/effectiveness of the art be effected negatively? If so, how?
How is the preservation of a martial art's culture any different from changing it (or a portion of it) into a performance art?
Why?
Does knowledge of the non-martial aspects of the art's culture enhance one's ability to fight with said art?
If it is not a matter of defense proficiency, then what? Is there something more than martial in the martial arts, something which cannot be gleamed from other sports?
Why?
Would instruction of even basic terminology in the practitioner's native tongue enhance the learning experience?
Does the wearing of one's own clothes, as opposed to the clothing of one's art's birthplace, add to or detract from the martial instruction?
Really? Why would a combative art, or the training in such, require one to be honest with the self? Is it because once we pass the ego, the idea of being separate from anything, that we are able to function in a more coherent fashion?
Duh. ;)
Those are kinda the questions that've been knocking around. Pretty much all I post, anymore.
Whaddya think? If you vote, you should also explain your standpoint.
I'll only berate you if you're wrong. :eek:
T'ai Ji Monkey
11-28-2003, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by Vash
What part of the art would be lost?
Understanding and insight into the concepts and principles of the art.
Look at all the discussions about Chi/Qi, Shen, Jing, Song, training methods and similar.
You won't find much of them in a good traditional school or in the originating culture.
Would combat efficiency/effectiveness of the art be effected negatively? If so, how?
If the basic concepts cannot be fully understood the skill cannot be fully developed and you end up with a watered down art that might resemble outwardly the original.
It can end up as a shell that is filled with misunderstandings based on the students own knowledge and experience.
If you are happy with only the physical part of the movement than that is fine, if you want to develop a skill to a high level you will have to dwell deeper into the origins of the art, it's concepts and naturally the culture from which they evolved them.
Example:
"Song" being relaxed.
Now "being relaxed" does not equal the true meaning of the word.
Closer might be: relaxed but not limp.
Still not accurate:
calm and ready with no feeling of either limp nor tense, I think might be better.
You see hard to translate and word in a different culture.
There are concepts and principles that are hard to be brought across culture and language barriers when the student has no knowledge of the original culture.
Same with teaching methods, it is quiet common to hear Asian teachers complain that the methods by which they were taught are not acceptable in their new place.
(i.e. hitting student with a stick to correct posture or similar)
In my Class Sifu often yells a single chinese word to tell a student to correct a posture, that is all that is needed.
This one word would require maybe a lengthy explanation in english to relate the same information.
How is the preservation of a martial art's culture any different from changing it (or a portion of it) into a performance art?
Not sure at waht you are getting here.
If something has been changed so that it no longer conforms to the basic principles, guidelines or the original focus it has become something new and can no longer claim to be it's parent.
Health Taiji cannot claim to be martial Taiji.
Another example:
BL in one Movie tells a student to kick, student does it wrong BL replies "kick with feeling".
I think that the translation here was mucked up, it should be "kick with intent/focus".
:D
If the focus/intent is there it becomes irrelevant if the student kicks air/sandbag or a sparring partner.
The most technicallly accurate kick is useless without focus/intent.
Surroundings, clothing and similar can help a beginning student to develop correct focus/intent, any advanced student should be able to show it regardless of where he is or under what circumstances.
Just my thoughts and I most likely will be fire-bombed for them. ;)
Originally posted by T'ai Ji Monkey
[B]
Understanding and insight into the concepts and principles of the art.
Look at all the discussions about Chi/Qi, Shen, Jing, Song, training methods and similar.
You won't find much of them in a good traditional school or in the originating culture.
How will not using the culture hamper this transfer of knowledge?
If the basic concepts cannot be fully understood the skill cannot be fully developed and you end up with a watered down art that might resemble outwardly the original.
Indeed.
It can end up as a shell that is filled with misunderstandings based on the students own knowledge and experience.
Are not all styles of martial arts based on knowledge and experience?
If you are happy with only the physical part of the movement than that is fine, if you want to develop a skill to a high level you will have to dwell deeper into the origins of the art, it's concepts and naturally the culture from which they evolved them.
Perhaps I'm missing the point. How does a culture effect the way someone is going to fight? I would think someone from China would punch basically the same manner someone from Brazil would. I've never been able to understand how a culture affects teh development of technique in martial arts. (Not counting T'ai Ch'i Chuan, as the underlying principle is obvious from the name.)
Example:
"Song" being relaxed.
Now "being relaxed" does not equal the true meaning of the word.
Closer might be: relaxed but not limp.
Still not accurate:
calm and ready with no feeling of either limp nor tense, I think might be better.
But doesn't the term still have to be translated into and explained in the practitioner's native language? If that is true, then using a word similar in meaning to the word from the foreign language, it should be possible to give the exact same idea.
Example: Song = calm and ready with no feeling of either limpness or tenseness. (we'll call this definition "x.")
x = ready. Ready, in this case, meaning
non-aprehensive, able to move, but not
over-tensing or under-tensing the muscles.
You see hard to translate and word in a different culture.
There are concepts and principles that are hard to be brought across culture and language barriers when the student has no knowledge of the original culture.
Agreed. But, as I stated above, it is possible to translate ideas across the language/cultural barrier effeciently.
Same with teaching methods, it is quiet common to hear Asian teachers complain that the methods by which they were taught are not acceptable in their new place.
(i.e. hitting student with a stick to correct posture or similar)
I've never agreed with this type of instruction. It seems it is easier to help a student grow through positive reinforcement than negative.
In my Class Sifu often yells a single chinese word to tell a student to correct a posture, that is all that is needed.
This one word would require maybe a lengthy explanation in english to relate the same information.
One must also explain the foreign term, and after this explanation, only the word need be used. In my example a few paragraphs up, I address this.
If something has been changed so that it no longer conforms to the basic principles, guidelines or the original focus it has become something new and can no longer claim to be it's parent.
Health Taiji cannot claim to be martial Taiji.
I agree.
Another example:
BL in one Movie tells a student to kick, student does it wrong BL replies "kick with feeling".
I think that the translation here was mucked up, it should be "kick with intent/focus".
:D
That's true. Enter the Dragon was the movie. Second best thing EVER. Anyway, I've read Bruce explain his idea as "emotional content." That seems to me to mean the same as your translation.
Agreed.
[quote]Surroundings, clothing and similar can help a beginning student to develop correct focus/intent, any advanced student should be able to show it regardless of where he is or under what circumstances.
This I agree with, kinda. For the art side of it, I feel that the fighting methods require one to be honest with the self. If this means wearing one's own culturally birthed clothing in training, or that of another, then so be it. It must be up to the practitioner how training occurs.
Holy Crap! I think I just said my opinion on training really only applies to those who think it should. Dang, and here I was, trying to be profound.
Just my thoughts and I most likely will be fire-bombed for them. ;)
No, your village will be sacked, and your women clubbed over the head and taken back to our encampment.
Peace and Good Training.
It depends on the art, I think. Chinese culture is embedded in traditional chinese martial arts, and the philosophies, attitudes, and mechanics are, as TM said, difficult to convey without at least some component of chinese culture. On the other hand, something like american boxing isn't imbued with the hallmarks of any particular culture, so it can be more easily transmitted. Maybe the problem is that chinese martial arts systems have traditionally been ways of life, and people keep trying to filter them down into methods of fighting.
But, as I stated above, it is possible to translate ideas across the language/cultural barrier effeciently. I disagree. It is sometimes impossible to translate things well across two languages within the same culture. When you take two very different cultures with very different languages, many more things become impossible to share, going both ways. The US has a lot of Indian Reservations.
Stuff like clothing, belts, etc, I don't care about personally, but I know that some teachers feel that uniforms lend an element of formality or seriousness to classes. IMO, if a student isn't serious, a different shirt isn't going to make him/her more so, but I don't have a monopoly on the truth.
T'ai Ji Monkey
11-28-2003, 04:06 PM
Vash.
I understand what you are saying and to a certain degree I felt the same till I came to study MA in Asia and especially under my current Sifu.
He even gives us seminars about the culture, concepts and the origins of the terms to help us understand them, we are also given a list of recommendet books to read.
Training in a traditional way and under a traditional teacher has opened for me atleast a completely new level of understanding and how easy it is to miss the mark of correct understanding and skill development.
He has taught me that ANYTHING can help me further in my development of the art and that training in the kwoon is just a fraction of the process.
Like TAK said on Asia MA is more of a way of life thatn something you do, I still look up to every fellow MA that trains every morning without fail in the park regardless of the weather.
For them it is not even dedication or similar their training is simply part of their daily routine like breakfast or going to the toilet.
And some of those are true "Crouching Tigers, Hidden Dragons"(unrecognised talents and people hardly known outside their little circle).
Time to top, started to rant.
Starchaser107
11-28-2003, 04:36 PM
the adaptabilty of the human mind is perhaps one of its most integral and vital assets. the question is does one necessarily have to immerse oneself in asian culture to understand asian arts...or even teach it.
i will attempt to answer this question the only way i know how..by using analogies.
firstly: "Does one have to become a part of the drug culture to understand the principles of taking a drug... or does that come naturally by mere virtue of drug ingestion?"
secondly : "In order to cook chinese cuisine does one Specifically need a Wok? , if a Wok is not used , is it still chinese food?... If when eating chinese food one uses a fork and a knife instead of chopstics is the chinese food lost? does it become western:eek:?"
thirdly : "How far does culture extend? I am being taught cma by a white man, when I teach people learn from a black man's perspective..is the art that I teach still Chinese Martial Arts?"
suppose I improvise and practice with sticks instead of swords... am I practicing it wrong? will a chinese master look on me and say I'm doing it wrong...will I care?
T'ai Ji Monkey
11-28-2003, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by Starchaser107
firstly: "Does one have to become a part of the drug culture to understand the principles of taking a drug... or does that come naturally by mere virtue of drug ingestion?"
In order to really understand the drug culture you need to have been somehow in contact(friends, etc) with it, you don't need to take drugs to gain understanding.
But you will NEVER have full understanding unless you were a full member of the culture, i.e. took your own drugs.
secondly : "In order to cook chinese cuisine does one Specifically need a Wok? , if a Wok is not used , is it still chinese food?... If when eating chinese food one uses a fork and a knife instead of chopstics is the chinese food lost? does it become western:eek:?"
This analogy shows the exact problem in the west, you don't need a wok to cook chinese you can even replace some ingredients and adjust the falvour. But you might have missed the essence of Chinese cooking.
FWIW, most chinese food outside of China is adjusted to loal flavours already.
thirdly : "How far does culture extend? I am being taught cma by a white man, when I teach people learn from a black man's perspective..is the art that I teach still Chinese Martial Arts?"
Again wrong analogy, it is not who teaches you but the essence of what he teaches you.
Looks like you guys are obsessed with outward appearances more than the essence of the thing.
suppose I improvise and practice with sticks instead of swords... am I practicing it wrong? will a chinese master look on me and say I'm doing it wrong...will I care?
Depends, if he cares about you he will tell you that you are doing it wrong.
It really depends.
In my Kwoon we train in tracksuit pants and t-shirt, NO TJQ suits or similar anywhere. WE also train in a sports-hall and not a specialised and equipped kwoon.
Yet, our training is 100% traditional, it is not the outward appearance that matters but what and how it is taught.
Would our skill be better if we wore TJQ suits, bowed to a shrine, etc. Not neccesarily as this are all outward focused items, yes, they can help some students but ....
Starchaser107
11-28-2003, 06:15 PM
don't assume that these are my view points tjm, i just said it was food for thought. I don't necessarily have to subscribe to these beliefs , just trying to get some feedback for vash , thats all.
also do not be quick to make snap judgements "This analogy shows the exact problem in the west, you don't need a wok to cook chinese you can even replace some ingredients and adjust the falvour. But you might have missed the essence of Chinese cooking.
FWIW, most chinese food outside of China is adjusted to loal flavours already."
who said anything about this being relegated to the west...perhaps a chinese man in canton decides to use a pot?
the essense does not always = culture
__________________________________________________ _
"cul·ture
(click to hear the word) (klchr)
n.
The totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought.
These patterns, traits, and products considered as the expression of a particular period, class, community, or population: Edwardian culture; Japanese culture; the culture of poverty.
These patterns, traits, and products considered with respect to a particular category, such as a field, subject, or mode of expression: religious culture in the Middle Ages; musical culture; oral culture.
The predominating attitudes and behavior that characterize the functioning of a group or organization.
Intellectual and artistic activity and the works produced by it.
Development of the intellect through training or education.
Enlightenment resulting from such training or education.
A high degree of taste and refinement formed by aesthetic and intellectual training.
Special training and development: voice culture for singers and actors.
The cultivation of soil; tillage.
The breeding of animals or growing of plants, especially to produce improved stock.
Biology
The growing of microorganisms, tissue cells, or other living matter in a specially prepared nutrient medium.
Such a growth or colony, as of bacteria.
tr.v. cul·tured, cul·tur·ing, cul·tures
To cultivate.
To grow (microorganisms or other living matter) in a specially prepared nutrient medium.
To use (a substance) as a medium for culture: culture milk.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Middle English, cultivation, from Old French, from Latin cultra, from cultus, past participle of colere ; see cultivate.]
Usage Note: The application of the term culture to the collective attitudes and behavior of corporations arose in business jargon during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Unlike many locutions that emerge in business jargon, it spread to popular use in newspapers and magazines. Few Usage Panelists object to it. Over 80 percent of Panelists accept the sentence The new management style is a reversal of GE's traditional corporate culture, in which virtually everything the company does is measured in some form and filed away somewhere. · Ever since C.P. Snow wrote of the gap between "the two cultures" (the humanities and science) in the 1950s, the notion that culture can refer to smaller segments of society has seemed implicit. Its usage in the corporate world may also have been facilitated by increased awareness of the importance of genuine cultural differences in a global economy, as between Americans and the Japanese, that have a broad effect on business practices.
_________________________________________________"
imo culture is a group of things combines including ideology...so if something is missing from the mix..is it still that culture?
you might also want to notice that these are left as questions , and not statements.
why?
because i believe that there might not be an answer ... It depends on who's point of view is judging. seriously.
T'ai Ji Monkey
11-28-2003, 08:44 PM
You re quiet right that there can not be an universal answer to you questions.
Culture means different things to different people and unfortunately most english speakers are relegated to using dictionaries compiled by other english speakers and hence are already handicapped. ;)
Even look at the differences between an american and british dictionary.
Still my point stands that your understandings will be influenced by your own culture unless you can let go of it and for that you will need immersion in the other culture and opennes of mind.
Pity, is that I see many people talking big and sagely about other cultures when they never even left their own and truly experienced others.
Holidays and like here don't count you need to experience them at the root level by living & working the same way as the locals do.
Example:
Like going to the Shaolin temple and living/training/eating like the other locals and NOT stay at the 3-star hotels and similar.
There are few that can do it and even fewer that can look at it without being prejudiced.
TJM:
From what you're saying, and from much of what I've read, it seems that culture is a bit more dominant theme in CMA than in OMA. So, whatever feelings I have are going to grow from the Japanese trappings on the Okinawan art I, as an American, practice. I just can't relate to your stance completely as I'm not in your training situation. I knew there was a reason I was getting lost.
My chief concern in regards to OMA being tought in America is this:
The gi, the bowing, the Japanese terminology, the sense of formality, those things which are completely foreign to my culture.
(I know there's a better way of saying this.) Okay, I'll steal an example from 24FightingChickens: Gitchen Funakoshi brought an Okinawan art to Japan, and changed the terminology, the clothing, to a Japanese-based system. (Not regarding technique.)
When OMA and JMA were brought to America, the reverse happened; training (again, no reference to technique) included Japanese terminology, Japanese dogi dress. My question: why?
This is alien to me. Does that make it bad? God, know. It just feels dishonest to me to use the culture of another nation in my training. But, I use their fighting art. So, why the difference?
Again, this goes to my feeling that a fighting tradition is not confined to the culture which birthed it.
And then there's the whole "can an art's techniques be altered and still be the original art?" concept. I say no. But, I also say this: If someone utilizes techniques and/or principles derived from the art studied, then those techniques are a part of said art. I am descended from my grandfather; I have his last name, his genetic makeup, his history. I behave differently from my grandfather. Am I still of my family (or clan, if you go back to Scotland, or Ireland, or wherethefudgeever we got kicked out of)?
A poor analogy, yes. But, that which best expresses my feelings.
Feelings, it's all about . . . feelings *sung to the tune of the song "Feelings."*
Keep it real.
Good points.
Chinese, okinawan, and japanese cultures, while distinct, are very much more similar to each other than any of them to american culture. So, when CMAs went to Okinawa, the Okinawans may have gotten the gist of where the CMAs were coming from, and adjusted them to make them their own.
The difference between CMA going to Japan and JMA coming to the US stems from this, I think. The japanese changed CMA and OMA and imbued them with the japanese cultural perspective, while JMA in the US (supposedly) remain JMA. So, we retain the japanese cultural trappings because we (supposedly) practice JMA. Now, if we take a [COJ]MA and make it our own, americanize it (openly, admitting that we're doing so), then it should have an american cultural perspective. (All the training gear would be Nike brand, any meditation would be in front of a tv, weapons would be: switchblade, pool cue, broken beer bottle, leather belt, rank would be signified by tattoos, etc. - I wonder why kenpo didn't do this)
Maybe part of the reason that we try so hard to keep the original cultures of our martial arts is that the US is so culturally bankrupt. (Let the flames begin.)
US, culturally bankrupt? Noooooooo ;)
There are many different things, I think, instructors wish to give by using the original culture. Some do it just because that's how they were taught; others say the culture which is presented is a necessary part of the art; for Shaolin (gonna generalize here, since I know diddly about kung fu styles), the martial art is an aspect of a particular whole; and then some do it just for the "awe" factor.
My thoughts: the presentation of the culture is not a necessity for some martial arts (those which are not a part of some other activity/lifestyle) but it does not usually detract from the art.
Indeed.
Thinking back to a conversation I had with my girlfriend recently . . . (this is in reference to the XMA thing, as well as "traditional" instruction) "You hate the new way and the old ways of doing stuff? How are you gonna get anything done?" A good question, which brings upa few points I think need to be made.
1. The new way, in reference to non-martial concepts being taught alongside (or in place of) martial concepts, does nothing for the art. It takes it from a fighting tradition to performance art.
2. The old ways. I don't think it is overly important to examine the "what" which was done (a blanket concept for both cultural "traditions" [those which were tacked on later] and martial techniques) so much as the "why" it was done. (Again, referencing Okinawan Martial Arts) Why did the instructors there speak in Hogen? It was there native language.
After this, though, comes the topic of kung fu instruction for Okinawan karate teachers. I've been told one reason they (the Okinawan karate men) didn't teach their martial art using Chinese dialect and/or traditions was that they weren't teaching kung fu, they were teaching karate based on kung fu principles. This, though, I doubt as a reason. I submit that these instructors, had they taught unaltered kung fu techniques/principles, would have instructed in the same manner as they would have karate.
Why does this matter? I say that, by keeping one's own social and cultural identity while practicing martial arts, one is following tradition.
Just to take up space, an example (for my own clarification):
The Okinawans trained using their language, wearing their clothes. So, if I do the same, I'm following the principle, not the technique.
Anyway, drive safe. I think I've beaten this topic so far beyond death that . . . dang, can't even come up with a good closing analogie.
Peace.
apoweyn
11-30-2003, 01:20 PM
I think this can go one of two ways. Either you're practicing martial arts strictly as a combative system or you're training as an 'artist.'
I'm going to leave that first one alone for a minute. So you're an artist. I think it's a mistake to equate being an artist with giving two pence about your style's history, philosophy, or culture. The two aren't synonymous.
In every field of endeavor to which the world 'art' can be applied, there are going to be some artists who are very mindful of those who came before. There are going to be artists who honour that. And then there are going to be those who consciously react against it or simply ignore it entirely.
And those possibilities are what make art what it is. Personal, interpretive, and expressive. It has sod all to do with whether your practice is aesthetically pleasing, whether you train meditation, or there are things in your practice that you do solely because "it's part of the system." Those things don't make you an artist. They reflect your priorities. Nothing more.
If you're training in an art as a cultural experience, then obviously a study of culture, tradition, and even language will aid that experience. If you're doing it for some other reason (artistic or no), then they'll be less important. A process of self discovery, for example, may or may not be aided by your ability to learn cantonese terminology. That process is far too complicated to make sense of here (and by my brain).
As an artist, you decide what your art will be. You decide if it's ugly, what message it communicates, what values it reflects, and so on.
Now, back to combat effectiveness. My first instinct is to say that cultural trappings are unnecessary to communicate fighting skills. And I think that's still essentially true. But sometimes, people learn a concept like yielding more readily if they're called to 'step out of their own head' first. Sometimes, cultural trappings can do that. Sometimes, embracing another tradition can shift your perspective enough that you're open to a new idea, like yielding in a fight.
Is it necessary? No. I don't think so. I think a good teacher could explain yielding to a student without going into the flow of qi, etc. But sometimes, people learn more readily when they can leave themselves behind a bit. Know what I mean?
Stuart B.
That was very insightful and thought-provoking. Dang good post.
Thanks for the input.
For the ideas expressed . . . that's what I think I was thinking.
Great minds think alike, no? ;)
apoweyn
11-30-2003, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by Vash
That was very insightful and thought-provoking. Dang good post.
Thanks for the input.
For the ideas expressed . . . that's what I think I was thinking.
Great minds think alike, no? ;)
Indeed they do, mate. :)
joedoe
11-30-2003, 10:58 PM
I agree with ap. I think the cultural aspects can help you to understand the art on a deeper level. It might not necessarily make you a better fighter, but it will probably help you gain a deeper understanding of why things are done the way your art does them.
Kempo Guy
12-02-2003, 11:18 AM
I have answered this particular question in your previous thread... but I’ll post my thoughts again:
My personal opinion is that foreign budoka (I’m speaking of traditional Japanese arts as that is my primary study) should make a serious effort to understand or at least familiarize oneself with Japanese etiquette as well as language if they wish to be taken seriously by seniors in their respective arts.
I feel that the study of budo is more than the study and memorization of physical techniques, but rather the study and preservation of a cultural “treasure / art” as well as providing an opportunity to understand philosophical attitudes or underpinnings if you will and combative behavior of the warriors of the past. This study should include language, etiquette, philosophy, principles, history (at least as it relates to the art you study), and of course technical application of your art. Also, imho to not educate oneself about the culture and etiquette from your arts country of origin limits ones ability to properly interpret the original intent and meaning of ones chosen art.
A lot of the Japanese terminology as it pertains to martial arts does not translate accurately into English. There may be multiple meanings and implications associated with the particular terminology and it will not do it justice to simply translate it to English as it may diminish the original idea presented.
Of course tradition doesn’t necessarily translate or equate into fighting skill. However, parts of the ‘traditions’ in most combative systems (of old) include the study of human combative behavior (within its cultural context). This may be transmitted within these systems in the form of kata or kuden (oral teaching). I feel this separates these ‘traditional’ systems from an empty form of pugilism (or study of weapons for that matter), as the traditions often carry the philosophies and principles of the founders.
Some may say tradition isn’t necessary as the various arts discussed are constantly evolving as do the environmental conditions, which I agree with to a certain extent. The art may evolve, but tradition means that there is a cultural continuity in customs, social attitudes as well as technical and linguistic aspects of your art (whether it’s of Asian or European heritage).
Most traditional arts were developed out of principles that were tested in “real” combat (created out of necessity in many instances). They were founded upon revelations experienced during combat/battles and distilled down to find the essence of these conflicts. You could say these systems underwent a process of natural selection (“survival of the fittest” if you will), meaning that arts with flawed operating systems ceased to exist (these practitioners got killed over time).
The arts that made it went through constant refinement over centuries (in many cases) by succeeding generations. They had to distill the principles and philosophies and create a basic operating system in order to simplify transmission. BTW, this does not mean that these traditional systems aren’t based on sophisticated principles and philosophies. I ask, how can we dismiss these revelations that were taken from real combat experience? Again, some people may argue that combat (or it’s essence) has changed and that the realities of today are different from the realities faced by our ancestors. But I want get into that here…
I would like to end my tirade with this, the prospective student should be able to trust the teacher and the art (with all the cultural trappings if you will) in being able to convey the proper etiquette, philosophy, training methods and impart the principles of their art and eventually be able to help the students tailor the art to fit them (in some respects) by becoming the art. This is where “Shu, Ha, Ri” comes into play, which means to embrace the form, diverge from the form and finally discarding the form. In some ways the by adopting the cultural trappings and absorbing the art you become part of the art with free expression of the combative principles. This is perhaps the fundamental difference between modern (or eclectic) and traditional martial arts.
That's my two yen.
Sorry for the long post.
KG
This, along with the other "Tradition" thread, are two parts of a horse I've beaten to death many a time. However, I feel that they can contribute to active discussion on the traits, practices, and applications of JKD as both an art and a philosophy.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.