Should any art be preserved?

[rogue]

If something has to be preserved that means it's not being used or is outdated. I've noticed that in my old home school a class is run just as the master did it, but as time goes by people are forgetting why things are done the way they are. I asked about this and the instructor wants to preserve the masters art. Fine but if you don't know why you're doing something what are you preserving? So outside of preserving something for historical value or as a hobby is there any point in saving a martial art?

[Tiger_Yin]

Because you believe its worth it.. or believe in the efficiency it can still have :D

[red5angel]

I don't buy that just because a thing is disappearing it means that it is run its course or become useless. There are other circumstances involved.

[Tiger_Yin]

lemme say it.. me me me....
















Guns :D

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by red5angel
I don't buy that just because a thing is disappearing it means that it is run its course or become useless. There are other circumstances involved.


yeah, but to be doing it and not even know why?

[David Jamieson]

So outside of preserving something for historical value or as a hobby is there any point in saving a martial art?

ahah!!!! you are one of those buddhist thinkers after all!!!

You have cast your own snare this time.

Is there any point in saving basket weaving?

cheers

[Vash]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
Is there any point in saving basket weaving?


Well, no. Unless a nuclear holocaust happens, or all of technology suddenly stops existing, then that's a nice hobby, but not all that necessary.

And if one must equate one's martial art with basket weaving, well . . .

[neit]

preserve things that you value. for example you may like a certain form that your system is not really interested in holding on to. so keep it, practise it and pass it on to someone willing to learn it. i don't think it is wise to fear losing or forgetting a martial art though. its not worth keeping something just to keep it.

[Chang Style Novice]

Art preservation is a great thing, as is art restoration.

Have you seen the before and after images of the Sistine Chapel? That ought to put the question to rest!

[Water Dragon]

The martial arts were never meant to be preserved, they were meant to evolve.

[joedoe]

What is the point of painting a picture if you can take a photo?

[SanSoo Student]

Why take a picture, when you can make one using photoshop.:p

[Chang Style Novice]

Because no photograph (or .PSD file) ever looked like this (http://www.artmag.com/museums/a_usa/ausrdvf/acqui99/murray.html) (with the obvious exception of photographs and .PSD files of Elizabeth Murray paintings.)

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
The martial arts were never meant to be preserved, they were meant to evolve.

WD has caught the correct, taken it to the lab, genetically altered it and forced it to evolve into the uber-correct

[MasterKiller]

I'm sure the Muslims were asking themselves the same question about mathematics during the Dark Ages...

[Ray Pina]

The martial world would go on without some arts.

As for unarmed martial arts ingeneral.... am I the only one here who stills witnesses fist figths? Or do I just hang out with a bunch of derilicts?

[apoweyn]

I haven't seen a fist fight in 10 years. And I think you're my age. So... yeah, you might be hanging around with delinquents.

:)

[KC Elbows]

Pickle Fist should be preserved. Unfortunately, I can find no students. The training is not to everyone's tastes.

You all can go back to being productive now.

[red5angel]

The martial arts were never meant to be preserved, they were meant to evolve.


Crap. crap crap crap crap crap. I'm so sick of hearing this, especially from those who consider themselves "modern martial artists". Sure arts are supposed to evolve, but evolution takes time, much much time and evolution should only be in a positivie direction. An art may stay very similar to itself for many hundreds of years, with only slight changes and would you like to know why? Your body is limited to so many moves and so many ways of moving. Evolution in the martil arts has generally turned into re-inventing the wheel for the sake of making a buck. suuuuure trainng techniques ,ay "change" a little due to technology but I don't want to hear all that crap about arts having to evolve, because for the most part those spouting it don't understand what it means.


yeah, but to be doing it and not even know why?

7* - maybe an explanation as to how this pertains as an apropriate response to my statement?

[Ray Pina]

Well obviously I'd take beef with the stament that there is not a lot of "evolution".

Yes, the body can only do so much, but the mind is limitless.

Example: lots of MA use the hand to block. Swiping here, swiping there. There's a lot of timing involved with that and extension.

My technique has evolved to where the hands have one duty now. They hit! Makes it easy. The elbows do all the blocking.

Now, I admit this is not rocket science. Just a change in understanding.

I used to get hit A LOT more, and collapsed A LOT more before.

I don't go to my teacher to learn how to kick and punch. I'm sure everyone here knows how to throw a hell of a punch and a kick. Personally, I'm looking for new ways, more economical ways to do it.

My technique changes about every 3 or 4 months ... looks the same from the outside, but my understanding changes.

Evolution = survival. My computer looks the same: keyboard, monitor, ect. There's some changes in there though compared to my old one.

[red5angel]

My technique has evolved to where the hands have one duty now.

Key word "My" in this sentence. 99.9999999 percent of martial arts mistake greater skill or a switching of arts as evolution.

[Chang Style Novice]

Let's phrase the question like this, to see if it adds any clarity:

Do martial arts have value aside from utility in handing out beatdowns? If so, what sort of value is it? Is it cultural, expessive, scientific, artistic, etc.?

edit - happy now, ya proofreading Tom Joad wannabe?;)

[MasterKiller]

My technique has evolved to where the hands have one duty now. They hit! Makes it easy. The elbows do all the blocking Haven't boxers been doing that for about 100 years already?

Is it ultural, expessive, scientific, artistic, etc.? Ultural. Defintitely ultural.

[Ray Pina]

If you switch styles, you evolve automatically. Accept them or not, you're going to be getting new ideas, concept, approaches to combat. That's evolution.

You can't increase skill without a change occuring. That change is evolution.

In the end, call it what you want to call it. Maybe growth. Whatever it is, you can't be the same next Jan. as you are now. And I'd say the same about your style.

I don't think there has ever been such a focus on the ground game and low-kick as there is now. Which style was ORIGINALLY designed for this?

This is why I like to play with other styles. What are they trying to do? How do they do it? I want to be good. If someone is good at the single leg take down -- we don't train that -- I want him to dump me with it 10-15 times until I can apply my styles formula and counter it. Now I have evolved/grown a little more. Little by little.

[edit add on: maybe boxers have. I hadn't. Now I do .... evolution]

[Chang Style Novice]

The point is, that's not the ART evolving (a possibly spurious idea, IMO), but YOUR skill evolving.

[red5angel]

Do martial arts have value aside from utility in handing out beatdowns? If so, what sort of value is it? Is it cultural, expessive, scientific, artistic, etc.?


Much better question.

[Ray Pina]

If a group of people are studying an art and the teacher makes a change from observation and testing, teaches it to the students, the students find merit in it and incorporate it into their arsenal, the students and the art have evolved.

I know a lot of schools don't run this way. I've been in schools where the teacher's teacher's teacher was the best. Then the teacher's teacher. Then teacher. And we did things as they've always been done.

The system I study now prides itself on being open to change. In fact things change so often that some senior students could be bothered by it. In reality, it's just a change in understanding, a little tweek. It still comes off the same source of power generation, same principles of keeping the door closed, ect.

To get back to boxers. I see what they do and like it. We do it a little differently since we can use back hands, forearms, elbows to strike and don't bob and weave. We tend to use that shape to get inside and stay inside until it's done. We don't want to take shots to that shape. We want to wedge through with that shape. As many things in MA: looks the same, a little different approach.

This is just our way. There's countless ways. I'm not saying all MA evolve. I'm just suggesting that they should.

[red5angel]

change, does not necessarily equal evolution.

[Ray Pina]

Please forgive me. I know I've been a royal pain in the a$$ this week. Maybe argumentive from recent training and subsequent mindset

Anyway, is it really a better question for martial artists to ask themselves if their skill has the same value as a Picasso painting, a song or civil rights ... or for them to ask themselves if they need to critically evaluate their skill sets and update them to meet the needs and demands of todays fighters?

Please, I'm really curious about this.

[red5angel]

I'm one of those rare individuals who believes the chinese actually fought once in a while and believe it or not, even went to the ground!:eek:


or for them to ask themselves if they need to critically evaluate their skill sets and update them to meet the needs and demands of todays fighters?

Why, no one fights for survival anymore? We aren't getting attacked by hordes of mongols or other barbarous tribes. In general the practice of martial arts makes it a hobby, even at the serious sport level. It's unnecessary to do it, that's why it's so fukking ridiculous how people fight about it. If I had to face off on the field of battle or through the mean streets of some slum then ok, I might see it as a serious investment of my time, and while I take my training seriously, at the end of the day, or my life, it makes little difference that I did it.

[Chang Style Novice]

"while I take my training seriously, at the end of the day, or my life, it makes little difference that I did it."

I disagree, and I think you do, too. You have your reasongs for doing MA, even though you seldom run into life-or-death violent situations. Those other reasons are the same kinds of reasons almost everyone here does MA, and they are perfectly legit.

Actually, I think I don't need an "almost" in that last sentence.

[red5angel]

everything we do changes things and in that way I would agree it makes a difference, however there is no need for me to do it.

[MasterKiller]

however there is no need for me to do it. Do you not feel a sense of accomplishment from learning and getting better? That is a need we all have. The outlet for expression varies from person to person; nevertheless, the need for the outlet is universal.

[red5angel]

self gratification is not what I would call a "need". I'm not saying its not a strong drive but certainly not a need.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by joedoe
What is the point of painting a picture if you can take a photo?

To use your analogy, there arre a whol lot of people out there painting and then telling people it's a photograph they took.

And Red, my art is very traditional. Our tradition is to beat the crap out of everyone else. If you can find a better way to do that, it becomes a part of the tradition.

[red5angel]

Wd - nothing specifica against you, it's just I hear that all the time and am not buying it. I'm not saying an art can't evolve or grow, but I am saying that many older arts have been pretty well refined in the past. They may have lost somethings recently or they may nothave some things built in, in which case there is certainly room to grow.

[Ray Pina]

Recently someone visted my teacher to fence and kept cutting for the leg and my teacher warned him not to do it, it's dangerous ... for him. My teacher held his attack and actually took a couple on the leg. After a few minutes of this my techer had enoughand and hit him ontop of his head, still saving him the upward cut that would have happened before the downward.

The other guy's reasoning: in ancient times 80% of battle wounds were to the legs. Sounds like a good reason to go for the legs right?

Well, he overlooked the fact that those same people had SHIELDS! Cover the head -- ting! -- cut the guys leg.

Now most fencers don't use a shield. You can still cut the leg, but without the shield you are very exposed. Maybe you both die together. Maybe it's better to lose the head... you die quicker and less painfully. Personal choice.
...

I don't consider it a hobby when you face off with someone who wants to hurt you as much as possible as quickly as possible before you can do that to him.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by red5angel

Crap. crap crap crap crap crap. I'm so sick of hearing this, especially from those who consider themselves "modern martial artists". Sure arts are supposed to evolve, but evolution takes time, much much time and evolution should only be in a positivie direction. An art may stay very similar to itself for many hundreds of years, with only slight changes and would you like to know why? Your body is limited to so many moves and so many ways of moving. Evolution in the martil arts has generally turned into re-inventing the wheel for the sake of making a buck. suuuuure trainng techniques ,ay "change" a little due to technology but I don't want to hear all that crap about arts having to evolve, because for the most part those spouting it don't understand what it means.

compare mma fighters in 1995 to those of today. would you call that evolution? if not, why?



7* - maybe an explanation as to how this pertains as an apropriate response to my statement?

it pertains because of rogue's oirginal post:

"If something has to be preserved that means it's not being used or is outdated. I've noticed that in my old home school a class is run just as the master did it, but as time goes by people are forgetting why things are done the way they are. I asked about this and the instructor wants to preserve the masters art. Fine but if you don't know why you're doing something what are you preserving? So outside of preserving something for historical value or as a hobby is there any point in saving a martial art?"

[rogue]

Sure arts are supposed to evolve, but evolution takes time, much much time and evolution should only be in a positivie direction. An art may stay very similar to itself for many hundreds of years, with only slight changes and would you like to know why? Your body is limited to so many moves and so many ways of moving. Things evolve as a response and evolution can happen very quickly. An art will stay similar as long as the problems it's dealing with remain constant or it's forced to remain the same by those preserving it. Something could also evolve against a specific threat to the point where it does deadend once the threat disappears.

For example in many karate schools there are many empty techniques. The techniques themselves are fine it's just that people no longer have a knowlage, or even need a knowlage of what the technique is for or what the original situation for it's use was.

Sport based arts like BJJ, boxing or Olympic TKD don't need to be preserved since it's used frequently by hundreds of practitioners in competitions, many traditional arts though would have to be preserved since while they have many practitioners they don't get used for their intended purpose nearly as much. If something isn't being used as intended it's meaning becomes lost. Look at how many arts where it's drills (which people perform with some vague notion of it's purpose) have become the end to the training. Musical kata anyone?

[red5angel]

compare mma fighters in 1995 to those of today. would you call that evolution? if not, why?

All arts have to come to fruition.


it pertains because of rogue's oirginal post:

then you must have missed my reply to that.



Things evolve as a response and evolution can happen very quickly.

My challenge is that this is not always evolution but a rediscovering of the old ways or ways that were used once but forgotten. It's happened time and again in the last 2-3 decades. So called evolution also happens when someone doesn't fully understand an art before they go off to start their own schools. they fill the gaps or "decide" something doesn't work and toss it out for something else.


If something isn't being used as intended it's meaning becomes lost.

This is a more reasonable answer then it must have lost its usefulness.

[rogue]

This is a more reasonable answer then it must have lost its usefulness. But why? There are things in karate that make no sense unless you understand the original intent. Look at uke or what are commonly called "blocks". If practiced as they are in most karate & TKD schools they are used to block a punch or kick by meeting the force and as an individual stand alone movement, and as most will realize they don't work done that way but will continue doing them in kata and basics. Now if you take those techniques and use them as intended with footwork, body movement and as counter attacks they work and have meaning. If you can find some old Okinawan karate photos you sometimes can see this, or you can just look at the Enshin karate book Sabaki Method by Ninomiya which is one of the best books on traditional karate IMO. The point being they know what these are for since they use them.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by red5angel


My challenge is that this is not always evolution but a rediscovering of the old ways or ways that were used once but forgotten. It's happened time and again in the last 2-3 decades.


even if you look at it that way, TMA devolved into what is was, right? Now, it's evolving back to what it once was. The next step is to go beyond where it was before. The way to do that may be something as small as upping the training standards, who knows.

So called evolution also happens when someone doesn't fully understand an art before they go off to start their own schools. they fill the gaps or "decide" something doesn't work and toss it out for something else.

not necessarily. Evolution happens when something - anything - makes your game better. The problem comes in when styles are reluctant to try anything new that will advance their game.

[SLC]

Empty hand martial arts is still too useful (and used) to be able to clearly see it in its social context. It might be easier to discuss this question looking at iaido.

Iaido is clearly archaic, but it is also clearly perserved. The good question is why.

I don't do it, so I don't know this first hand, but I doubt that it still evolves.

[SevenStar]

Iaido is nothing but forms - it's the art of sword drawing - I don't think it's supposed to evolve. However, the counterpart - kendo, rather, it's practitioners - would indeed evolve, and some of that could be based on what is learned in iaido.

[SLC]

First off, your personally "getting better" is NOT the evolution of martial arts... or even YOUR art. It's just your own evolution. And you can accomplish this by something as simple as practice. Even if you change to another art, it is still just you that's evolving. This is the arts influencing you.

It is only at the point that YOU, or someone else, begins to influence the arts, that the arts change (evolve).

(Aside, evolution does not equal "good". The dinosaurs evolved into extiction, while mammals took a turn that worked better.)

Look at a beginning student starting a kata with no idea what it means. The student is not personally SAVING the kata yet... he is just learning it. But he is becoming part of the "saving" process.
In reality, the kata may have holes in it where even the current teacher doesn't know the complete purpose. We must presume, however, that the teacher is still searching for the meaning. But all this is the process of learning and, in learning, saving.

If not, he is no teacher and is just going through the motions. And, after several generations of going through the motions, the kata probably gets to be like 3rd or 4th generation xerox copy.... muddy, fuzzy, more and more distant from the original.

You can see this Not saving and Not learning happen all around you with common "traditional" things where people no longer understand OR PURSUE the meaning. Look at Christmas. Look at Veteran's Day (originally Armistice Day marking the end of WWI).

Iaido, though, is not the same. People don't just "sleepwalk" through iaido. Just because it is no longer used in combat does NOT mean that the people that still study it don't know the meanings of the movements or search for those they lack. This can also be said about some of the less followed empty hand arts.... or even your own art. YOU may not know the meaning of a movement, but if you are studying the art seriously, you WILL be trying to discover the meaning. That is part of the study. Sometimes, if you are lucky, your teacher will give it to you. Other times you will have to find it yourself.

Finally, going back to Rogue's original question -

"I've noticed that in my old home school a class is run just as the master did it, but as time goes by people are forgetting why things are done the way they are. I asked about this and the instructor wants to preserve the masters art."

I can't see it in that context. If the ignorance is growing rather than shrinking, it seems to show the current teacher as nothing but a caretaker.... keeping a locked box that none may peer into. Pointless.

[MasterKiller]

Originally posted by SLC
(Aside, evolution does not equal "good". The dinosaurs evolved into extiction, while mammals took a turn that worked better.) Dinosuars became birds in order to adapt to a new climate. Survival = good, no matter what changes had to occur to ensure it.

But I'm not buying the evolution stuff here. Getting better at something and evolving into something are different birds of a feather altogether. :D

[D_Messenger]

Answering the original question in the first topic here and careless for what how further people might have discussed it on some 4 pages:

1) If its good, it should stay
2) If its bad, it should either die or change into something good

That concludes it for me.

[iblis73]

I think the main reason people are upset with TMAs/CMAs isnt that they have utility outside of fighting. I feel most or many folks (not all obviously) want a method of self defense. Yet they are sold a bill of goods that tells them they will learn an effective method of self protection/fighting. I think this is dubious especially given the vast range of fighting possibilities out there.

I have sadly pretty much given up on TMA/CMA. While I met some great people I got tired of several things, mostly ego, attitude and LACK OF FIGHTING ABILITY. This last one is the killer for me, because I realized I would end up being insecure if I couldnt fight yet held high rank in a martial art. An important note here folks-there needs to be some form of empirical method for testing ones fighting skills. Having done literally HUNDREDS of hrs of research (why I wasnt pursuing an MA in cultural antrho at the same time beats me), visiting dozens of martial arts schools and viewing perhaps 50-60 videos I have seen the good and the bad.

How does one focus on fighting ability? Obviously there is full contact fighting, a good portion of which is conditioning and attribute development. But that could leave out weapons,tactics,psychological and mental issues, environment/scenario training and of course TIME involved.

The reason I'm writing this abbreviated novel is simple-no single MA instructor, "traditional" or otherwise, has been able to deliver all the goods so to speak. I found a few who came close.
Military and police trainers are a decent place to look as well.

Food for thought.