The meaning of martial "ART".....

[Fu-Pow]

Blah, blah, blah...UFC....MMA..."skillsets"....ring matches....we just go round and round on this forum. You guys seem to miss the point again and again.

What is an art? Art, in its purest form, is an investigation and also an expression of the "self." Wasn't it Bruce Lee that said that?

Its not a contest of who can beat up who. Martial competition has its place but it should only serve as a tool...it should be a means and not an end.

You wonder why kung fu guys don't enter UFC and all that jazz, I think mostly its because most of them don't care. They got into martial "arts" for other reasons (or eventually did) then just to be a brawler.

Martial arts for them is a vehicle on the road to something else, not a destination.

So I say to you guys that practice for combat sport competition what's the point? Are you really doing art or is it just a diversion for you?

Because in the end, you just won some stupid trophy that doesn't mean anything in anyone in the world at large....unless you won some money or something.

[bodhitree]

The 'art' comes from responding the way that is best for you. I think learning a little of everything is crutial to understanding what your oponent may do, but learning all of the options, then seeing what works best for you.

A great example of the 'art' aspect is shadowboxing
shadowboxing can be very tiring if your imagining a live oponent reacting in different ways and you are responding to what that person does. It's very demanding of the creative and imaginative aspects of the mind, and, to me, one of the most difficult things to do

[n.mitch]

The art side of it is exspressing yourself, respect to yourself and others and it becomes part of your life the more you progress. As said before a lot of people dont study martial arts to become pro fighters most do it for fitness, hoby and enjoyment a lot of ma dosent even spar e.g thi chi it has a lot more meaning than just fighting. Martial arts should teach you not to fight, if you understand its lessons you shouldnt need to prove your self to others

[Mutant]

Fu Pow, could you please remove the term 'san shou' from your sig? You obviously have no clue what it is or really is about... :rolleyes:
thanks.

[manofkent]

I think, Like art (as in crafts) your martial art is something that can only be improved by removing the bad bits.

Once you hav learned to punch you then spend the rest of you life making it better, by removing all unneccesary movement untill it can not be seen or antisipated.

I think that the term martial art is diffrent for everyone, For me its the persuit for perfection. Not the persuit for points.

I know many ppl will disagree, but I would never call UFC, sumo, Boxing, TKD or Comp Karate a martial art. The martial arts are about pure attack, using everything you have and anything thats around you to stop any attack.

I think its far to say that these things I mentioned above are sports. They are played for Money and the want to prove how good some1 is. When a true martial artist will understand that Most of a fight is luck. We just train the best we can and hope it works in the event that we will never have to use it.

[yutyeesam]

I guess a test would be to see who would still practice martial arts if they were completely cut off from civilization, where there were no people and no training aides. Would people still practice if all of a sudden, there were no external recipients?

-123

[manofkent]

I think that if a martial artist was 100% cut off and would never see another human again, there art form would turn in to "park our" or "free running".

Personaly I feel that I wouldnt train to fight against humans if there were none. I would stiil desire perfection in movement, Whatever disipline I took. I'd prob train in internal healing arts and free running.

[Wong Fei Hong]

For me personally for a fighting style to turn into art it has to display perfect movement at the right time. Not in a kata or in a form pre arranged sparring, but when it counts.

Whenever i watch muhhammed ali or any of those great boxers from marvin hagler to marciano, i think this is pure art and i dont think it could get better, the punch is 8cm away from their head and they manage to move their head out of the way , or back or bob and weave. Not only this but they do it consistently all through rounds and rounds of a rigorous fight.
To me it is the perfection of the word art in martial arts.

When you see it its so natural and perfect its like a painter when he just does what he knows how to do or when a musician performs live in front of thousands of people and he just does what he likes to do most.

[MasterKiller]

Blah, blah, blah...UFC....MMA..."skillsets"....ring matches....we just go round and round on this forum. You guys seem to miss the point again and again.

What is an art? Art, in its purest form, is an investigation and also an expression of the "self." Wasn't it Bruce Lee that said that?

Its not a contest of who can beat up who. Martial competition has its place but it should only serve as a tool...it should be a means and not an end.

You wonder why kung fu guys don't enter UFC and all that jazz, I think mostly its because most of them don't care. They got into martial "arts" for other reasons (or eventually did) then just to be a brawler.

Martial arts for them is a vehicle on the road to something else, not a destination.

So I say to you guys that practice for combat sport competition what's the point? Are you really doing art or is it just a diversion for you?

Because in the end, you just won some stupid trophy that doesn't mean anything in anyone in the world at large....unless you won some money or something.

You are missing the point entirely.

First off, up until about the 19th century, artisans were craftsmen, who applied a skillset for practical purposes. You apprenticed with an artist, learned the craft, and eventually used that skill to make a living for yourself.

The notion of artist as sensitive individualist doesn't pop until fairly recently in modern history.

Art, real art, is not always a painting, or a song, or book. Sometimes, it's a building (Frank Lloyd Wright) that has purpose outside of it's aesthetic appeal. It is fully functional and contains elements of personal expression that elevates it above the standard.

People complain about modern art, ala abstract expressionism, or the New York school, but without it we wouldn't have jazzy sports team logos, or patterned sweaters, or Coca Cola cans. Big deal, right? But all those things allow companies and individuals to express their own individualism...so the art becomes a practical tool for the individual to use for their own benefit.

There is plenty of bad art out there. You don't have to look very far to find it. Just tune your radio to a top 40 station, but listen up, because in 6 months it'll be replaced by something else. The stuff that sticks around for 20 years has an intrinsic value that elevates it above the Ashlee Simpsons of the world. And for martial arts, that value is practical application.

Now, I'm not much of a competitor, but 99% of these guys DO NOT COMPETE FOR THE TROPHY. Sure, they want it, but not because of the trophy...but because of what the trophy symbolizes---Personal Excellence. They compete because they want to be the best, and winning a trophy (or belt, or medal, or Superbowl ring)just happens to come along with the package.

You think Hemingway wasn't a competitor? Or Jackson Pollock? Or Van Gogh? Jim Morrison?

The guy painting a picture in his garage doesn't care about recognition, sure. Just like the guy doing forms in his backyard.

But most of the guys you hear about it, the guys you go to college to study, fought hard, made huge sacrifices (many destroyed themselves in the process) to be recognized as the best in their field.

Is the Nobel Prize for literature "just a trophy"? But can you name the last 5 winners?

[Judge Pen]

MK is right; however, several famous artists were not appreciated until well after their deaths. In their time, their work was not considered aesthetic or practical. How do we, therefore, define what is practical as it relates to art? It can’t be simply accepted as good work within your trade, can it?

[MasterKiller]

MK is right; however, several famous artists were not appreciated until well after their deaths. In their time, their work was not considered aesthetic or practical. How do we, therefore, define what is practical as it relates to art? It can’t be simply accepted as good work within your trade, can it?

Sometimes, it takes a little while for the value to become evident. Sometimes it takes a couple of generations. Sometimes, it never happens at all.

When you try to shake the system up (Van Gogh, for example), at first people scream because change is scary, but eventually, if your ideals have merit, you will find mainstream acceptance if the right momentum is there.

There will always be hold-outs.

Look how long it took for traditionalists to admit they had holes in their ground delivery systems...all the while the Gracies were choking people out all over the place.

Moby **** ruined Melville's career. But 100 years later it is a classic and taught in every American Lit class on the planet, so I'm forced to concede that the novel has merit even though I think it's is a crap book and will never read it again.

So, the UFC comes along and says martial artists should put up or shut up. We'll have a few years of people screaming about it. But as the older generations die off and the newer ones come into their own, eventually you'll have more acceptance in the TMA world for combat sport venues.

In the words of Agent Smith: "It's not impossible. It is inevitable."

[bo_hou_chuan]

Wow, the comments about "if there were no other humans would you still do martial arts" are very thought provoking. I wonder how many MMA/UFC ers still do martial arts into the later years of their lives, after their desire to fight has died out.

This touches on the idea that martial arts are done for personal gain, not to inflict your greatness on others. Kung Fu doesn't translate to fighting tough guy school. If you don't do martial arts to fight, why do you do them?

In the beginning my pursuit was to be a skilled fighter. As time progressed and I trained I realized that I don't get into fights in my every day life. So my motivation for training seemed to have dried up. And yet I still train. And if I am not training for "battle" why do I train in an art that is made for it?

I try not to label it a pursuit of perfection, as there is no perfect art and no perfect artist. Perfection can only be achieved in sciences, where facts can be pinned down. For example, in all martial arts there different methods for kicking. Some prefer to stand flat footed, some prefer to get up on the ball of your foot. Is one method more right than another? They each justify their reason and they are different. If you could say conclusively and prove that one method was right all of the time you would be moving into a more scientific approach.

[MasterKiller]

I try not to label it a pursuit of perfection, as there is no perfect art and no perfect artist.

Right. It's the pursuit of excellence. Excellence in the ring. Excellence in your form. These are just two paths with the same goal in mind--personal excellence in a chosen field.

Winning a forms competition at the highest levels takes years of hard work, sacrifice, and dedication.

Winning a championship belt takes years of hard work, sacrifice, and and dedication.

There are many ways up the mountain. Not everyone takes the same path.

[Judge Pen]

There are many ways up the mountain. Not everyone takes the same path.

Or even tries to climb the same mountain.

Say, MK, do you think the Lord of the Rings Movies have artistic merit even thought you think they are crappy? :D

[Fu-Pow]

You are missing the point entirely.

First off, up until about the 19th century, artisans were craftsmen, who applied a skillset for practical purposes. You apprenticed with an artist, learned the craft, and eventually used that skill to make a living for yourself.

The notion of artist as sensitive individualist doesn't pop until fairly recently in modern history.

Art, real art, is not always a painting, or a song, or book. Sometimes, it's a building (Frank Lloyd Wright) that has purpose outside of it's aesthetic appeal. It is fully functional and contains elements of personal expression that elevates it above the standard.

I'm not talking about "artisans" I'm talking about "artists." I see a difference there."Artisan" really refers to someone with a specific skill or craft. In fact I'll even concede that "art" as defined in websters dictionary refers to a "skill or craft." But why the expression martial "artist" and not martial "artisan?"

I'm not just talking about "art" on a physical level. I'm talking about "art" on the whole self level ie body, mind and soul. When you do "art" you are expressing your whole self. Or it can be an investigation into the whole "self." I dont' see it as only what is material manifest but also the mental and spiritual levels. So when we do martial "art" are we just talking about the material "skill or craft" component or are we talking about the whole deal?

[David Jamieson]

It's an artform like any other.

Like some forms of art, it has dual functionality to it as well, such as martiality.

The product is your transformation acquired through the process of practicing the art.

Stretch your head a little, it's not that far a reach. Dunno why the snide remarks about competitive fighters are in there. That's there form of thang.

All painters do not practice the same genre, all musicians do not play the same song or style of music and so on.

Not a big leap to understand what the term means.

[MasterKiller]

I dont' see it as only what is material manifest but also the mental and spiritual levels. So when we do martial "art" are we just talking about the material "skill or craft" component or are we talking about the whole deal?

In the highest levels, it's both. Jackson Pollock's work is emotionally visceral and technically groundbreaking (for the time). Same with Hemingway's style (in the beginning). But, someone without art training looks at Pollock and says "my kid can do that!"

So what separates Pollock from grade school scribbling? I would say Intent.

Sure, you can argue intentional fallacy until the cows come home. But great arists show their intent in their work. It's what separates them from the pack. Otherwise, you would study only significant movements and not individual artists.

That's why the emphasis on fighting style is a fallacy. The style is not the art. The person executing the style creates the art, if they are any good. Not everyone who walks through forms or wears a Gi is a martial artist, just like not everyone who paints a tree outside their window is an artist.

[Judge Pen]

That's why the emphasis on fighting style is a fallacy. The style is not the art. The person executing the style creates the art, if they are any good. Not everyone who walks through forms or wears a Gi is a martial artist, just like not everyone who paints a tree outside their window is an artist.

Why then are people criticized if their form doesn't look like anothers. Several people learn the same form, but they don't all "play" it the same way. Inevitably, the ones that do play it similarly will critique the other when, arguably, the person who is the most uniqe has the most individual take on the form to suit that persons interpretation and intest while the others that look alike may be guilty of mere imitation.

[MasterKiller]

Flavor is one thing. Mimicry is another.

There is a difference between writing like Raymond Carver, and trying to write like Raymond Carver.

[Fu-Pow]

Fu Pow, could you please remove the term 'san shou' from your sig? You obviously have no clue what it is or really is about... :rolleyes:
thanks.

You flaunt your ignorance. You think San Shou is a term that was "invented" when people started wearing head gear and 14 oz gloves?

Even traditional taiji training has "San Shou" training.

San Shou simple means "loose hand" or "free hand" in Chinese.

Just like PRC has branded the term "Wu Shu" so has the combat sports people branded the term "San Shou."

:rolleyes:

[Fu-Pow]

Sure, you can argue intentional fallacy until the cows come home. But great arists show their intent in their work. It's what separates them from the pack. Otherwise, you would study only significant movements and not individual artists.

Yep, that's what I'm getting at intent. As you mature as a person and as an artist your intent changes. If you never look inside then you never move to that next level of "intent" or conciousness. Kung fu masters who are "high level" already went through that lower level "hierarchical" phase of who's better, who got the trophy. Maturity is letting that go and finding ways to synergize body, mind and soul. Then when you do your form you are not just moving your body while mind and soul are somewhere else. Your "intent" is pinpoint focused whether for fighting or for other pursuits. Its about synergy of intent. I think I'm getting off of my original topic though.



That's why the emphasis on fighting style is a fallacy. The style is not the art. The person executing the style creates the art, if they are any good. Not everyone who walks through forms or wears a Gi is a martial artist, just like not everyone who paints a tree outside their window is an artist.

Good point. I totally agree. "Art" is taking it to the next level, its not just reproduction. You have to make the "form" your own from the inside out.

[MasterKiller]

I still say that "art" implies technical proficiency, which to me means a higher level of applied skill. If a singer can't sing, or a painter can't paint...well, you see where I'm going with this.

Literary theory is not the same thing as literature.

[Mutant]

MK, i agree with you on every point, except for the one about Melville's Moby D1ck being a crap novel. :p

Don't really know of anyone who competes in sportfighting 'for the glory' or for tacky medals or trophys. It IS a personal pursuit of excellence, of pushing personal bounderies, of pressure-testing material in the best and most constructive way possible. The competition is more about pitting yourself against actual non-complying, skilled and well-trained adversaries. There's no way to simulate this with even semi-cooperative (or even fully resisting) training partners... there's something about facing off in a competitive arena that ups the stakes to territory you can't simulate in the training hall. You could try to get it on the street but then you have to worry about getting shot, and your average thug there, while dangerous, is not very likely well trained or skilled. Its all about developing the core art. Its one path up a mountain. An important path in fully developing as a martial ARTIST. One who can and does apply their art.

[MasterKiller]

MK, i agree with you on every point, except for the one about Melville's Moby D1ck being a crap novel. did you read the unabridged original version with all the history of whaling stuff? I wasted an entire spring break getting through that book. :mad:


Say, MK, do you think the Lord of the Rings Movies have artistic merit even thought you think they are crappy? I think they had potential, but I find the execution flawed. If you bore the audience to sleep with bloated story arcs, you miss a great oppotunity to actually make them think about something.

See Episode I and the first half of Episode II to further illustrate my point...

[yutyeesam]

I still say that "art" implies technical proficiency, which to me means a higher level of applied skill. If a singer can't sing, or a painter can't paint...well, you see where I'm going with this.


Technical proficiency by who's standards? According to western music theory, Indian music does a lot of things "wrong".

The punk rock movement was designed to dispute the notion of technical proficiency, and created a musical revolution out of it. Michael Bolton has better technical proficiency than Johnny Rotten as far as singing techniques, but Johnny proved that you don't need that when it comes to self expression. There are many who'd prefer to listen to Johnny Rotten than Michael Bolton.

David Byrne of The Talking Heads said punk rock was about if you knew how to only play two notes on the guitar, you'd figure out a way to make a song out of it. ...clearly putting creativity above technical competence.

I'm not downplaying technical competencey, I'm just saying that the level of it is irrelevant when it comes to art.

-123

[David Jamieson]

I sort of disagree with that thing about technical competency not being important in art.

It is.

Your own expression + technical competency will reap far greater rewards than you alone or the mechanics of technical competency alone.

yes, you can express yourself and call it art and others may see it as so.

But they wouldn't deny the value of technical competency.

punk rock also isn't about music, it's about rebellion. music is the vehicle because it's the format of the method of rebellion. technically speaking, the sex pistols were awful, but the idea of them and the motion and momentum was great! It, like many other forms of music in various genres was a way that people could in turn express themselves and stand out and be part of something when they didn't feel like they fit into the common social more they lived in. kind of like emo fruits or death metal lollers. :D or even the worst of the worst, classic rocking parents with mullets. :eek:

There are as many types and categories of martial arts as there are types of music.
Each type of music is a 'type' because of the technicality of it. It's rythyms, it's structure, etc etc. The same is true of a given martial art.

Technical proficiency is the foundation, creative expressionism is the pinnacle. That's probably true of any art.

[MasterKiller]

Technical proficiency by who's standards? According to western music theory, Indian music does a lot of things "wrong".

The punk rock movement was designed to dispute the notion of technical proficiency, and created a musical revolution out of it. Michael Bolton has better technical proficiency than Johnny Rotten as far as singing techniques, but Johnny proved that you don't need that when it comes to self expression. There are many who'd prefer to listen to Johnny Rotten than Michael Bolton.

David Byrne of The Talking Heads said punk rock was about if you knew how to only play two notes on the guitar, you'd figure out a way to make a song out of it. ...clearly putting creativity above technical competence.

I'm not downplaying technical competencey, I'm just saying that the level of it is irrelevant when it comes to art.

-123

For every Sex Pistols and Talking Heads, there were 1,000 bands that didn't make it. The one's that survived were technically superior to the one's who didn't. Better execution of the medium, regardless of the medium, is true mastery. Johnny Rotten, if anything, is a master of the punk movement.

And that's really the point, now isn't it? Is your kung fu good enough to move beyond kung fu? Can you express your kung fu in a different medium? A real master like Chan Tai San could...He'd clobber you in the street or in a ring. Didn't matter, right?

BTW, I met Johnny Rotten in OKlahoma City about 12 years ago when he was on the MTV Tour with PIL. I asked him where Sid was, and he spit soda out of his nose.

[Mutant]

did you read the unabridged original version with all the history of whaling stuff? I wasted an entire spring break getting through that book. :mad:
You had to read that during Spring Break?!?! Well, therein lies the problem...

The detailed whaling data in that book is some of the best documentation of life and work on a whaling ship from that era that still exists today, which he compiled working as a whaler early in his career. Melville was a freak (as you know from reading the book and taking the class), the patterns of writing within the book are said to capture the ebbs and flow of a whaling voyage, including the tedium. It is poetic, detailing the forces that drive men to pursue their obsessions. I thought it was a trip.

[Mutant]

You flaunt your ignorance. You think San Shou is a term that was "invented" when people started wearing head gear and 14 oz gloves?

Even traditional taiji training has "San Shou" training.

San Shou simple means "loose hand" or "free hand" in Chinese.

Just like PRC has branded the term "Wu Shu" so has the combat sports people branded the term "San Shou."

:rolleyes:

I know what the terms translates as, but I'm talking about 'what it means' to the the martial arts community in today's world. Using the term out of contemporary context is just misleading.

Part of what defines San Shou now is systematic pressure testing in competition, an aspect which you deride as somehow blasphemous and unworthy of being an art form. So while you disrespect all sport fighters, including those fighting hard within the CMA community to vindicate Kung Fu within the modern martial arts world, you flash the san shou term in your sig like youre some kind of fighter, all the while giving all 'san shou' peeps a ration of sh1t. Thats why I nicely asked you to reconsider it.

[Mutant]

Okay, I don't know why I bother, but here it goes...

Many of you are just masterbators.

You guys like to compare martial arts to various other sports, arts and recreational pursuits. Now I'm going to compare martial arts to sex.

Martial arts without competitive fighting is like Sex without f#cking. It is the central theme and purpose, all the other things are fun but peripheral.

But many of you seem satisfied to stay within your incestrous realms and never go beyond masterbation, never taking it all the way, while smugly feeling clever and self satisfied. The problem is, you've never been laid and you don't know any better... don't understand what you're missing, as martial arts without fighting is akin to martial masterbation.

Fu-Pow, you are just a masterbator.

[yutyeesam]

For every Sex Pistols and Talking Heads, there were 1,000 bands that didn't make it. The one's that survived were technically superior to the one's who didn't. Better execution of the medium, regardless of the medium, is true mastery. Johnny Rotten, if anything, is a master of the punk movement.



Not only is he the master, he is the creator. With no background of technical anything.

Kurt Kobain destroyed the hair metal scene, which was all about technically wicked riffs and blazing hot complex guitar solos. He destroyed it with something much much less technically proficient.

[Fu-Pow]

I know what the terms translates as,

Actually, you don't and you continue to flaunt your ignorance of Chinese culture and language.....but thanks for playing.

Put that in your "context" and smoke it, ya master-debator. ;)

[manofkent]

Well said Fu-Pow.

Mutant - Your really dont have a clue. Your so called "compeating" is not a martial art, its a sport.

A martial art is an art form, used to kill or hurt an oponent in any situation. It's a way of life that changes the way you see things, talk to people, act and everything about you.

Martial artists train to enrich there lives, some use it for healing and exersise, some love to gain knowledge or teach, some want to know how to deffend themselves and for most of us its just something that we really enjoy doing.

While your looking to hit for points, we are breaking legs and taking you by the neck.

I dont think sport fighting is bad. I just dont see how ppl can think they are the same thing. And I can't see why anyone would take so many heavy blows to the head for money. It looks tough and comands respect, but at the end of the day your the one whos body is screwed up and cant remember your own name at 60.

[Wong Fei Hong]

A quote comes up from a film i saw since theres all this sex comparison and masterbation , called emanuelle if youve ever heard of it.

At one point emanuelle is told to shag this guy , and she turns around and says something like what on earth could you see in this guy he is old and wrinkly and not even good looking.
So the woman turns around and says to her a young guy will just ram away, but when you get to this guys age, the ability to still do it and how much you savour it, that is art.

I think that the thread got somehow gayed because people arent discussing art more mmARTS s vs trad ARTS yet again

[David Jamieson]

I think that the thread got somehow gayed

dude, this is pretty good stuff, it's getting serious consideration as sig material by the judges even right now! :D

[manofkent]

Whats "sig material"?

I'm just waiting for Mutant to reply to my last post, or any other meat head compo fighter thats gonna be brain dead at 60.

[David Jamieson]

Whats "sig material"?


stuff that goes into one's signature in their posts.

[MasterKiller]

Not only is he the master, he is the creator. With no background of technical anything.

Kurt Kobain destroyed the hair metal scene, which was all about technically wicked riffs and blazing hot complex guitar solos. He destroyed it with something much much less technically proficient.

Don't confuse "technical" with "complex."

Both Kurt and Johnny Rotten did what they did very well.

Remember the old saying "Don't fear the man who practices 1,000 kicks 1 time; fear the man who practices 1 kick 1,000 times."

[Mutant]

Put that in your "context" and smoke it, ya master-debator. ;)
LOL! :D

Of course, not to be confused with a master-killer..

[David Jamieson]

If you are male, if you are under 84 years old, then you are a masturbator.

If you claim you are not, then it changes and now you are a liar. :p

There, now enough about masturbation, fact is, you all jerk off like any other healthy male. Don't deny it, we'll just laugh at you.

[Ray Pina]

Blah, blah, blah...UFC....MMA..."skillsets"....ring matches....we just go round and round on this forum. You guys seem to miss the point again and again.

What is an art? Art, in its purest form, is an investigation and also an expression of the "self." Wasn't it Bruce Lee that said that?

Its not a contest of who can beat up who. Martial competition has its place but it should only serve as a tool...it should be a means and not an end.

You wonder why kung fu guys don't enter UFC and all that jazz, I think mostly its because most of them don't care. They got into martial "arts" for other reasons (or eventually did) then just to be a brawler.

Martial arts for them is a vehicle on the road to something else, not a destination.

So I say to you guys that practice for combat sport competition what's the point? Are you really doing art or is it just a diversion for you?

Because in the end, you just won some stupid trophy that doesn't mean anything in anyone in the world at large....unless you won some money or something.

I think you have it backwards. And I say that genuinely.

You start with martiality .... principle, technique, training, more training, then testing. Then you see things differently and can go deeper. More techniques become available off of original principles that you may now understand differently, at a different level....... more training, more testing. This is the road. There is no destination. You point yourself in a direction and keep going.

The art: I can learn my master's principles and techniques, but being that we are two different people we will express it differently based on our own physical attributes and emotional/mental disposition.

He may prefer to enter one way, I may prefer to enter another, but we'll be using the same principles or leverage. And most importantly, we'll have the same philosophy, of not wanting to trade blows, not wanting to "fight
the guy.

On top of all that, every one of my fights are different though I use the same principles and its the same guy using them. That's art! That's the expression of my martial art on a chaotic canvas of fight.

To me, that is the most beautiful thing in the world. I don't fight for trophies, medals or money. I am truly fighting for my art right now ..... though it would be a dream to make a living from it.

This other stuff that you refer to -- pretty much the wushu-fication of martial arts -- to me, that's pornography. I'm alright with pornography, but it's a cheap substitution for the real thing. You might watch it and enjoy it when there's nothing better going on (like the fighting aspect of a tournament) but I always wind up feeling less than right in my stomach, and embarassed for everyone involved.

[Ray Pina]

Master Killer, I have a new respect for you. That was a beautiful dicorse on art.

Mutant, I bo to you for seeing the greatness of Moby **** -- became my favorite book after I finished it this summer -- and for walking your path like a man.

(salutes both)

[SPJ]

The meaning of an art is that there is no art.

Or the best art is that there is no art.

A punch is just a punch.

A punch is not just a punch.

A punch is just a punch.

quotes from Bruce Lee or Jun Fan.

:)