Some answers to SD critics - Part 2
Uniforms: If you are not a monk living in a temple, wearing that clothing would be inappropriate, maybe even disrepectful, and definitely insincere. Look at the old photos of traditional kung fu practitioners in the East -- they don't wear what we now call "kung fu uniforms." They wear whatever they have on that is comfortable. And most who practice CMA agree that although so-called "kung fu uniforms" look really cool and make those students feel like "kung fu" practioners, they are not rugged, and are not practical, and didn't they come more from movies than real martial arts schools anyway? Didn't many schools, outside of the temples, that wanted a uniform, just wear loose pants, and a t-shirt, and something tied around the waist? Traditional gi's are rugged, and are practical. Why do some MMA's still wear them, even in the ring? I saw a match recently where a tradionalist and former champion and current contender (non-UFC) wore a gi in a ring match, and used the sleeve and collar to choke out the opponent. It improves grip and friction. If we were to line up all the possible choices for a uniform for a school where discipline and practicality and uniformity was important, which one would be anyone's first choice, if indeed fighting, not appearance, were important? But those who want to criticize GGM ICM, or later GMT, for making that choice, although doing so creates an appearnce of modern notions of non-TCMA, and at the same time wants to discredit the combative benefits and claims of SD, is hypocritical.
Japanese rankings? Isn't that a minor adaptation of the most meaningless, but also most obvious, way to avoid looking like a pure Chinese system, if one was wanting to avoid that pure appearance? And isn't that also a common factor in schools that were run to be business and support the instructor? Isn't that also a convenient, even if not tradional Chinese kung fu, way of keeping track of a student's progress, and also to set future goals? When I tested, I did so for one reason: not to have another stripe on my belt, but to force myself to progress to that goal: being confident enough in that material to perform it under pressure, in front of others who probably knew it better than I did, and not just to have them say it was okay, but to know myself that it is up to my standards.
Claiming some of the material is "made up" by GMT, or even GGM ICM. If one wants a historical martial art that has not changed ever since it was created, one also needs a time machine. There is no such thing today. Isn't TKD a "creation" to serve the popular needs, derived from tang soo do and/or moo duk kwan? Wasn't judo invented as a "gentler way" from the more brutal ju jitsu? We all know how jeet kune do came about -- purely "made up." Is all that therefore illegitimate? Wasn't every style today "made up" from something else? How many traditional Japanese Karate styles were just "made up" or derived from something else -- including Goju-ryu? I would hope my teacher is astute enough to be able to develop new techniques and methods, including forms, to meet my needs, and if I have a teacher that I don't think is good enough to do that -- I need a new teacher.
And as for thinking GMT must be making most of it up because he uses notes or books to prepare for class, or has deviations from one class to the next. First, I recall I have in the past "made up" forms for myself. I couldn't remember them at all not long after, unless I practiced nothing but that, unlike the forms I was trained and taught by others, which if I've forgotten, I can go back and look at notes, or keep working at, they do come back to me. Recently with such help, I have recovered material I first learned decades ago, and can now do like it was yesterday (mentally at least). I teach an evening class (nothing to do with martial arts) at a local branch of a university, have been since 1987, and on a subject that I make a living doing every day. I still get my lecture notes, tests, other teaching material out, every time I teach every session of the ten-week class, and still have variations on how I teach it from sesson to session. So what?
900 forms. I think the number comes from the list -- that I hear other schools have plagiarized for their websites -- of systems, and the forms per system (18 broadswords, 7 of this, 12 of that -- and add them all up). 108 are the short forms. Many are VERY short. Doesn't for example the five element fists, 12 animals, linking set, and two man set, of Hsing-Ie count as 19 of them? Many are not so short, but most people who criticize based only on the number assume it is literally 900 long form sets, and that is not true.
It is not outside the realm of possibility that GMT focused on his specialty (his "major"), and at the same time was taught other forms. I've learned the basic movements of a new form in 30 minutes, and then go on to practice and refine it according to my way. He was with GGM ICM for hours per day, almost every day, for many years. He probably was taught by every one of the Masters at that school. He could learn and memorize a form, work on it, and go to another one, maybe not go back to the old ones again, maybe yes. He is not a dummy. He has a degree in engineering, which he achieved after first coming to a foreign country, no easy feat. He is known to be fluent in several languages. He has a black belt in judo. Why couldn't he learn more than I can learn -- or more than "you" think you could accomplish? If he was no better than me, why do I want him to teach me? I've told critics more than once, once you think you are good enought to critique your own teacher, you need a new teacher.
In my career I know more about the stuff I do most and more often, but can still do the stuff I do less regularly. I might know more about the stuff I've done more than a lot of people, and less about the stuff others do more than I do, but I still know it and can pass it on to others. And they might get better at it than I ever was. GOOD. That is what a teacher hopes will happen.
TO BE CONTINUED
Just One Student
"I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine
(I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by goju
