Is it appropriate to create a new martial art?

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm
Well, there are many arts that have rather standardized curriculum. You are either a member or you are not. Little room there.

If people want to mix, for example BJJ with Muay Thai and call the combo a new name, there is nothing to stop them from doing that. We already have American Karate, which has TKD in its core,

So, just about anyone can mix and match any art and slap a new label on it. Its a free country.

Too many people are you using that same name American Karate. Joe Lewis used to call his American Karate along with others.

There is nothing wrong with crosstraining. When I was in traditional classes under my brother-in-law. He taught several classes but all separately. And guess what?

All the classes cost the same price.
At todays rates for Karate, Judo, Kobudo and Aikido. Thats an easy $300. a month per student. I think I do see why they don't want us to mix the arts up!!!!!

 

[chufeng]

My whole point is my teaching methods are being questioned and I don't see how it makes a differance if you get the job done.

The question asked in a rhetorical way was: "Why do we need a new art?"

That does not question your teaching methods...

Your reply was a generic, "Traditional arts don't teach you to fight at all ranges."

That is when things started to get heated...

I have nothing more to add to what I posted earlier...

:asian:
chufeng

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by akja
Here is a schools complete Karate curriculum. I say it is not complete as martial art. It does not cover the ranges as I say they should be. You do the translation and tell me what makes it complete because I don't see it.

I am not reading through all that crap.
I asked you a question and in a rather non-threatening and polite way.
All you have done is responded by asking me questions and accusing me of playing head games.
I just want YOU to answer a simple question.
You are the one that made the sweeping generalization that “traditional” styles are lacking and I merely asked you which ones and why.
However, I see you are going to do a Zhao Dei Wei and prance around with out ever giving a direct answer.

You made the comment traditional MA are lacking in some way so it is up to you to qualify your statement and explain what you mean.

Just in case you forgot here is the question again:

Originally posted by RyuShiKan
Can you give some characteristics of what you consider to be typical “traditional” weak points?

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan
I am not reading through all that crap.
I asked you a question and in a rather non-threatening and polite way.
All you have done is responded by asking me questions and accusing me of playing head games.
I just want YOU to answer a simple question.
You are the one that made the sweeping generalization that “traditional” styles are lacking and I merely asked you which ones and why.
However, I see you are going to do a Zhao Dei Wei and prance around with out ever giving a direct answer.

You made the comment traditional MA are lacking in some way so it is up to you to qualify your statement and explain what you mean.

Just in case you forgot here is the question again:

I've said it many times but you don't accept what I say.

What I stated was "partially wrong."

I should of stated that it is my opinion that "many arts" traditional and non-traditional believe that they are effectively covering all ranges but in reality "I" do not feel that they do.

I say this because, like I've stated, knowing particular techniques, in this case grappling submissions is not enough. "I feel" that it is at least just as important to spend more time on matwork which builds natural instinct like reactions. Focusing on the positions and transitions within the positions.

"Being in control" when on the ground rather than being overwhelmed on the ground. I'm not saying your art does not do this. I'm saying "many do not."

I put that schools curriculum in because it obviously did not cover the ranges like I am trying to express.

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm
Well, there are many arts that have rather standardized curriculum. You are either a member or you are not. Little room there.

If people want to mix, for example BJJ with Muay Thai and call the combo a new name, there is nothing to stop them from doing that. We already have American Karate, which has TKD in its core,

So, just about anyone can mix and match any art and slap a new label on it. Its a free country.

And this is exactly what "creating a new art" amounts to these days...

If a person does some MT, some BJJ, some Wing Chun and Kali, some of this, some of that, and he/she is using the same training methods those styles used to develop the unique skills they all possess, then why does the individual feel a need to give it a label to identify the particular amount and mix of training he/she has in order to differentiate it from anything else?

One simple answer - ego.

I have studied Yili, Modern Arnis, some Ryu Te Karate and soon (I hope) some Shinto Muso-ryu Jo. Should I run out and label it "Matt-ryu Combat Bang Up-do-jutsu Chuan" just because I like how my training turned out and the skills I developed work(ed) for me? Why? Why not simply a) point someone in the direction of the teachers I felt were worthy of learning from and let them evolve from there, on their own and in their own way, or b) teach what I know but continue to identify each part as what it is?

Why the need for a new label to identify one particular person's method?

Ego, again. The need to be recognized for one's own accomplishments and skills gets in the way of demonstrating, developing and passing on those same skills. It becomes what Brucie was trying to keep folks from getting hung up on. "Have no way as (your) way" means only not to tie yourself down and limit your thinking.

"The perfect way is only difficult for those who pick and choose. Do not like, do not dislike; all will then be clear. Make a hairbreadth difference and heaven and earth are set apart; if you want the truth to sand clear before you, never fe for or against. The struggle between "for" and "against" is the mind's worst disease." That is straight from Brucie's own pen, page 8 of the 1975 version of the Tao of JKD. By saying "traditional" is no good ("I don't like traditional") and "modern" is the best ("I like modern"), you fall into the trap of choosing...

I study because I enjoy studying. I learn from whoever I train with, whatever they train in. Perhaps I don't learn a technique, but I can at least develop an understanding of how one particular technique, favored one place and disliked another, is perceived by someone from outside my training. That was the main thing I gained from Modern Arnis training - the perception of what I do from someone else's vantage point. In training with RyuShiKan in Ryu Te Karate I learned more about Xingyi, Taiji and Bagua than I had in a long time - from studying real classical Karate methods... I was shown how universal MA really are when you get to their roots.

akja -

I don't begrudge your teaching ability. I have never once commented on your ability as a teacher, only the possibilities that you could be an incredible teacher, or a mushmouthed idiot. Both are equally possible, and until I meet you and watch you teach I have absolutely no foundation for an opinion on that subject.

I have already said that the amount of years you have behind you, and the explanation for your gradings received from people you didn't necessarily train under, seemed to hold water.

The only thing I am saying is that if you are really creating a new art, it should be far more than just a collection of techniques learned here and there from this teacher and that teacher, compiled together with your own take on things... That isn't a new style, but perhaps more of a new tradition of a style (e.g. Shorin-ryu and Gojo-ryu are both termed styles of karate, but in reality they probably have more in common than they have in differences, so they could be considered different traditions of karate... Likewise, what separates Oakland JKD from Seattle JKD or Jun Fan Gung Fu? Just interpretations and evolutions of the same basic principles, right? I don't do JKD, but it seems, from what I've read in the media, that all JKD has more in common that it does in the amount of things that set different methods apart...

One art being new and different would be like the differences between Taiji and Arnis. They both kick, punch, lock joints and throw. They both use a variety of weapons. But it is in the theory and strategy of their application that they are different. They internal methods, the non-physical as well as the physical, is what makes them styles of martial arts instead of variations on the same theme...

Perhaps I didn't make this thinking clear. Please let me know if you at least grasp where I am going with this...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by akja
I should of stated that it is my opinion that "many arts" traditional and non-traditional believe that they are effectively covering all ranges but in reality "I" do not feel that they do.

But because "you" feel they do, does that necessarily make you right? How many "traditional" styles did you study, and how long? Did you try for a second opinion by going to other schools of the same style to verify the lack of certain information?

Like I said in an earlier post, just because a teacher doesn't pass on certain knowledge (for whatever reason), doesn't mean that that art doesn't or didn't contain the information you are seeking. Just that that teacher couldn't pass it on to you.

In time, I'm sure, if enough teachers fail to pass on the same information, that information will be lost entirely. I don't think that is the case currently, however, though Taiji and Shotokan along with most mini-mall styles of TKD may well be about halfway down the path...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

Its not a new art in the sense that I invented anything. I stated that too. All techniques were probably done somewhere before.

But it is a new art in the sense that it is differant enough to not be labeled by any one of my past instructors.

When the old great masters went to China to train, they said they learned Chinese "Kempo", at least thats the way I heard it.

We know that it was actually several forms of Gung-Fu. Definately White Crane Gung-Fu. My use of that word is valid, it is generic and it explains what I interpet my art along with Jujitsu.

I've deleted the "Label of Atemi". What I have is Kempo Jujitsu, modern martial art. "No ego!"

I know you guys don't agree with the "Soke" councils but my 5th Dan in Kempo is not just certified by a "Soke" council member, it is stamped with the "seal" of the "Soke" council. Whether anybody agrees iwith me is irrellavant, my Kempo Jujitsu is mine.

 

[Matt Stone]

They called it "kempo" because in their language that was the pronunciation of the same characters the Chinese were using for the words "chuan fa."

"Kempo" wasn't a new label, just a translation of the same words. That is like saying someone from Spain came to the US to learn "martial arts," and went home to use the brand new label "artes marcial," or "artes de guerre" as the name of their art. Completely incorrect. They just spoke of what they learned in their own language rather than clinging to the language of another place and people that the folks they were interacting with back home didn't understand.

You call what you do "kempo jujutsu." Whatever. The point is you don't speak Japanese, so you are using those words as a label and then citing what international travelers did to describe (in their own language to folks they knew at home) what they saw and learned (in another language in another country).

I ate a lot of sushi, sashimi when I was in Japan. No problem, we can use those words because most folks know what they mean. But if I tell you I ate donburi, yakiniku and temaki you might have a little more trouble understanding. I also ate tons of asagohan and bangohan, and while that makes it sound really interesting all it means is that I ate a lot of breakfast and dinner! Better that I tell you "breakfast" and "dinner" than amaze and befuddle you with stories of asagohan binges or long awaited bangohan outings...

"Kempo" is what those teachers called their "chuan fa" when they came back home to people that had no idea what "chuan fa" was, but could understand what "kempo" meant. Nothing more.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by akja
Its not a new art in the sense that I invented anything. I stated that too. All techniques were probably done somewhere before.

But it is a new art in the sense that it is differant enough to not be labeled by any one of my past instructors.

So what you do is your method of JKD it seems... Or if not JKD then your variation on the art(s) you studied. So why not call it "Billy Bob's-ryu" or something like that? That would identify it as your particular take on what you learned, while acknowledging that it is still, in some degree, the original art (though modified according to your understanding and ability).

Just a thought.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
They called it "kempo" because in their language that was the pronunciation of the same characters the Chinese were using for the words "chuan fa."

That is what makes it correct, along with being cerified in it.

 

[James Kovacich]

I do see all of your points but the terminology came to the USA with the arts as a part of them. So it is ours do with as we choose.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Hey, here's an idea for y'all. You cannot create a new martial art, in the sense of coming up with something that was never there beofre, for the same reason that the sciences do not create new theories. What you're doing is to uncover what was already there, inherent in the human body, and physics, and social norms, and responses to weapons, that was always already there before you.

Just as a note, I find two things interesting about these threads. 1) How much I've learned from your various references about martial arts' history (though I might note that it's odd not to know about Donn Draeger's books) and 2) How little of all the technical info is new--because every single technical thing I've read here, especially including all the stuff about ranges, I learned (intellectually, that is) by purple belt in American kenpo. You might check out Mr. Parker's "Infinite Insights" series, assuming of course that you haven't already. It's in there, all of Nature's goodness.

Thanks.

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Hey, here's an idea for y'all. You cannot create a new martial art, in the sense of coming up with something that was never there beofre, for the same reason that the sciences do not create new theories. What you're doing is to uncover what was already there, inherent in the human body, and physics, and social norms, and responses to weapons, that was always already there before you.

Just as a note, I find two things interesting about these threads. 1) How much I've learned from your various references about martial arts' history (though I might note that it's odd not to know about Donn Draeger's books) and 2) How little of all the technical info is new--because every single technical thing I've read here, especially including all the stuff about ranges, I learned (intellectually, that is) by purple belt in American kenpo. You might check out Mr. Parker's "Infinite Insights" series, assuming of course that you haven't already. It's in there, all of Nature's goodness.


.
Thanks.

Ed Parkers Kenpo dosen't even come close to the ground game the I'm talking about. Theories maybe, not technique. Ed was a smart man and a true American Pioneer but Kenpo is not a grappling art by "my definition."

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by akja
That is what makes it correct, along with being cerified in it.

I have no idea what you meant by that statement... Clarification, please?

I do see all of your points but the terminology came to the USA with the arts as a part of them. So it is ours do with as we choose.

No, the terminology is not ours to "do with as we choose." It is a living language for God's sake! Why can't people get it through their heads that having a foreign sounding name that is used incorrectly is complete BS? Just because your art has a foreign sounding name (I say sounding because some folks have used words that don't even go together to mean anything as the name of their art, not to mention using completely incorrect characters from Japanese or Chinese for the alleged name of their style) does not mean it is correct...

I study Yiliquan. That is the Mandarin Chinese pronunciation. The Japanese pronuciation of the exact same characters is Ichi Ri Ken. That doesn't mean I can call it "kenpo." It isn't. Period. Not one single solitary ounce. Yiliquanfa would be Ichi Ri Ken Po. You can't just use words to mean whatever you think they should, could, or what you want them to mean. What if I called my "brand new" art Masturbatory Ejaculate Spewing Fecal Scat-jutsu (MESFSJ for short), but told everyone that no matter what they thought, those words really refer to concepts within the deadly combative art I had just devised... Everyone would think, rightly so, that I was a complete loon! Words mean things, in English or any other language. Just because you know a few words, and you think you know what they mean, doesn't mean you have license to fling them about in whatever manner you choose!

If what you do is based on Kempo, then call it Kempo. If what you do is based on Jujutsu, then call it Jujutsu. If you have combined Kempo and Jujutsu into some kind of approach to personal combat, then call it Kempo Jujutsu. But don't create your own Billy Bob method then hang Asian language terms onto it just because you like the sound of it...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
I have no idea what you meant by that statement... Clarification, please?



No, the terminology is not ours to "do with as we choose." It is a living language for God's sake! Why can't people get it through their heads that having a foreign sounding name that is used incorrectly is complete BS? Just because your art has a foreign sounding name (I say sounding because some folks have used words that don't even go together to mean anything as the name of their art, not to mention using completely incorrect characters from Japanese or Chinese for the alleged name of their style) does not mean it is correct...

I study Yiliquan. That is the Mandarin Chinese pronunciation. The Japanese pronuciation of the exact same characters is Ichi Ri Ken. That doesn't mean I can call it "kenpo." It isn't. Period. Not one single solitary ounce. Yiliquanfa would be Ichi Ri Ken Po. You can't just use words to mean whatever you think they should, could, or what you want them to mean. What if I called my "brand new" art Masturbatory Ejaculate Spewing Fecal Scat-jutsu (MESFSJ for short), but told everyone that no matter what they thought, those words really refer to concepts within the deadly combative art I had just devised... Everyone would think, rightly so, that I was a complete loon! Words mean things, in English or any other language. Just because you know a few words, and you think you know what they mean, doesn't mean you have license to fling them about in whatever manner you choose!

If what you do is based on Kempo, then call it Kempo. If what you do is based on Jujutsu, then call it Jujutsu. If you have combined Kempo and Jujutsu into some kind of approach to personal combat, then call it Kempo Jujutsu. But don't create your own Billy Bob method then hang Asian language terms onto it just because you like the sound of it...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

I quoted you. Kempo was actually Gung-Fu which everybody says is differant. Thats my point. My background is Karate and Gung-Fu and Jujitsu. I am certified in Kempo. Kempo Jujitsu is a natural expression of my art.

And the terminology is a part of the systems, thus making it ours to do with as we choose. Technically it was forced upon us. If we wanted to train and eventually test, we "had" to "use" and "learn" the terminolgy. Everything that I have been exposed to in the arts is mine.

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Hey, here's an idea for y'all. You cannot create a new martial art, in the sense of coming up with something that was never there beofre, for the same reason that the sciences do not create new theories.

Sure. I agree. But the theories uncovered were previously unknown. Someone would need to uncover a previously unknown martial theory to warrant the title of "new art." Repackaging already known, understood and commonly held theories is simply different marketing of the same old product.

What you're doing is to uncover what was already there, inherent in the human body, and physics, and social norms, and responses to weapons, that was always already there before you.

Hence the "All are/is One" comment. All martial arts really are the same, just viewed differently. While no single art contains all the possible training methods of every art (nobody has that kind of time), just because style number 1 has ABCDEFG and style number 2 has HIJKLMN and number 3 has DEFGHIJK doesn't mean that style number 3 is a brand new art...

Just as a note, I find two things interesting about these threads. 1) How much I've learned from your various references about martial arts' history (though I might note that it's odd not to know about Donn Draeger's books)

Actually, Mr. Draeger's books have been referenced elsewhere, though I don't think they have had much use on this thread...

and 2) How little of all the technical info is new--because every single technical thing I've read here, especially including all the stuff about ranges, I learned (intellectually, that is) by purple belt in American kenpo. You might check out Mr. Parker's "Infinite Insights" series, assuming of course that you haven't already. It's in there, all of Nature's goodness.

Thanks.

All is One. When I studied Modern Arnis I found that Yiliquan already contained pieces of it. When I studied Ryu Te Karate I found that Yiliquan already contained pieces of it. I also learned that those other arts already contained pieces of Yili. All are One.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

Isn't Sifu Starr an American? Where di the word Yili come from?

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by akja
I quoted you. Kempo was actually Gung-Fu which everybody says is differant.

Because they are. Gung fu or kung fu mean any skill, any skill, developed over time. You can have car driving kung fu or spaghetti making kung fu. That term does not mean martial arts... Ignorant Americans simply took it to mean that when they were first exposed to it.

Chuan Fa is the romanization of the characters meaning roughly "fist law." Kempo is the romanization of the Japanese/Okinawan pronunciation of the exact same characters.

Thats my point. My background is Karate and Gung-Fu and Jujitsu. I am certified in Kempo. Kempo Jujitsu is a natural expression of my art.

Your background is in Karate and Gung Fu and Jujutsu (note the spelling, yours is incorrect). You claim certification in Kempo. Whatever. Call it what you want to call it, since you are missing the boat on the entire consistency thing anyway...

And the terminology is a part of the systems, thus making it ours to do with as we choose. Technically it was forced upon us. If we wanted to train and eventually test, we "had" to "use" and "learn" the terminolgy. Everything that I have been exposed to in the arts is mine.

Maybe they are yours, so if you choose to continue fostering your ignorance of their use by teaching your students to be ignorant as well, feel free to do so. You wouldn't be the first one to use what is yours incorrectly, and I'm sure you won't be the last. Sorry to be so blunt, but bottom line you are using the words incorrectly, and there are plenty of ways to prove I am right on this one... So I won't take a wavering, touchy-feely stance of "maybe it's okay for you to use them the way you want." No, words are used one way, and one way only. Period. If the rules aren't followed, it is incorrect. Period.

I prefer to know what I am saying when I say it. If you want to use the words for historical continuity's sake, then learn how to use them correctly. If you are using them to sound authentic, you are failing miserably in the eyes of the people that speak the languages you are mutilating.

Why not make up your own terms since you are making up your own style? Brucie did it with his ABC and other abbreviations... That would avoid the whole issue, wouldn't it?

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by akja
Isn't Sifu Starr an American? Where di the word Yili come from?

The words Yi and Li are romanization of the characters for "one" and "principle." Quan means "fist."

Our teacher inherited his Chinese system of Baixingquan from his Chinese teacher (who spoke Chinese, by the way, and who taught him Xingyiquan, Taijiquan and Baguazhang as well). When he "created" Yili (which was really nothing more than a reorganization of everything he had learned from his teacher, rather than teaching it seperately - not too dissimilar in concept from what you are trying to do), he acknowledged its Chinese roots, heritage and ancestry by keeping the Chinese terms.

We have found some incorrect terms that we had been using, and when we found the actual terms and phrases in correct Chinese, we changed them. For example, our transliteration of the Japanese term kiai was mistransliterated as qiai. We found out it is instead qihu. So we changed it to be correct in grammar and syntax.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
Because they are. Gung fu or kung fu mean any skill, any skill, developed over time. You can have car driving kung fu or spaghetti making kung fu. That term does not mean martial arts... Ignorant Americans simply took it to mean that when they were first exposed to it.

Chuan Fa is the romanization of the characters meaning roughly "fist law." Kempo is the romanization of the Japanese/Okinawan pronunciation of the exact same characters.



Your background is in Karate and Gung Fu and Jujutsu (note the spelling, yours is incorrect). You claim certification in Kempo. Whatever. Call it what you want to call it, since you are missing the boat on the entire consistency thing anyway...



Maybe they are yours, so if you choose to continue fostering your ignorance of their use by teaching your students to be ignorant as well, feel free to do so. You wouldn't be the first one to use what is yours incorrectly, and I'm sure you won't be the last. Sorry to be so blunt, but bottom line you are using the words incorrectly, and there are plenty of ways to prove I am right on this one... So I won't take a wavering, touchy-feely stance of "maybe it's okay for you to use them the way you want." No, words are used one way, and one way only. Period. If the rules aren't followed, it is incorrect. Period.

I prefer to know what I am saying when I say it. If you want to use the words for historical continuity's sake, then learn how to use them correctly. If you are using them to sound authentic, you are failing miserably in the eyes of the people that speak the languages you are mutilating.

Why not make up your own terms since you are making up your own style? Brucie did it with his ABC and other abbreviations... That would avoid the whole issue, wouldn't it?

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

I don't use the terminology, just Kempo Jujitsu. I spell Jujitsu the way same way a lot of people spell it. Take note James mitose was a Japanese speaking Japanese American and he called his art Kenpo Jiu-Jitsu. His first language was Japanese and he spelled yet even differantly. Who care what is correct?

Like I said, I don't use the termoinology for techniques. To me it defeats the purpose of the learning process. Again its just "my opinion." " I think" that your brain (an Americans) should be focused on the techniques and what is really trying to be accomplished without having to get confused withj so much terminology. That does not mean using terminolgy is wrong, it is just not of concern to me to focus on it like it was for our instructors.

What is the big concern anyway? The Japanese that brought Karate and Jujutsu to the USA went to great lenths to make the terminology a part of the arts!