I hate em'. I really do. Yet, I teach them because it was a part of the art, and Professor wanted them.
I used to hate having to do them for tests because no matter how much I practiced them, or who I learned them from, there was always someone with a different "opinion" as to how they should be done, eager to "correct" me. I love being critiqued when it makes sense and I can improve from it, but I hate it when I don't feel like the critique is warrented, or helping anything besides the critics ego.
Anyways....how do I teach em? I basically copy verbatum the way Datu Hartman does them on his instructional CD-Rom. The reason why is 2-fold: 1. Tim Hartman was the one who helped to somewhat standardize the forms at the MI summer camps, and was often (especially in the early to mid 90's) the one to teach them. When ever I would ask Professor about the forms, he would send me specifically to Tim, and no one else. So, if there ever was a completely "correct" way of doing the forms, Tim must have it. 2. I don't like the forms, and I am far to lazy to break them down and analyze them. I'd rather let the forms experts do it for me, while I work on my real-life fighting skills.
Hard or Soft....? Well, it seems basically hard to me, with some "soft" elements to them. I think the reason behind this is due to the fact that Professor basically modified Shotokan Karate Forms (from when he learned a little Karate on his tour in Japan) to create our Modern Arnis Forms.
Correct way....? I teach my students that the correct way "FOR US" is the way Datu Hartman does them. Yet, in truth I don't believe that there is a correct, or even "better" way. Forms are hypothetical fighting scenarios that are used to build mostly attributes, and some fighting technique. If Professor was adament about the "correct" way of doing the forms, then because he is the founder, there would be a "correct" and "incorrect" way. He wasn't, so this tells me that many ways could be correct, just as long as they work.
But, part of the reason I don't like the forms is because they are hypothetical solutions to hypothetical scenario's (designed to build attributes and some techniques), meaning THEY ARE NOT REAL. If your blocking something "wrong" for instance, we can find this out very quickly through sparring, or "live" drills, so there is little arguement. If your technique is "wrong" in our forms, you can justify it through a load of rhetoric and your own "applications," with no real way of anyone proving you incorrect. I think thats why a lot of people like to argue about forms...its safer to argue about the hypothetical because you can't really be proven wrong as easily. Since I choose to deal with reality, I think argueing over forms is useless.
ramble ramble....

:asian: