There is some really neat stuff out there that just does not translate well for instruction to the masses. There is a line between what really works well, and what works well-enough, and that line has a lot to do with the ability to make a living as a martial arts instructor.
I can imagine the dillemma: How does one temper down the material enough to make it palatable to the masses with checkbooks, but not so far down that people training it end up representing the bottom of the heap?
I asked a similar-veined question at a seminar recently, particularly regarding the differences in content and training styles between "then" and "now", since I started kenpo when it was still "grab and beat" karate for maiming, with a technical twist. Now, "it" (American Kenpo in general...keep in mind, each teacher has their own take on how they teach and what they teach, and not all kenpo is created equal, or related equally to the people learning it) seems to be more technical than applicable, having been lost largely in a sea of it's own mumbo-jumbo. I learned techniques and freestyle combinations as "the one against a...", and that's how I remember them. Since then, definitions and algebraic equations seem to have taken over the application of combative logic (in my mind).
The answer I recieved was an interesting one, which included references to what kenpo was used for, and by whom back in the day, as well as making it more accessible to a wider audience of participants. Even then, the stuff I learned was about blasting a guy hard and fast, with flurries of strikes to vulnrable targets. That's given way to checking off angles of execution with borrowed force from the marriage of gravity, yadd-yadda-yadda. In recent months, I've had the opportunity to dialogue with Mr. Chapel regarding some of the real vs. distracting technical components of the art. There are some higher level understandings of kenpo that are more technical than the stuff people get lost jabbering about, but which are not readily amenable to the public for communication or consumption. Cool stuff; hard to talk about (gotta see it, feel it and try it to even start getting it).
It's kinda like the Matrix idea...it's out there, but you gotta look for it, because it's not in the mainstream. It's in garages, backyards, and hidden studios, because the public in general would consider it too hard, too confusing, or too much work. And some of it is so hard it's simple, with other stuff being so simple, it's hard.
If, to you, kenpo is rattling off definitions, memorizing equations, and whipping out techniques in sharp-n-snappy form, then don't bother looking for the Matrix. You won't like it when you find it (Take the pill that doesn't send you deeper down the rabbit hole).
1. "Old" kenpo was both more rudimentary (i.e., grab-&-beat karate), and more complex (Mr. Parkers' early addition of a heavier Chinese influence).
2. Simplified physically, but made more "interesting" academically births "mainstream" kenpo.
3. Stuff he taught some of his seniors but not all? New ideas he had been working on and cleaning up (years on some, many years on others), but either did not want to make mainstream, or was not ready to deliver to the mainstream.
I remember an interesting comment by Doc Chapel on another thread, in which he noted that none of the kenpo BB's on Martial Talk could pass one of his yellow belt tests. The immediate reaction was to assume he was not teaching kenpo. Doc's response was that, yes, he was teaching kenpo...just not the stuff everybody was used to. That there are differences in performance of the basics, cleaning up bad habits, etc., that pretty much everybody would do wrong...just because they didn't know better, and likely came from teachers who, though accomplished, probably did not know better, either. I think I may have been the only one out of the crowd of SoCal kenpoistas challenging Doc on that thread who bothered to check out the differences. He is right. A black belt in EPAK would not pass one of his yellow belt tests, and he is teaching kenpo.
To wrap up my little rant (sorry, all), I clearly remember watching Mr. Parker teaching seminars and classes to rooms full of black belts who were so entrenched in their engrained performance of a movement or idea, that they were UNABLE to change what they were doing to accomodate the lesson or tweak Mr. Parker was trying to illustrate and impart. Typically, after a couple attempts at clarification and correction, he would just forget about it and move on to the next topic. I wasn't always able to break my own baggage patterns to catch up with what I was seeing, or even see all that was going on, but it was clear to me that what he was teaching the crowd was not what the crowd was doing. I suspect he tried to disseminate his newer stuff; people just couldn't let go of their "known" material well enough to embrace and learn the "new" material.
If you view Infinite Insights and the Encyclopedia as starts meant to prompt conversation, and not a gospel meant to define or dispel it, ... Reference the perspective of a different starting point, and you end up with a different kenpo. Same material, same defs and moves, but nevertheless quite different. Mr. Parker was excellent at playing with different starting points in his mind, and exploring what new ends these alternate paths might lead to. There were a few guys around when he would go on these explorations, some taking notes furiously, some not. Some of those musings -- and the techniques, concepts, and implications stemming from them -- are in the intellectual possession of the guys who were there. Most of Mr. Parkers top-tier students, seniors, and cherished friends were simply not present during these musings, and as such did not have access to the stuff they produced. Not an issue of super-secrecy; just proxemics and timing.
D.
PS -- Please understand that I make no claim or insinuation that I am a senior student, or anything even remotely close. I am one of those hobbyists that's been around for awhile (Mr. Parker's nickname for me was "wallpapuh" because I had hung around with a low profile for so long, no one noticed me anymore), and am among the couple thousand still active (in a sea of a couple million) that has been in kenpo long enough to say "I remember when...". I've watched a lot of changes happen over time, and seen the "take" on kenpo from several oldsters presenting their kenpo. I respect them all (well, most of them...), but they do not all specialize in providing the same information for the same purposes, under the influence of the same motivations.
