Is JKD the way bruce intended?

Eric Daniel

Green Belt
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
128
Reaction score
1
Location
Moses Lake, WA
Is Jeet Kune Do the way bruce lee [JKD's founder] expected it to be today?

I don't think anyone knows exactly what Bruce wanted or expected JKD to be. Bruce is the only one who can answer the question. However there are many opinions on what peole think bruces expectaions for JKD were. Are there any people like that in this forum? Are you one of those people? If not It would still be nice to have your perspective on the subject.

Later, Eric
 

AdrenalineJunky

Black Belt
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
513
Reaction score
3
Did BL really even use the term JKD specifically in reference to an fighting system? I always thought he just meant without restriction under a particular art.
 

mantis

Master Black Belt
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
1,488
Reaction score
5
Location
SoCal
people just wanted to make money and reputation by using Lee's ideas.
i believe they have abused what Lee suggested, and turned jeet kune do (he named it that) to another style! which it was supposed to be an art of no style!
look today in LA, and Orange county area.. jeet kune do is merely kali, muay thai, and some BJJ where a fighter finishes the 4th stage of "jeet kune do" withou knowing kali, muay thai, or BJJ and without understand what JKD is!
 

Jelik

Orange Belt
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
Location
Kapiti Coast, Wellington, NZ
I've mentioned this elsewhere before, but I will go into a bit more of an interesting story...

First part of the story is the difference between modified and traditional wing chun:

Modified has the pigeon toe stance, limited footwork, but brilliant chi sao
Traditional has a parallel side and front stance, excellent footwork, not as strong chi sao. (this is obviously over simplified)

Story (once again simplified): William Cheung (www.cheungswingchun.com) learnt "modified" by Yip Man, and "apparently" in secret learnt traditional also by Yip Man. Once Yip Man died, William Cheung was then allowed to teach traditional. Dana Wong became a student of William C (after first learning modified in the States) and later ran the Wing Chun Head Office in Melbourne for about 17 years or so.. Here's the ing, William Cheung would only show students (including Dana Wong) the traditional chi sao (which wasn't as good), however he personally did the modified version (theory is, so no one could ever beat him / show him up etc).

Once Sifu Dana Wong left William Cheung's school (after a good 20 + years of dedication) Dana then showed the students that followed him the "better way" of doing chi sao.

I personally believe that Bruce held a lot back from his teachings, that he was developing really good sparring and training partners - but feared a student ever getting better than him.

This is why I believe that the JKD system is incomplete (to be honest, mainly in chi sao)... My two cents worth ;-)
 

MA-Caver

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
14,960
Reaction score
307
Location
Chattanooga, TN
AdrenalineJunky said:
Did BL really even use the term JKD specifically in reference to an fighting system? I always thought he just meant without restriction under a particular art.
In one of the (sadly) few episodes of the old t.v. series "Longstreet" when Bruce was introduced to the blind-cop's friend he says JKD specifically as to describe his "style" of fighting and proceeds to demonstrate. "...in Cantonese it's called Jeet Kune Do ... the way of the intercepting fist..."

Lee was "supposed" to be a (frequent) re-occurring character in that series but it didn't work out... I remember those few episodes as Longstreet was one of my favorite tv shows when I was a kid... eons ago.
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,560
Reaction score
436
Location
Terre Haute, IN
AdrenalineJunky said:
Did BL really even use the term JKD specifically in reference to an fighting system? I always thought he just meant without restriction under a particular art.
He coined the term, but meant something more nebulous by it.
 
OP
E

Eric Daniel

Green Belt
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
128
Reaction score
1
Location
Moses Lake, WA
wow, lot's of interesting ideas, thanks for your thoughts on the subjects guys. I was talking to my sensei about this last night in class. He told me that I should read Bruce Lee's books Jeet Kune Do and Tao of Jeet Kune Do. I think I will go to the library later today and see if they have it in. Do you guys have any suggested reading on Jeet Kune Do?
 

Andrew Green

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
8,628
Reaction score
448
Location
Winnipeg MB
This is pretty much a weekly question...

Answer: Who cares?

If the whole idea was individuality, who cares what Bruce Lee did, worry about yourself. He did what worked for him, everyone else does what works for them.

If I am doing Physics, and suddenly realise that what I am doing is not what Aristotle meant by Physics, does that matter? No, things change, different people approach things differently.

If you're worried about it dump the name and carry on doing what you are doing. No more worries about whether it is "correct" by someone elses definition.
 
OP
E

Eric Daniel

Green Belt
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
128
Reaction score
1
Location
Moses Lake, WA
Andrew I think that some people might care, like maybe bruce's students might care. Other Martial Artist might not care even though i think bruce had a major impact on martial arts in the united states. I am glad there are a lot of opinions on this subject. What are your opinions?
 

Andrew Green

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
8,628
Reaction score
448
Location
Winnipeg MB
Eric Daniel said:
Andrew I think that some people might care, like maybe bruce's students might care. Other Martial Artist might not care even though i think bruce had a major impact on martial arts in the united states. I am glad there are a lot of opinions on this subject. What are your opinions?
I think it all comes back to the "Do not focus on the finger...", and people focusing on the finger ;)
 

Dancing Dragon

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Location
Grandview, Missouri
Andrew Green has a point here. Too many folks missing "all that heavenly glory" around here. We are NEVER going to know Bruce's true intentions on JKD. It was HIS art and only HE knows what is what. I use Bruce's concepts and philosophies on JKD in my gung fu training, but I know that with all the training that I do, I will never be like him. Bruce wouldn't even teach his students the secrets behind his art, he didn't want someone to come along knowing all the secrets about his art and defeating him. Thusly the art of JKD died with Bruce Lee.
 

MA-Caver

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
14,960
Reaction score
307
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Dancing Dragon said:
Andrew Green has a point here. Too many folks missing "all that heavenly glory" around here. We are NEVER going to know Bruce's true intentions on JKD. It was HIS art and only HE knows what is what. I use Bruce's concepts and philosophies on JKD in my gung fu training, but I know that with all the training that I do, I will never be like him. Bruce wouldn't even teach his students the secrets behind his art, he didn't want someone to come along knowing all the secrets about his art and defeating him. Thusly the art of JKD died with Bruce Lee.
...umm, do you have a viable source for that, or is that your speculation. I'm finding this hard to swallow. There are so many myths now about Jun Fan Lee that it's hard to keep reality in focus with the man and his art.
 

Nanalo74

Blue Belt
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
237
Reaction score
2
Location
New York
Bruce Lee is turning in his grave. All the political BS that surrounds JKD, the lawsuits, concepts vs. original and all that other crap is not what he intended at all. The "way of no way" is caught up in its own classical mess.

Vic www.combatartsusa.com
 

Dancing Dragon

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Location
Grandview, Missouri
MA-Caver said:
...umm, do you have a viable source for that, or is that your speculation. I'm finding this hard to swallow. There are so many myths now about Jun Fan Lee that it's hard to keep reality in focus with the man and his art.
I understand. It is somewhat both. Bruce told this to James DeMile and it's found in Black Belt Magazine August 1995 p42-44 .

-----Section Start-------

'Bruce did not even show all of his students every way that he himself trained, or present all skills that he himself developed or advocated. Besides the reason of every person having their own "way", there is the following:

*This is an excerpt from a letter from James W. DeMile to the editor and staff of Inside Kung Fu, and Hawkins Cheung. The latter who had a series of articles published on Bruce and JKD, to which resulted in the following reply.

"What Sifu Cheung did not feel when he touched hands with Bruce's second- and third-generation students is some key elements that Bruce left out in his later teaching. Bruce made a statement to me that made everything clear as to why he changed certain aspects of his teaching. Jessie Glover, Bruce's first student and probably the best fighter in out group, and I were visiting Bruce when he was teaching a Jun Fan class in a Chinatown basement (Oakland). We noted that Bruce was teaching some things that seemed incomplete. We asked Bruce about this and he said, "Why should I teach someone to beat me?" It was true. Why should he spend all his time developing his personal style and then give it away to someone else who might one day challenge him." '

------Section End------

It makes sense why he wouldn't teach his students every secret and trick that he had. I would keep some of my personal techniques to myself simply for the element of surprise.
 

MA-Caver

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
14,960
Reaction score
307
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Thank you.

I keep hearing all kinds of stuff about Lee, all the time, and that's why I requested a source. One thing after another and soon the hype gets mixed with the truth and the man passes into ridiculous legend.
Even the movie about his life "Dragon" (with Jason Scott Lee)... couldn't get away from some supernatural mythos about the man. Pretty sad if you ask me.
 

beauty_in_the_sai

Green Belt
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
127
Reaction score
2
Location
Maryland
Absolutely not in my book. If you just read the Tao you'd see that. He didn't want it to be a style, but it turned out one anyway :(. Now, with all the JKD federations and the ranking system, those dictate them a style by themselves. I've seen there movies. "this is the way Bruce taught it" LOL All of them say that so how can you be sure? And another thing is... No one teaches exactly like their instructor. I'm sure Dan Inosanto teaches JKD differently than Bruce Lee did. I'm also willing to bet he threw some escrima into it. I think he intended for it not to be an art, but accidently made it one by setting up schools and giving it a name. After seeing his mistake, he closed all of his schools down and taught privately; yet it still lived on as a style. I think it should've went to the grave with him. He fought so long against the "style" system, but now, how is JKD different from TKD, aikido, kung fu, etc.? They all have ranks, federations, and a "this is how you do this" attitude. He said himself not to do things exactly the way the founder did, you become a "mechanical man" But that's what people are doing. Trying to be just like Bruce Lee, when there will never be another Bruce Lee.
 

Dancing Dragon

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Location
Grandview, Missouri
I agree 100% beauty_in_the_sai. People are doing the exact opposite of what Bruce Lee wanted done with his art. I think he wanted people to follow his example, rather than just duplicate his techniques. An 'art' or 'way' goes deeper than technical applications and moves. The very thing that separates Judo from Jujutsu, and Aikido from Aikijutsu is the philosophy and meaning behind it all. I think we can all agree that self-liberation is what Bruce Lee wanted his students to gain from JKD above anything else. But oh well, anything to make a quick dollar right?
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,560
Reaction score
436
Location
Terre Haute, IN
I agree with most of what you said, but I think many of his ex-students (and their students) are looking to preserve and honor his legacy, not make a quick buck. Maybe they're not succeeding, but I think many are acting from the best intentions. Others, obviously, fit your description well.
 

Nanalo74

Blue Belt
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
237
Reaction score
2
Location
New York
beauty_in_the_sai said:
Absolutely not in my book. If you just read the Tao you'd see that. He didn't want it to be a style, but it turned out one anyway :(. Now, with all the JKD federations and the ranking system, those dictate them a style by themselves. I've seen there movies. "this is the way Bruce taught it" LOL All of them say that so how can you be sure? And another thing is... No one teaches exactly like their instructor. I'm sure Dan Inosanto teaches JKD differently than Bruce Lee did. I'm also willing to bet he threw some escrima into it. I think he intended for it not to be an art, but accidently made it one by setting up schools and giving it a name. After seeing his mistake, he closed all of his schools down and taught privately; yet it still lived on as a style. I think it should've went to the grave with him. He fought so long against the "style" system, but now, how is JKD different from TKD, aikido, kung fu, etc.? They all have ranks, federations, and a "this is how you do this" attitude. He said himself not to do things exactly the way the founder did, you become a "mechanical man" But that's what people are doing. Trying to be just like Bruce Lee, when there will never be another Bruce Lee.
EXACTAMUNDO!!!

Vic www.combatartsusa.com
 
Top