Martial Frankensteins...why the hate?

[Flying Crane]

I think that most arts have a whole lot of depth to them that most people never come close to tapping into. Unfortunately that gets more and more difficult as time goes on because there are fewer and fewer people who do have that deep understanding, and a whole lot of the "teachers" out there do not. If the teachers never got to the depth, they can never bring their own students to the depth, and it gets lost forever eventually. But some still have it, they are just rare and hard to come by.

For people who do not have access to such a teacher, it's not their fault. That's just life, and life ain't fair. So people do the best they have with what they have to work with. The problem is, in most cases they do not even realize what is missing from their training. They may have learned all the formalized curriculum of their system, but their depth of understanding is shallow. So all they understand is: "I've learned the entire system, so I've got it." They may have learned the entire system, but they still don't get it.

In my opinion, most people are looking at their training on a technique level, and few really get to understand their system on a principle level. Technique is very important, and one can be quite skilled and successful on that level. But if you really get to understand the system on a principle level, then you grasp what really makes everything work the best, and you can also understand what might not be compatible to adopt into a system. If your level of understaning is on the technique level, then I suspect the goal becomes chasing after all the techniques that one might need in their arsenal, in an attempt to fill in any "holes" that their system may have. But if you really understand the principles, then you understand how to make your method work against anybody, no matter what method your enemy may attempt to employ against you, and you realize that you do not need to collect all the techniques that exist. A strong grasp of the principles gives you a better and stronger ability to adapt to a situation spontaneously, and create an appropriate technique to fit the situation, rather than plumbing the lists of techniques that have been collected. The latter can also work, but it's my opinion that the former gives you the tools to make it work better, and with less clutter as an approach to training.

What I see happening in most of the "Frankenstein" cobbled-together martial arts, is someone who is chasing after techniques because he never really grasped the principles. He sees "holes" in his list of techniques and he is trying to fill those holes. But if he really understood his system on the principle level, he would realize that those holes don't actually exist, and his system gives him the means to deal with any situation. He doesn't need to chase after techniques and lengthen his lists.

 

[Flying Crane]

I agree with what you're saying 100%. I've seen videos from those that are high Dans that I found laughable. I'm looking at it from more of a big picture POV to suggest that each art needs to be taken on a case-by-case basis. And even a 'laughable' video needs to be taken in context. It is too easy for any of us to broad brush stroke something.

On a theoretical and hypothetical level I agree with you. But all too often after just one look at something, the answer is an obvious and glaring "no". And done.

 

[Marcy Shoberg]

I've seen both sides of this issue in myself. In my personal current opinion, at one point in my life when I tried to mix together a bit of this and a bit of that in my taekwondo classes, I was wrong to do so because no certain goal was being achieved and some things didn't fit well with others.
But, I now feel totally confident with the way I blend FAST Defense, IMPACT Basics, and Krav Maga in my self defense classes. I am achieving the goal of leaving my students with fewer situations they may find themselves in for which they have no answer. And, I am now better able to tell what blends well together and what doesn't.

So, while I think you are right that we shouldn't hate about this issue because it may sometimes be done well, each individual should decide if they are "ready" to make a "Frankenart" or not ready to do so.

 

[K-man]

I think that most arts have a whole lot of depth to them that most people never come close to tapping into. Unfortunately that gets more and more difficult as time goes on because there are fewer and fewer people who do have that deep understanding, and a whole lot of the "teachers" out there do not. If the teachers never got to the depth, they can never bring their own students to the depth, and it gets lost forever eventually. But some still have it, they are just rare and hard to come by.

For people who do not have access to such a teacher, it's not their fault. That's just life, and life ain't fair. So people do the best they have with what they have to work with. The problem is, in most cases they do not even realize what is missing from their training. They may have learned all the formalized curriculum of their system, but their depth of understanding is shallow. So all they understand is: "I've learned the entire system, so I've got it." They may have learned the entire system, but they still don't get it.

In my opinion, most people are looking at their training on a technique level, and few really get to understand their system on a principle level. Technique is very important, and one can be quite skilled and successful on that level. But if you really get to understand the system on a principle level, then you grasp what really makes everything work the best, and you can also understand what might not be compatible to adopt into a system. If your level of understaning is on the technique level, then I suspect the goal becomes chasing after all the techniques that one might need in their arsenal, in an attempt to fill in any "holes" that their system may have. But if you really understand the principles, then you understand how to make your method work against anybody, no matter what method your enemy may attempt to employ against you, and you realize that you do not need to collect all the techniques that exist. A strong grasp of the principles gives you a better and stronger ability to adapt to a situation spontaneously, and create an appropriate technique to fit the situation, rather than plumbing the lists of techniques that have been collected. The latter can also work, but it's my opinion that the former gives you the tools to make it work better, and with less clutter as an approach to training.

What I see happening in most of the "Frankenstein" cobbled-together martial arts, is someone who is chasing after techniques because he never really grasped the principles. He sees "holes" in his list of techniques and he is trying to fill those holes. But if he really understood his system on the principle level, he would realize that those holes don't actually exist, and his system gives him the means to deal with any situation. He doesn't need to chase after techniques and lengthen his lists.

Michael, you should have this post printed, framed and sent to everyone who is interested in the MAs. It is pure gold! :asian:

 

[Instructor]

Michael, you should have this post printed, framed and sent to everyone who is interested in the MAs. It is pure gold! :asian:

Agreed. I've always called it seeking dimension in your training.

 

[K-man]

I think most people are saying the same thing. It is possible to construct a system that will cover most aspects of self defence and contain the principles required to make it effective. In most cases it will not have the depth of an art that has developed over hundreds of years as for example White Crane, but it is better suited to our current way of thinking and understanding.

Where it becomes confusing is when someone takes half of one system, without it's core essence, and combines it with bits from other systems. Then they equate their new system to the original and tell people how much better their system is. On the surface, that is the case. It looks better because neither the person who constructed the new system, or the person it is being sold to, totally understood the original system. The person developing the system may even believe that he has taken all of the original system. But he doesn't know what he doesn't know because he was never taught the whole system in the first place. FC said that beautifully in his post above. :asian:

 

[Flying Crane]

In most cases it will not have the depth of an art that has developed over hundreds of years as for example White Crane, but it is better suited to our current way of thinking and understanding.

Sorry, I couldn't resist a comment here about the bolded portion: our current way of thinking and understanding, being primarily Attention Deficit Disorder coupled with the push for High Self Esteem, whether merited or not. Cobbling together a Frankenart is perfect for the modern day and age!

 

[Instructor]

Of course many systems wouldn't even exist if somebody hadn't started in one, tried another or a few others and decided to merge it all and call it something new. My own Hapkido included. We don't have a verifiable 100 years of history or any of that stuff but the system has dimension just the same, I think because its early people were very excellent martial artists to begin with and they brought depth to the table.

The worst for me is the people who barely exceed green belt or a systems similer rank then they go to another one and don't go far in that one, then they go into another one. It just seems they don't have a whole lot of anything. Then if a person like that has the absolute gall to 'create' a new system based on the spattering of training they have it's a mess.

The really great arts are created by people who have invested a significant amount of time (years and years) in something.

 

[Tez3]

Of course many systems wouldn't even exist if somebody hadn't started in one, tried another or a few others and decided to merge it all and call it something new. My own Hapkido included. We don't have a verifiable 100 years of history or any of that stuff but the system has dimension just the same, I think because its early people were very excellent martial artists to begin with and they brought depth to the table.

The worst for me is the people who barely exceed green belt or a systems similer rank then they go to another one and don't go far in that one, then they go into another one. It just seems they don't have a whole lot of anything. Then if a person like that has the absolute gall to 'create' a new system based on the spattering of training they have it's a mess.

The really great arts are created by people who have invested a significant amount of time (years and years) in something.

I know quite a few people who have trained different styles and haven't graded much in any system, this however isn't their fault but because they are posted out of the place they were in and had to find a different style as they couldn't always find the same in their new posting. I'd find out why they've done different styles first before condemning them. This is why MMA is catching on big style with the military. I don't know anyone however who has created their own system though

 

[Flying Crane]

I know quite a few people who have trained different styles and haven't graded much in any system, this however isn't their fault but because they are posted out of the place they were in and had to find a different style as they couldn't always find the same in their new posting. I'd find out why they've done different styles first before condemning them. This is why MMA is catching on big style with the military. I don't know anyone however who has created their own system though

See, I don't think anyone is blaming anyone else for the shortcomings in their training. Especially in what you describe, where circumstances prevent a deeper study so people get what they can before they are forced to relocate. That's not their fault, they do the best they can with what is possible and available to them.

But that's a separate issue from cobbling together a Frankenart.

 

[Tez3]

See, I don't think anyone is blaming anyone else for the shortcomings in their training. Especially in what you describe, where circumstances prevent a deeper study so people get what they can before they are forced to relocate. That's not their fault, they do the best they can with what is possible and available to them.

But that's a separate issue from cobbling together a Frankenart.

However as soon as you tell people you've done half a dozen different styles you get the very definite feeling you are being judged as being inadequate.

 

[K-man]

However as soon as you tell people you've done half a dozen different styles you get the very definite feeling you are being judged as being inadequate.

I don't have a problem with that at all. I believe anyone will improve as a martial artist by training in different styles over a period because a lot of underlying principles are the same across the MAs. The only difference is that they probably won't have advanced in rank. The difference is when someone who has spent a short period of time in numerous styles turns round and claims to be an expert in all those styles they have trained. :asian:

 

[Flying Crane]

However as soon as you tell people you've done half a dozen different styles you get the very definite feeling you are being judged as being inadequate.

I guess I don't see that happening as long as people are up front and don't make outlandish claims. Studying several systems is kinda important, in my opinion, because it's part of the journey in finding the system and the instructor that is best for you. You gotta try some different things before you can make an intelligent and informed decision about that. I don't blink at all when people tell me they've studied several.

But if someone had studied a dozen systems, each to a moderate level of understanding, and then cobbled together a frankenart with what he had, then yes, I'd say he has no business trying to do that.

that is also a different thing from him simply trying to make use of what he has learned in these various arts. Of course that is the best he can do with what he has to work with. I think where the line is crossed is when people try to establish it as a viable "new system," to be taught to students.

 

[rickster]

Wasn't Frankenstein's monster super strong?

but then again, mentally challenged.....

 

[Instructor]

I know quite a few people who have trained different styles and haven't graded much in any system, this however isn't their fault but because they are posted out of the place they were in and had to find a different style as they couldn't always find the same in their new posting. I'd find out why they've done different styles first before condemning them. This is why MMA is catching on big style with the military. I don't know anyone however who has created their own system though

I know their plight all too well, it's why I made Hapkido Online so my fellow servicemen may continue their training.

 

[Carol]

Stone Dragone is also in uniform and faced some serious injuries while serving "over there". He's fought and rehabbed his way back from a very bad place. Quite a warrior, if I may say so myself.

I think many of us are put on edge by the "Frankenstein" concept because we're fatigued by all the bunk out there. People whose patchwork of training has been more from drifting and/or lack of discipline (I'm guilty of that myself) rather than circumstances such as activation or frequent relocation. People that claim to teach the baddest most deadliest thing ever....but never had to put their own physical safety on the line. People who turn mundane excuses in to rank promotions -- especially the folks that are looking for any justification at all to crown themselves "Grandmaster." We've seen people like that post right here on MartialTalk.

I don't see those kind of negative attributes in someone like Stone. However, between the folks out there producing dreck and the folks out there with dodgy business practices....I can understand why some folks are a little suspicious.

 

[Jin Gang]

Rather than looking at it as a "frankenstein monster", I see this process as more like martial arts evolution/mutation. As others have said, this process has been going on since the beginning of martial arts practice. There is no such thing as a "pure" art. Every style we know now developed out of an individual's experiences, and has evolved over time through each generation of students, not in a vaccum but combined with the personal experiences of each practitioner and other methods they had been exposed to. White Crane, for example, did not spring out of the head of Zeus as a fully grown martial art, nor did any style At some point, a talented person attracts the attention of others who wish to understand the skill they have witnessed, and a new school is born out of their experiences, which often include training in at least a couple different areas. Some schools thrive and grow and adapt, and some schools last only a generation or two and die out. Not every mutation is beneficial, and even those that are useful do not always remain so as changes in environment may make a once useful mutation into a hindrance and then it will die out. The styles we have today are the few lucky ones which survived, and they continue to adapt and change, and will mate together and produce offspring that none of us can predict . Learning from a few different teachers for a number of years, and then combining, organizing, and personalizing the teachings into your own style is what martial artists have been doing for a very long time. Every Chinese, Okinawan and Japanese style I can think of is the product of this type of evolution. How many years of training under a particular teacher is enough before you can teach yourself? That question is different for everyone. And it is not necessarily true that spending 20 years under the same teacher will allow a person to reach a greater level of understanding than spending five years each with four different teachers. It depends on the learner, and the teacher, and their experiences. Practicing for a few hours a week for a couple years is not the same as practicing 20 hours a week for a couple years, and the understanding and skill that those two people will have achieved will not be the same, even though on their resumes they will both say "practiced X for 2 years".
So I say, if you are confident in your skills and have something valuable to offer, go ahead and blend styles together. As long as it works (fofr whatever your goal is), and you are honest about who you are and what you learned, then your skill and teaching ability will speak for themselves. Who knows, 200 years from now one of these blended personal styles might have evolved into a long and deep tradition.

 

[harlan]

I think this is very true, and happens in many, many instances.

However as soon as you tell people you've done half a dozen different styles you get the very definite feeling you are being judged as being inadequate.

Howerver, I'd like to put something out there: does anyone think that this attitude is found more within certain circles? For example, if one is studying a more 'historical' art, one that requires people committ to years of training? (Going to leave out the whole territorial/possessiveness thing, and just keep it to training methodology.)

 

[Cyriacus]

I think this is very true, and happens in many, many instances.



Howerver, I'd like to put something out there: does anyone think that this attitude is found more within certain circles? For example, if one is studying a more 'historical' art, one that requires people committ to years of training? (Going to leave out the whole territorial/possessiveness thing, and just keep it to training methodology.)

Id say thatd depend on the System. You can Box for a month and get something out of it, but do Jiujutsu and You probably wont get *as* much. And its subject to the learners ability to learn. Like, really learn.

 

[Tez3]

I think this is very true, and happens in many, many instances.



Howerver, I'd like to put something out there: does anyone think that this attitude is found more within certain circles? For example, if one is studying a more 'historical' art, one that requires people committ to years of training? (Going to leave out the whole territorial/possessiveness thing, and just keep it to training methodology.)

It's not any particular style but a certain mindset that looks down on anyone not studying their style, it tends to be instructors who are rigid in what they teach, the don't ask why, just do types. Egos are often involved as well as grandiose statements about their style, there's never anything they can learn from any other style which is why they don't like anyone who has trained elsewhere in their groups. Parents think they are wonderful with their children, teaching them 'discipline' ie do as I say or else you get press ups and derision. I wouldn't say they were McDojos because it's not about the money it's about the 'preciousness' of their style, it's a closed mindedness that nothing can be as good as what they do, funnily enough often though you find techniques and katas/patterns have been changed by them to put their own stamp on them, (going back perhaps to the Frankenstein thing?) I think too it's snobbishness as much as anything else.