Well, I'm still very new to Aikido, and am enjoying it so far, but I struggle with the role of Uke and Nage at times. In another thread, hussaf made a very interesting post that reflects my current feelings:
I also come from a martial background, and encounter these same explanations of why uke has to "stay connected." To be blunt, nage does a lot of "I can kick you if you're there" and then proceeds to execute a very ill advised attack given the situation. Or explanations of how you want to stay close to and then roll away from a man with a sword. Now, this isn't to say that sticking with nage isn't safer for Uke in some situations, but to be honest, a lot of the explanations I'm given are flawed. And to be clear, I'm not critizing my instructor, or any of the students - they're pretty good, and their Aikido is pretty good. I'm just questioning the interpretations and assumptions that seem to be widespread in Aikido.
Why make up stories about how Uke can't do this or that without putting himself in grave danger? The truth is that situations are fluid, and any martial artist - including an Aikidoka - can't just rely on this or that technique. You must be able to flow and adapt to what your partner does. Isn't that why Aikido has so many different techniques, and variations on those techniques? Now, of course, when you just want to practice a certain technique, Uke needs to cooperate, or else you'll have to do something else other than what you're trying to practice. But giving explanations of how Uke can only do this or that is usually flawed.
As Uke, for example, I sometimes find nage giving me too much energy, or too much space, and encouraging me to disconnect, if not flat out making me lose connection. Is it not nage's job to properly encourage uke to stay connected? Granted, my instructor is pretty good about this, but the other students aren't always, and I often have to wonder if it is my fault as uke, or if it is nage's when something doesn't work right.
My understanding of, and experience in Aikido is still very limited, though. So, I'll ask all of you who have been at this longer than I have: what does it mean to be a good uke?
It's not my school. But I travel a lot for work and visit many dojo. It's just frustrating that a nage puts me in a certain position then kicks me because I'm not where he wanted me to go, saying he could kill me and I need to protect myself and I'm just sitting there trying not to counter the **** out of his mediocre technique. It's good training to bite your ego, but I feel like a visiting shihan should set a better example. The frustrating part is that's just the culture. Even his uchi deshi was pulling the "as Uke it's your job to stay connected with me because I can kick or punch you." I'm sorry, I don't know the play preprogrammed in your head, and the oblivious disgust by the uchi deshi I was working with suggests poor training. When I was uchi deshi I was taught to find ways to help students understand what's being taught...not repeat the same thing over in the same way and expect others to understand. But thread relly: the excuse for this is "this is a martial art." I've done martial arts my whole adult life, just simply coming up with stories as to why Uke is supposed to move a certain way and say "nage will kill you" does my make it martial. it makes it delusional. Nage is responsible for what happens to Uke, regardless if Uke is too flimsily, resisting, neutral or attempting countering. Coming from a martial background it's frustrating that people can be so adamant and trick themselves into thinking they are the "real deadly" martial school of aikido.
I also come from a martial background, and encounter these same explanations of why uke has to "stay connected." To be blunt, nage does a lot of "I can kick you if you're there" and then proceeds to execute a very ill advised attack given the situation. Or explanations of how you want to stay close to and then roll away from a man with a sword. Now, this isn't to say that sticking with nage isn't safer for Uke in some situations, but to be honest, a lot of the explanations I'm given are flawed. And to be clear, I'm not critizing my instructor, or any of the students - they're pretty good, and their Aikido is pretty good. I'm just questioning the interpretations and assumptions that seem to be widespread in Aikido.
Why make up stories about how Uke can't do this or that without putting himself in grave danger? The truth is that situations are fluid, and any martial artist - including an Aikidoka - can't just rely on this or that technique. You must be able to flow and adapt to what your partner does. Isn't that why Aikido has so many different techniques, and variations on those techniques? Now, of course, when you just want to practice a certain technique, Uke needs to cooperate, or else you'll have to do something else other than what you're trying to practice. But giving explanations of how Uke can only do this or that is usually flawed.
As Uke, for example, I sometimes find nage giving me too much energy, or too much space, and encouraging me to disconnect, if not flat out making me lose connection. Is it not nage's job to properly encourage uke to stay connected? Granted, my instructor is pretty good about this, but the other students aren't always, and I often have to wonder if it is my fault as uke, or if it is nage's when something doesn't work right.
My understanding of, and experience in Aikido is still very limited, though. So, I'll ask all of you who have been at this longer than I have: what does it mean to be a good uke?