Steve
Mostly Harmless
I'm dying to know... when you use the term "martial art," what specifically do you mean?
What does "martial art" mean to you?
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
Langenschwert
Master Black Belt
A systemized method of combat.
Best regards,
-Mark
Best regards,
-Mark
OP
Steve
Mostly Harmless
- Thread Starter
- #3
Thanks! I can agree with that. Anyone else? I can see two meanings that work for me. The first is just based on modern, popular usage of the term, which is basically any combat system that is non-western or exotic, particularly one that has Asian roots.
I think that if you asked the average person on the street if Boxing is a martial art, most would say no. Fencing, no. Wrestling, no. Brazilian Jiu Jitsu? Yes. Capoeria? I think yeah... if the person's even heard of it.
Another definition would be more within the martial arts community, and that's any kind of codified system of combat, more in line with your definition. So, boxing would be considered a martial art.
But then other people insist that only Eastern arts qualify as a martial art. And still others distinguish between "art" and "sport."
I think it's all interesting, but that last is what really intrigues me. Do you guys think that there's a difference between martial arts and martial sports? If so, what are they? What makes a martial art an art?
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
I'll agree with the original statement and skills that can be used for with offense or defense.
Beyound that it means a way of life that incompasses much more. It means a mind set that is open to areas of different opions. It means to become more then you are be that by education or arts. It means to become a better more rounded person ( not just at the waist line).
The martial arts are a way of life and it takes a whole person not just someone who knows combat arts to become a martial artest.
Beyound that it means a way of life that incompasses much more. It means a mind set that is open to areas of different opions. It means to become more then you are be that by education or arts. It means to become a better more rounded person ( not just at the waist line).
The martial arts are a way of life and it takes a whole person not just someone who knows combat arts to become a martial artest.
OP
Steve
Mostly Harmless
- Thread Starter
- #7
Haha! That's actually pretty good.
What do you agree with, Xue Sheng? Systemized method of combat?
@ Langenschwert and Don, (and anyone else), do you guys distinguish at all between martial arts and martial sports?
Frankly, if it's that simple, I'm astounded (and pleased). I've seen over and over again where people emphasize ART over other things, and I've always wondered what specifically makes something an "art" over anything else.
Marketing maybe?
Someone who is skilled in fighting.
Yes, that is interesting. I dont consider boxing to be a martial art, but if you were to go by my description of what martial arts is, then boxing would fit that category.
Sports, IMO, is anything physical, competitive, and includes a ruleset. Baseball, football, hockey, MMA. Martial arts, ie: TKD, Kenpo, etc, can also fall into that category though, anytime they spar.
When 2 MMAists enter the ring, yes, they are fighting, they're skilled in fighting, but it falls into the def. I gave of sports. If the TKD guy is standing at the ATM getting cash, someone comes up and attacks him, demands cash, he is fighting, but IMO, its not a competitive event, there is no ruleset.
Not sure if this is what you're looking for, but thats my .02.
Langenschwert
Master Black Belt
Well, first of all it's not up to me to tell other people if what they do is a martial art or not. I've had people tell me that what I do isn't a martial art, and well... screw them. So I'm not going to go down that road.
Secondly, there has been historically (at least in Europe) a strong link between Martial Arts done in earnest and Martial Arts done as sport.
Read the following quote from Sigmund Ringeck's 1440 fechtbuch which details a fair section of knightly martial arts:
"Princes and Lords learn to survive with this art, in earnest and in play"
For concrete examples, look at the joust. It's a sport, but using a lance from horseback in battle is certainly a martial art. So the knightly jouster is using MA training to compete in a martial sport. But this sport was considered VITAL for the training of the knight for actual warfare and mounted duelling.
Again, what about wrestling? In the German tradition we have kampfringen and ringkunst, the latter is the sportive version of the former. Yet again, the sportive grappling was training for when you have to fight for real.
And the same with longsword fencing. There was fencing you did in the school (schulefechten) and fencing for killing (ernstfechten). In the school, thrusting was forbidden as far too dangerous. In a lethal duel, the thrust is a primary technique.
The difference between martial art and sport is a continuum. They're not mutually exclusive.
Best regards,
-Mark
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
Actually to me the term Martial Art is an umbrella term for a systemized method of combat and under that you have divisions and sub-divisions of TMA, Sport MA, RSBD, etc.
Similar to Kung Fu/Wushu being an umbrella term for Chinese Martial Arts
Or it could just be paintings of tanks
Langenschwert
Master Black Belt
And let's not forget that Martial Art is a European term, first used to describe combat arts from Europe, not Asia.
From Pallas Armata (1639):
"Thou herein to the Reader dost impart
In a plaine way that famous Martiall art
Of fencing,"
Best regards,
-Mark
KELLYG
2nd Black Belt
Interesting. There in my opinion there is a martial side the nuts and bolts of striking someone with the intent on doing bodily harm. This does not come in any particular form and does not have to be pretty. There is also the side that shows that these skills are present but it is done in a particular way so as to show the art, or pretty side. Have you watched two people do one form and see the fight in one and the artistic presence in another?
A beautiful or asthetically pleasing way of stopping another from harming myself or those in my charge.
May sound off or stupid, but it works for me. Nothing better than seeing a high level of skill used to stop another person or persons.
May sound off or stupid, but it works for me. Nothing better than seeing a high level of skill used to stop another person or persons.
I like it. I may steal that
Tanaka
Purple Belt
I consider Boxing a martial art.
Same with wrestling.
Same with wrestling.
Shin71
Yellow Belt
Training for a fight that might not ever come.
ap Oweyn
Brown Belt
Every time I arrive at some definition of martial art, some qualifier or criterion comes along to make me think that definition is insufficient or over-reaching. In the end, "martial art" is a label, prone to the same sorts of problems as most other labels. If I say "melee," it immediately occurs to me that archery is often regarded as a martial art. So I say "melee or ranged" and immediately begin to wonder whether it should include firearms. So then, there's a temptation to specify "archaic weaponry." But then that raises the question why weaponry would need to remain archaic, when empty hand embraces modern training techniques. Etc.
In short, I think the perfect definition of martial art is a bit like King Solomon's mines. It may be out there, but I sure as hell don't know where.
A couple of criteria that keep coming back to me, though, are the idea of personal combat (distinct from large-scale troop movements) and the transmission of fighting technique (emphasizing not only the performance of combative maneuvers, but the teaching of them as well).
As far as the sport versus traditional versus reality-based thing goes, I think that gets to the heart of why it's so difficult to define martial art. A martial art is an attempt to triangulate an experience without necessarily living that experience. We train in knife fighting, for instance, without actually engaging in knife fights. Martial arts are an abstraction. They aren't the real thing. And that's why you get so much variance in interpretation; because everyone has differing opinions on how best to simulate, approximate, and communicate something without necessarily doing it.
So is a combat sport, with gloves and rules, a better or worse abstraction than a drill in which you pull attacks that would blind or maim if you followed through? I don't know. Neither person actually did the real thing. Both approximated personal combat without actually engaging in a full-out, life-or-death skirmish.
Nothing new in that either. Duelling, pankration, pugilism, fencing... People have been trotting up and down the sliding scale of abstraction with this stuff for milennia. In the end, it's an indistinct concept. We can argue about it, but eventually we have to acknowledge that there's no definitive answer. No watertight definition.
Best we can do is determine what's important to us as individuals and try to tailor our training to match up with that. Worrying about whether everyone agrees whether that is or is not martial art is a fool's errand, in the end.
Stuart
In short, I think the perfect definition of martial art is a bit like King Solomon's mines. It may be out there, but I sure as hell don't know where.
A couple of criteria that keep coming back to me, though, are the idea of personal combat (distinct from large-scale troop movements) and the transmission of fighting technique (emphasizing not only the performance of combative maneuvers, but the teaching of them as well).
As far as the sport versus traditional versus reality-based thing goes, I think that gets to the heart of why it's so difficult to define martial art. A martial art is an attempt to triangulate an experience without necessarily living that experience. We train in knife fighting, for instance, without actually engaging in knife fights. Martial arts are an abstraction. They aren't the real thing. And that's why you get so much variance in interpretation; because everyone has differing opinions on how best to simulate, approximate, and communicate something without necessarily doing it.
So is a combat sport, with gloves and rules, a better or worse abstraction than a drill in which you pull attacks that would blind or maim if you followed through? I don't know. Neither person actually did the real thing. Both approximated personal combat without actually engaging in a full-out, life-or-death skirmish.
Nothing new in that either. Duelling, pankration, pugilism, fencing... People have been trotting up and down the sliding scale of abstraction with this stuff for milennia. In the end, it's an indistinct concept. We can argue about it, but eventually we have to acknowledge that there's no definitive answer. No watertight definition.
Best we can do is determine what's important to us as individuals and try to tailor our training to match up with that. Worrying about whether everyone agrees whether that is or is not martial art is a fool's errand, in the end.
Stuart
Cirdan
Senior Master
Actually I avoid using the term because almost everyone has some romantic meaning attached to it. It is noble, righteous, non-violent, magical, japanese bleh!
My first tought would be pragmatic violence.
My first tought would be pragmatic violence.
