What does "martial art" mean to you?

[Balrog]

Well, let's look at the term itself. "Art" is something taken to or expressed at a higher level. "Martial" derives from the genitive of the name of the Roman god of war, Mars, and is used to denote anything having to do with combat. So a fairly technical meaning of the term would be "combat taken to a higher level".

And I believe that is the foundation of the term. But it's much more than just combat. It's also life skills such as honor, discipline, perserverance, etc., all of which should be stressed just as hard (if not harder) than the combat training. Martial arts disciplines train us both mentally and physically.

 

[ap Oweyn]

Well, let's look at the term itself. "Art" is something taken to or expressed at a higher level. "Martial" derives from the genitive of the name of the Roman god of war, Mars, and is used to denote anything having to do with combat. So a fairly technical meaning of the term would be "combat taken to a higher level".

And I believe that is the foundation of the term. But it's much more than just combat. It's also life skills such as honor, discipline, perserverance, etc., all of which should be stressed just as hard (if not harder) than the combat training. Martial arts disciplines train us both mentally and physically.

See, I think this is precisely where the conversation always derails. This literal dissection of the term is doomed to failure. For one thing, I think you'd go through a lot of definitions for "art" before you necessarily land on this "higher level" thing. For another, "higher level" is just another vague, metaphoric description.

Then there's "martial." Mars is the god of War. Not civil unrest. Not self-defense. Not duelling. And not sport. War. So how many things does a translation that literal then proclude?


Stuart

 

[Langenschwert]

See, I think this is precisely where the conversation always derails. This literal dissection of the term is doomed to failure. For one thing, I think you'd go through a lot of definitions for "art" before you necessarily land on this "higher level" thing.

Indeed. For myself, I equate art with craft. Being a musician, the pursuit of "artistic" perfection can be paralleled with craftsmanship. It takes a lot of mind-numing, boring repetition to become good at an instrument. What the layman mistakes as "inspiration" is really the product of many thousands of hours of practice, instilling the principles of music until they come out naturally.

Aside from the term "martial art", other names have been given to combat arts such as "Science (or Art) of Defence" and the "Noble Science". From that we can perhaps define a martial art as one following a certain structure in order to gain a particular outcome in combat, whether it be points, submissions, KO, or even death and maiming.

Best regards,

-Mark

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I'm dying to know... when you use the term "martial art," what specifically do you mean?

Modern usage of the term is fairly broad, seemingly encompassing almost anything with a belt.

I use the term in conversation to denote fighting arts, regardless of national or cultural origin, that have a practical application (self defense, defense of others, etc.) and which may or may not have a sportive aspect.

Consider that the word 'martial' is being applied in a very broad sense. It has shifted from a meaning related to military arts to simply fighting, be it in defense of one's own life or in a sporting envirionment.

Art is being used, generally, to denote that it is a system or a craft rather than used in the sense of fine arts (painting, sculpture, etc.). I do not agree with people attaching the fine art connotation to martial arts.

I have stated before that I really dislike the term, "martial artsist" and I am frankly not overly fond of the application of the term martial art to many 'arts' that are traditionally or popularly associated with the term martial arts, though I do not dislike the term itself.

I prefer to use the term fighting system. However, martial arts is a part of the vocabulary and when I use the term, people know what I am talking about.

Many "martial" arts that are currently practiced have little practical application on and/or are not trained in such a way as to be useful on a battlefield of any era, including battlefields in time periods before firearms were the primary weapon, thus the reason for my preference of the term fighting systems or fighting arts.

Boxing, Judo, BJJ, kickboxing, Shotokan, Tai Chi (as popularly practiced in the west today) are all fine systems to practice and have manifold benefits for their students. They would also, as practiced in most schools today, have little to no application on a pre-industrial age, twentieth century, and modern battlefield.

Kendo is drawn from kenjutsu, but is geared towards a duel between two swordsmen and has been narrowly focused on sport/competition.

Fencing, as in what is regulated by the FIE, is based around civilian dueling weapons that were not a part of military usage.

So in the sense of applicability to warfare, neither is a 'martial' art in the strict technical sense.

In the current age of warfare, the riffle is the primary weapon of the soldier. Some kind of unarmed fighting is still needed in modern warfare. Like the samurai or the knight, unarmed fighting on the battlefield is considered a last resort.

The relative peace enjoyed in most of the developed world, and the very clear delineation between military and civilian fighting is such that the term martial art has come to represent fighting arts in general. And I am okay with that, though internally, I do make a distinction.

As for the martial sport question that you asked on page one, Steve, I draw a distinction, though not necesarilly the same one that everyone else draws.

Martial sports that are trained in for competion only are sports. Boxing, wrestling, fencing, sumo, BJJ, judo, kickboxing, taekkyeon, and certainly others, are sports. Yes, they have practical applications outside of the ring.

Kendo straddles the line and I do not include it only because it has kata that allow it to encompass more than just the shiai sparring and it has a very strong 'do element. Practically however, it is pretty much sport.

Martial arts with a sportive aspect, such as taekwondo and many karate styles, are primarily fighting systems that make use of sport to provide a safe environment to 'fight' against a resisting opponent. But they encompass a great deal that falls outside of the sporting realm (though WTF sport TKD is so divorced from the greater taekwondo system as to almost be a separate entity and most definitly a sport).

I see MMA as a rule set, though if you are training specifically for MMA matches without training in the donor arts specifically, then you are training in a form of sport fighting.

Please note that I do not see the term sport as bad or demeaning. Most competitive (meaning actually competing regularly and consistently) athletes train harder than most so called martial artists and could likely pulverize most so called martial artists in an actual fight. Very likely, they also have a higher chance of survival in a violent encounter as well, likely even against armed attackers, as they will not have any false confidence in their abilities against an attacker with gun or a knife, something that many so-called martial artists suffer from.

Daniel

 

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

See, I think this is precisely where the conversation always derails. This literal dissection of the term is doomed to failure. For one thing, I think you'd go through a lot of definitions for "art" before you necessarily land on this "higher level" thing. For another, "higher level" is just another vague, metaphoric description.

Then there's "martial." Mars is the god of War. Not civil unrest. Not self-defense. Not duelling. And not sport. War. So how many things does a translation that literal then proclude?


Stuart

If you only define war as conflict between states then your right.

But war is more than that, someone trying to kill, maim or oppress you is doing an act of war on you, self defense is personal warfare if avoidence and or deplomacy (talking) does not work, you are in a form of warfare.

Jutsu is not the blanket Japanese word for art, it's the term for arts of war (and yes flower arangment was a Jutsu, because they thought it helps with tactics and stratigy.)

So to me martial arts means art of war, even a sportive art as it has it's roots in combat and many martial sports are ment to buiold attributes for combat, even if they have millions of dos and dont's.

All the spirtuality and other stuff attached to it is just that, attached to it but now part of it.

A Marine is a martial artist, a cop is a martial artist, a IDPA shooter is a martial artist, a kid at the Mc Dojo or playing paintball is even a martial artist, it's just there are different levels of seriousness, need, ability and danger.

 

[ap Oweyn]

If you only define war as conflict between states then your right.

But war is more than that, someone trying to kill, maim or oppress you is doing an act of war on you, self defense is personal warfare if avoidence and or deplomacy (talking) does not work, you are in a form of warfare.

And that's fine. But you're still not going to get a definitive, clear line in the sand about what's included and what isn't. Is wrestling a martial art? Nobody is trying to kill or maim you in competitive wrestling. Oppress you? Not really. Not beyond trying to win the match. So is it martial? How about boxing? Or archery? Or point fighting? Or sumo?

How close a simulation does something have to be to constitute a martial art?


Stuart

 

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

And that's fine. But you're still not going to get a definitive, clear line in the sand about what's included and what isn't. Is wrestling a martial art? Nobody is trying to kill or maim you in competitive wrestling. Oppress you? Not really. Not beyond trying to win the match. So is it martial? How about boxing? Or archery? Or point fighting? Or sumo?

How close a simulation does something have to be to constitute a martial art?


Stuart

Lines are always blury I'd agree.

Wrestling moves can and do get used in combat, therfore it's a martial art even though the modrn goal is not war.

Some jerk puts you in a headlock, telling you to do something, he's oppressing you and many wrestling moves would Libre de Oppresso.

Sport fencing is very divorced from edged combat but still has it's roots in it, so it's a martial art.

If it was not, you could not call a WTF TKD stylist a martial artist and we all know he would take exception to it.

 

[ap Oweyn]

Lines are always blury I'd agree.

Wrestling moves can and do get used in combat, therfore it's a martial art even though the modrn goal is not war.

Some jerk puts you in a headlock, telling you to do something, he's oppressing you and many wrestling moves would Libre de Oppresso.

Sport fencing is very divorced from edged combat but still has it's roots in it, so it's a martial art.

If it was not, you could not call a WTF TKD stylist a martial artist and we all know he would take exception to it.

Indeed.

 

[pmosiun1]

I'm dying to know... when you use the term "martial art," what specifically do you mean?

Punching and kicking.

 

[Balrog]

See, I think this is precisely where the conversation always derails. This literal dissection of the term is doomed to failure. For one thing, I think you'd go through a lot of definitions for "art" before you necessarily land on this "higher level" thing. For another, "higher level" is just another vague, metaphoric description.

Then there's "martial." Mars is the god of War. Not civil unrest. Not self-defense. Not duelling. And not sport. War. So how many things does a translation that literal then proclude?

Please reread this. Note the emphasis.

"Martial" derives from the genitive of the name of the Roman god of war, Mars, and is used to denote anything having to do with combat.

And combat is defined as "a fight, battle, or struggle, esp. a prolonged struggle; strife."

So in a nutshell, martial arts teaches us how to resolve conflict, preferably with no one being injured. And isn't that what Sun Tzu said, so many years ago?

Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.

 

[ap Oweyn]

Yeah. Fair enough. But the higher level thing I think is something we read into the term "art." Not something that's inherently there.

 

[Em MacIntosh]

"Martial Art", to me, means an intepretation of martial science according to the artist's metaphysical value judgements.

 

[Eazy]

Living a healthy, spiritual and self protected, free lifestyle.
If i just wanted to kick but i would just do Combat training.
Combat training serves prtty much one purpose (Survival).
Martial arts has a deep history and with it comes so much more.

Combat trainers portray to people that with martial arts you dont need all that but Martial arts is not all about fighting its about wisdom , Respect, Confidence, Technque, Balance, Flow, agility,Loyalty,motivation Integety, spirit, Harmony, Truth, worship, Meditation, Health, Nature and to be Humble.
And these things are things we can enjoy every day, They are there for everyone to have but how many of us take them and use them.
A matial Atist strives for perfection and finds ways around barriers and seek knowlege in truth a amrtial artists understands his/her limitations and works to over come them. This is not just learning to fight this is practiced in every day tasks and helps them think out side the square, Leadership is another trait of the true martial artist, they have confidence which allows them to become leaders in their professon and enhances their ability to manage tasks at work and every day life.
A martial artist may learn these skills by teaching lower belt grades for example.
The belt process show us respect, to be humble is by respecting learners with a lower belt level also other martial arts to be humble is to not underestemate someones ability and to seek knowlege from others also to learn to listen, to come with nature is to learn our inviroment and understand what we can acheive with using it to our advantage but to also respect it. Passing a grade is to over come and break a barrier.
Loyalty is to not miss classes with a clean outfit and to not flaunt what you do or show off.
Integity is to strive to get your next grade and do it with conviction and passion. These are just some examples of how somethings naturaly fall into place and why these systems are their.


that is where the Martial Arts comes in because masters who have studied the important things in life shaped them into forms and blended these good gifts to make them usefull and usable in a way that is uneque to that Martial art.
Then they handed that great gift on to the next generations
You can't put a price on that but you can make the most of it
We who choose to grasp it are lucky.

What dose supprise me is the combat Trainers are usually if not all Martial artists, yet seem to say to all their learners or students that you dont need all that.
I got news, to attack a normal civililian they may come off ok
To attack a martial artsist with all the above mentioned as extra skills that their trainer said did not matter well i know who ive got my money on.

The master has put these skills in a way that they should be used together in harmony then it becomes so that its not your fighting style someone is attacking, Its your lifestyle and that is what they are up against.

The combat trainers say first that they don't train technial combo's etc then later on they show a 5 movment form or something like that.
that still means you have to be attacked in a certain way etc.
so they end up in essence training basic to hard martial art maneuvers basicly without alot of repititions and you learn a 5th of the defence and attack moves and nothing eles.
None of this really helps the learner because if they are not as commited to learn the full lifestyle and gymnastic, repetitions, the respect, wisdom well every thing i mentioned above then they don't have on of the most important aspects of Defence or fighting and that is Discipline and a wiliness to learn and seak knowlege.
Thats what martial arts means to me.
Ok so i you may think i went on a rant, well this just all spealed out without reserch or looking at other post first, which i will now.
(written without prejudice intent.)

Thanks for the question.

 

[altc]

There has been some interesting points raised.

I think martial arts is the formal study of combat methods of the past in an environment with formalities and protocols from the nation where that art originated from.

Each martial art is heavily influenced by cultural aspects relating to the originating nation it evolved from.

Often, names of techniques are called accordingly to their host nations language, the dress is based off traditional clothing from that nation and the class is generally conducted in formed ranks and files. There is a formal ranking system in place.

Martial sports are not so much focused on the study of the older combat methods from that host nation but on winning competitions according to a set of rules. That is the primary focus. This could be TKD, bjj or boxing.

Yes, there can be some crossover between martial arts and martial sports.

Self defence or RBSD are different in that there is no formal study, no foreign language, no uniform, no ranking and no adherence to cultural practises from a host nation. There is no 'ART" in other words. The focus is purely on teaching and learning effective modern combat methods.

I just included that description of self defence to differentiate it from the martial arts and martial sports.

 

[Andrew Green]

play-fighting with structure.

 

[Gruenewald]

For me personally, it's about both the "systemized method of combat" aspect mentioned earlier as well as the mental aspects (discipline, ideology, etc.). I do not believe that ethnic origins or culture (with the possible exception of that culture conflicting with one of the two aspects I just mentioned) has anything to do with whether or not something can be defined as a "martial art". Quite frankly I believe that to be an outdated method of thinking (stereotypical Asian martial artist, etc.) and even slightly racist. That is not to say that it isn't justified, however. It's something that's been ingrained into our minds for as long as and beyond the point where the martial arts first began to break into North America.

 

[altc]

I do not believe that ethnic origins or culture (with the possible exception of that culture conflicting with one of the two aspects I just mentioned) has anything to do with whether or not something can be defined as a "martial art". Quite frankly I believe that to be an outdated method of thinking (stereotypical Asian martial artist, etc.) and even slightly racist. That is not to say that it isn't justified, however. It's something that's been ingrained into our minds for as long as and beyond the point where the martial arts first began to break into North America.

I can appreciate where you are coming from Gruenewald. I certainly am not intending anything even remotely racist with my remarks. I hope the printed word did not come across that way as commnicating via the written word is not a complete way of communicating as it does not include body language, gestures and tone to aid in communicating an idea or point.

I do however, stand by my point that all martial arts have very strong ties to their cultures of each individual martial art. And I acknowledge you saying that the point I raise is not entirely unjustified.

I think one cannot ignore that very elemental aspect of martial arts. It is not something that is dark or dirty or anything like that. The cultural aspects of martial arts are to be embraced.

Everyone knows Kendo is Japanese and along with the study of the use of the Japanese sword, there will also be some supplimental aspects of that art which do not directly relate to the use of the sword at all but involve a deeper understanding of the arts origin. This is the study of the cultural aspects of the Japanese sword and its proud history. These generally involve a study of Japanese culture and possibly religion (meditation, ideals etc.) along with the actual physical sword training.

This can not be ignored and is a common aspect of all martial arts. It is what differentiates the martial arts from the martial sports and self defence. I cannot think of a martial art that does not involve some study of a particular aspect of the host nations culture whether that be that nations history and/or its language. The culture of that martial art is often an integral aspect of its study.

This is not a negative aspect of martial arts but should be proudly acknowledged. It is a very good thing that people are interested in other cultures and learning about them. Indeed, I feel this cultural study is an integral aspect of martial arts and cannot be ignored.

It is there.

 

[fighterkieran]

The term has changed from the derivation, because most people ( including me ) think of the Easter fighting forms first. But Martial means an art of fighting, so it pretty much covers styles from all over the world.

 

[Mark Jordan]

A tradition, a discipline, a fighting system that has been practiced/ handed down from generations that aims to balance the mind, body and spirit.

 

[Gruenewald]

I can appreciate where you are coming from Gruenewald. I certainly am not intending anything even remotely racist with my remarks. I hope the printed word did not come across that way as commnicating via the written word is not a complete way of communicating as it does not include body language, gestures and tone to aid in communicating an idea or point.

I do however, stand by my point that all martial arts have very strong ties to their cultures of each individual martial art. And I acknowledge you saying that the point I raise is not entirely unjustified.

I think one cannot ignore that very elemental aspect of martial arts. It is not something that is dark or dirty or anything like that. The cultural aspects of martial arts are to be embraced.

Everyone knows Kendo is Japanese and along with the study of the use of the Japanese sword, there will also be some supplimental aspects of that art which do not directly relate to the use of the sword at all but involve a deeper understanding of the arts origin. This is the study of the cultural aspects of the Japanese sword and its proud history. These generally involve a study of Japanese culture and possibly religion (meditation, ideals etc.) along with the actual physical sword training.

This can not be ignored and is a common aspect of all martial arts. It is what differentiates the martial arts from the martial sports and self defence. I cannot think of a martial art that does not involve some study of a particular aspect of the host nations culture whether that be that nations history and/or its language. The culture of that martial art is often an integral aspect of its study.

This is not a negative aspect of martial arts but should be proudly acknowledged. It is a very good thing that people are interested in other cultures and learning about them. Indeed, I feel this cultural study is an integral aspect of martial arts and cannot be ignored.

It is there.

I agree completely with you there; most martial arts are the product of a specific culture's needs (some from an actual need to defend themselves from aggressors, others purely for spiritual enlightenment, etc.) and as such it is usually needed to have a firm grasp of that culture in order to completely understand the martial art in question: the motives behind a martial art will usually dictate what kind of an attitude you should have towards practicing the art, for example.

In my original point I wasn't necessarily addressing you specifically, but more the widely pronounced stereotype that exists in the West that "martial arts are an Asian thing" (which arguably originated with it's breakthrough into Western culture in the early 70s, through means such as "Kung Fu", starring David Carradine). Obviously this isn't as much an actual racist stereotype as it may have been originally; ever since the martial arts have been "demystified" with the emergence and popularity of such things as MMA, Muay Thai, Karate, and so on people think of martial arts as something generally more accessible than they were before. Yet despite this, an astounding amount of people still consider the term "martial art" to denote, primarily, Eastern systems.

You may persist in suggesting that systems such as Western Boxing and European Fencing don't place such an emphasis on cultural immersion, but is that really the case? We live in the West (I'm making an assumption here just for the sake of my argument) and so it isn't even really possible to "immerse" ourselves in the cultural heritage of Boxing. We already live in it, and we speak its language of origin, so there is no foreign language to learn as in many Japanese arts for example, where techniques are most commonly referred to in Japanese. It does still teach strong discipline and morals (even as a "martial sport"), primarily good sportsmanship, respect, and so forth.

My other example, Fencing, can be examined similarly. It on the other hand does use foreign terminology (French), such as "en guarde", "fleche", "riposte". The bout begins with a customary salute, and ends with an almost ritualistic handshake with the off-hand (not the blade hand) denoting respect towards the opponent. The art itself places you back into a specific time period, when such a thing was common in everyday life (for the most part).

Let me know if I can clarify on anything, I'm aware that this may not be laid out very well, I'm in a rush to catch a bus at the moment.