Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, many do, but like myself, only in mixed company. In all fairness it should be pointed out that I got the term "motion-Kenpo" from Ed Parker Sr. directly. The term is not a negative, only an apt description of the vehicle as is the term "commercial." Although not everyone teaches motion-kenpo commercially, that system is designed and built around a business model specifically for the purpose of commercial proliferation. Therefore both terms are correct.michaeledward said:I'm curious about that attribution of 'motion kenpo' in this article.
I understand that Mr. Chapel often refers to the study of Kenpo outside his own with this term. But giving Mr. Chapel's language premier treatment in this description of Ed Parker's American Kenpo seems ambitious.
Do any other practitioners of 'Ed Parker's American Kenpo' refer to what they teach as 'motion kenpo'?
Rich_Hale said:I know how some can feel a bit put-off when Doc speaks of what they teach as being either Motion or Commercial Kenpo, but to a major extent I agree with him. Many of us teach either a motion based Kenpo, a Commercial Kenpo, or both.
As for me, I definitely teach the Commercial Kenpo Mr. Parker popularized in the 70s and Im proud of it. Doc knows what I teach and when he refers to it as being Commercial Kenpo, he doesnt mean it to be an insult, nor do I take it as one.
I also dont think when Doc refers to someone teaching Commercial Kenpo, he means theyre teaching Kenpo purely for profit. Although I cant speak for Doc, I think he means they have chosen to use the uniform teaching system that Mr. Parker felt would be most understood and least bastardized by the masses. I guess a less offensive way to put it may be to say some of us have chosen to teach a Uniform system of Ed Parkers Kenpo, but Im still okay with Commercial.
It would really be kind of funny if I were to claim to have never taught Commercial Kenpo, because when I first started in Ed Parkers Kenpo Karate, it was in Colton, California in 1972 and, at the time, we even had commercial play-books to sell from. It was one of those subdivided loose-leaf binders that had an answer for every question. When we answered the phone and a potential customer (student) asked a question, we would flip to that question in the book and the answer was provided. Every time the customer asked another question, we just kept flipping through the book to find all the right answers until we signed them up.
Back in the 70s there was a great sense of pride in the management of Ed Parkers (Commercial) Kenpo Karate Studios. We had hand-books, technique and form manuals, patches and full color certificates. The old Accumulative Journal was considered to be a great business tactic, because you paid full price for the book, but were only given the material as you advanced to each new belt level. That way the student couldnt just take off with the journal; quit paying dues and study at home.
I dont think anyone, who knew Mr. Parker, would argue that he would love to have been the McDonalds of martial art studios. Mr. Parker would often speak of commercial Kenpo with both great enthusiasm . . . and frustration. He was especially frustrated with instructors that joined the IKKA, used his business model, accepted his assistance and encouragement - then, when the studio was up and running, drop out, change their name and became independent again.
All this aside, lets consider what it takes to have a successful international association of karate studios, then decide if following Mr. Parkers Commercial model is such a bad idea. Just like McDonalds, a chain of martial arts studios need consistency. Consistency does not necessarily mean you have to sacrifice quality, but it does put a damper on individuality. Mr. Parker, just like everyone else, knew how frustrating it was to learn a series of kata (for example) only to discover that even though the names were the same, the movements within a kata were unique to the studio where you learned it. Mr. Parker wanted to provide an internationally uniform system of Kenpo that you could start learning in California and continue learning in Texas, New Jersey, or (old) Jersey - without having to relearn all your techniques, forms and terminology.
This does not mean we cant go beyond the base techniques and expand on the commercial Kenpo outlined in out journals; of course we can and we are supposed to. What we should not do (those of us who have chosen to use the commercial model of Kenpo) is change the base in such a way that it is no longer a uniform system of teaching. What if a teacher was to teach every technique right out of the book, but decided he didnt like all the silly names and taught the techniques as number 1 through 154? The moves may be the same, but those of us who have learned the techniques by name would be lost.
On the other hand, a concern about adhering to closely to the commercial Kenpo model is Mr. Parker certainly hid large portions of his art from view, when its studied directly out of the journal.
For example, does anyone really think Lone Kimono defends against a left hand lapel grab? I know it sounds silly, but you can squeeze by lapel all day long and it really wont faze me. But if you were to use that left hand lapel grab to rip me into a wicked right punch, I would indeed be adversely affected. So, even though my instruction is based on the commercial Kenpo model, I dont let it limit my knowledge of the art; its simply a uniform base to start from and where I go from there is up to me.
In some ways (I think) Mr. Parker was his own worst enemy, when it came to creating a business model that was based on consistency. On one hand he created a standard practice manual - then he personally taught many of us to do this material differently and emphasized how Kenpo was always changing.
On a personal note, I spent years searching for THE way our techniques and forms were supposed to be done, then one day, in the early eighties, Mr. Parker sent me a thick packet of his most recently revised technique manuals and a videotape of Jim Mitchell performing all the material from yellow through black.
(You may have seen this video offered on eBay lately for a hundred dollars or more. Trust me; its not worth it unless youre simply a collector with a hundred dollars burning a hole in your pocket.)
Now, although Mr. Parker is not seen on the video, he can be clearly heard calling out the basics, techniques, sets and forms. You can hear him telling Jim to do the techniques slowly and at full speed. He asks that the camera zoom in to show detail and to show additional angles. I was so excited to, at long last, have the final authority of Ed Parkers Kenpo in my hot little hands. . .
Then I noticed Jim doing unfamiliar moves within well documented techniques and forms. I froze the video and scrambled to look up a move in question. Sure enough, Jim was doing a fair number of things differently from how they were outlined in the manuals. How could this be? I had the most recent manuals available and a video tape with Mr. Parker personally directing every move and although they came in the same envelope - they did not match. Darn, so much for THE way of doing things.
Even with the above realization in mind, I still teach the commercial version of Ed Parkers Kenpo. I find it to be fairly consistent and I appreciate knowing that I (or any of my students) can visit with Jamie Seabook, Michael Billings, Josh Ryer, Bryan Hawkins, to name only a few, without worrying about them doing everything so differently that the visit takes away from, instead of adding to our knowledge, and enjoyment, of the art.
On the other hand there is a Kenpo studio, less than 10 miles from my house, where they do Short Form 1 with Delayed Sword, Sword of Destruction, Checking the Storm and Deflecting Hammer in a Short Form 1 pattern, instead of a simple in, out, up and down blocking sequence. We never visit the studio, because the material they teach is just so different from what I teach. Im not saying they arent teaching Ed Parkers Kenpo, but because what I teach is based on the commercial model and they have chosen to deviate so far from it, we are just not compatible workout partners.
On the other hand, when Larry Tatum ran the West Los Angles studio, we had a constant stream of Kenpo men, and women, from all over the world stopping in to work out with us. The same thing was true for Mr. Parkers Pasadena studio, which was run by Frank Trejo. Although Larry and Frank are very different when it comes to their individual style of Kenpo, they were both teaching the same commercial model of the art that Mr. Parker had designed, making interchange between other studios and guests practical.
As for Motion Kenpo - thats another story altogether. Hopefully I dont study, teach or perform Motion Kenpo, as I interpret the term. That is, I hope I am more concerned with what Im actually doing than how I look while Im doing it.
For example, I used to blaze through my techniques and forms of course my blocks werent solid, my strikes lacked penetration, I was missing checks, covers and foot positions - but I was fast! I used to envy, and try to emulate those who moved like Mr. Parker, without analyzing what they were actually doing. After all motion was all the rage. All I remember hearing about is how people moved. Boy can he move! Ya, hes got the motion down. If I didnt know better I would think I was watching Mr. Parker, he moves just like him. I even heard stories of people moving better than Mr. Parker himself.
Then, one day, Barbara and I were watching a well known Kenpo guy doing Form 5 and we were both very impressed with how well he moved - until we noticed that he left the entire left side of a technique out of the form. We asked him if he knew he had done that and all he had to say was no he hadnt noticed. We offered to go over the form with him, but he couldnt have cared less about the mistake. He moved well and we got the impression that so long as people kept praising his motion he had little need to concern himself with what he was actually doing.
Im not saying this is exactly how Doc interprets the term Motion Kenpo, but I think it may be similar. And like Doc, Im not trying to tell you what the term Motion Kenpo means to you; Im simply sharing with you how I think of it and how I explain it to my students. Doing a quick search on Google for Motion Kenpo I found a studio that is actually called Motion Kenpo. I really doubt this instructors interpretation of the term is anything close to my own, or Docs.
Remember, terminology can be much more difficult to debate than motion itself. Not long ago James Hawkins and I were bantering back and forth about the term Reverse Marriage of Gravity. I have my interpretation of the term and James has his. Its funny to go back and read how we went back and forth trying to enlighten one another, but in the end does it really matter if he thinks it means one thing and I think it means another? I would bet if we were to perform a series of techniques, side by side, they would be very similar.
For years I thought that the technique Gathering Clouds got its name from the scoop kick to the groin. I just pictured my foot down there gathering clouds. Later on I looked it up in Mr. Parkers technique notes and discovered it derived its name from the initial arm movement, which Mr. Parker described as: The name of this technique stems its name from the initial action of your defense whereby both of your arms seems to be Gathering Clouds. I guess James and I may as well have been arguing about that instead of Reverse Marriage of Gravity, because the correct answer to either question would not necessarily alter how either of us performed our techniques.
So, before you take offense to Doc saying most of us teach Motion and/or Commercial Kenpo, first study some of Docs previous writings to determine exactly what he means by Motion Kenpo and Commercial Kenpo, and then ask yourself if you share the same interpretation of those terms. Now you can take an honest look at yourself, and what youre doing, then decide if you agree with him or not.
As always Im not trying to lecture, or correct anyones thinking, Im just sharing my thoughts for those who may benefit from my mistakes . . . I mean experience.
So the next time you have a question or make a 'kenpo statement,' personalize it as your kenpo or simply what you do, or what your teacher taught you to do. If everyone spoke this way, than labels wouldn't be necessary and we coud spend all our time talking about what will or will not work, and not what you call it.
Ok Doc,
I will, This is my Kenpo , this is what I do and it is the result of what my teachers have taught as well as what I have figured out for my self, my base line is of course making my Kenpo work for me and any one who I am Privileged to teach.
Long time no talk, I hope all is OK with you.
Rich
Thank you, Mr. Hale. I think that was an excellent post and an excellent discussion of the value and purpose of the base material as illustrated by what captured here for a quote....This does not mean we cant go beyond the base techniques and expand on the commercial Kenpo outlined in out journals; of course we can and we are supposed to. What we should not do (those of us who have chosen to use the commercial model of Kenpo) is change the base in such a way that it is no longer a uniform system of teaching....