Maintaining tradition Vs. Evolving your art?

[Shorinryu Sensei]

People...you can now, if you will, visualize a 6'6", 240lb, 52 (as of tomorrow) year old man standing up and bowing to Shorin Ryuu for his last post.

 

EXCELLENT!!! Please...feel free to ramble anytime you want to bud!

 

Personally, I think you need to submit that as an article.

[GrrrArg]

I agree, good post Shorin Ryuu, I smell an article!

[SevenStar]

This whole thread begs the further discussion of what evolution actually is when pertaining to martial arts. Looking at the example of muay thai, it's been around for centuries. Since it's inception, it's always been known as a brutal style. Why? because that's the way that it was trained. Over the years, it's under gone several changes - not necessarily evolutions, such as the introduction of hemp to wrap the hands (muay chaad cheurk). This was done until around the 1920's, when gloves were introduced.

 

People say that the training methods of muay thai and the fact that it's a sport make it a modern style, but thais have been using those training methods for centuries. Instead of heavy bags, they were kicking bananna trees.

 

The evolution of muay thai came fairly recently - american thai fighters noticed that traditional thai footwork is somewhat limited, as were the punches. Because of this, they began combining it with western boxing, creating the muay thai you see today in the us and europe.

 

Judo was the result of a similar process. towards the end of the tokugawa and into the meiji, there was a time of piece. There was no need for the samurai of their fighting arts. judo was the result of a man who wanted to preserve the fighting tradition of his people. He removed the killing/maiming techniques and introduced free sparring. His efforts paid off - in tournaments involving his judo students and some jujutsu schools, the judo guys mopped the floor with everyone. Why? because they added free sparring to the curriculum.

 

That said, adding free sparring to any style really isn't an evolution, but a necessary (IMO, anyway) change. Not point sparring, but contact, full contact rules sparring. The reason alot of people say karate and other TMA need to "evolve" is because of the emphasis on kata and other things that really aren't an immediate help to your fighting skills. I think this is where change comes in. keeping forms is fine, however, I would change the way that they are taught.

 

First, I'd eliminate the immense number of forms many styles have. Fighting should be based on principles, not techniques. It shouldn't take 27 kata to demonstrate every principle in a style, I wouldn't think. When I was training karate (and this was under a guy who was born and raised in japan) he taught only two forms - taikyoku shodan and sanchin. He knew the other forms of shotokan and also knew some from other styles, so when I was learning them in my other karate class, he would make corrections when he noticed I was doing something wrong.

 

Next, as opposed to learning an entire form, then working it daily, I would break the form down into sections. you would spend day after day drilling applications of the form for the particular section that you are working. You would drill them lightly, then with resistance. The techniques need to be drilled into muscle memory if you intend to use them. Lack of doing so is the reason why you see so many people today who can't use the techniques of their systems - they just throw punches and kicks out there.

 

These aren't necessarily evolutions, but small changes that could benefit practitioners. Back in the day, some people may have trained 12-16 hours a day. They may have had challenge matches all the time. They may have used their skills in battle. Today, people don't do that. Time to train is more constrained. Guns are used in war, not hand to hand skills. People barely fight at all, much have challenge matches. For these reasons, I think that more drilling, more sparring and more conditioning is necessary.

[Drunken Monkey]

the problem i have with this kinda of discussion is that what we are practicing today is nothing like what the 'traditional'/original version of things.

 

i'll use shotokan as an example.

 

does shotokan need to be 'evolved'?

 

maybe.

 

my point is, how qualified are you to say that it needs to be?

 

do you think that what you do in your shotokan dojo is anything like what funakoshi and his first gen students did back then?

 

i guess i'm trying to say that what we call traditional is in all likeliness,

 

not very close to what actually was traditionally done.

 

hmm, i also guess that's what a lot of you are saying already......

[SevenStar]

but, that would still require a change, would it not? It's no secret that funakoshi was adept at throwing and locking. But, that's really not taught much now in shotokan. Adding it back would be an "evolution" for much of shotokan.

[Drunken Monkey]

a change, yes but that change is in fact, i would argue, going back to the traditional.

 

that's why i'm not too keen about discussions of traditional/evolution/modern.

 

i would say that in most cases, the change that is need, isn't an evolution

 

but a move back to the original.

 

the problem is that ****michal caine mode activated*** not a lot of people know that.

 

they see what it has become and assume that was what it was always like.

 

i think that needs to be addressed somehow before any 'evolution' is considered.

[SevenStar]

I completely agree. notice I use the term change and not evolution. evolution does still apply in many cases though, with respect to things such as sparring. Several styles lacked sparring then, just as there are those lack it today.

[Shorin Ryuu]

Well, I must say that I am certainly flattered that some of you found it enjoyable and perhaps even entertaining.

 

And Happy Birthday (late), Shorinryu Sensei!