Should instructors teach what the student wants to learn?

[tallgeese]

The red suit is great for impact protection. Unfortunatly, it gives up alot of mobility in the process. This makes realistic attacks somewhat less so, however, it's still a great tool.

Blauer systems have now come out with their own version of the suit. I'd like to get my hands on it to check out, it looks like the best of both worlds.

[Patrick]

Thank you, Patrick!

My pleasure.

Patrick

[joesteph]

Another response option was added to the poll, suggested by Wa-No-Michi:

My art is traditional, and with correct practice engenders good form that can be applied in the modern world.

We have a good variety of selections to vote on.

[sensei8]

Why should a style be updated? This makes no sense. What's wrong with what the style is right now? If the style was good enough for the creator of said style when said style was created, then why does it need to be updated? Is the human body any more different now, then when the style was created? Are our supposed attackers body's built so much more differently than ours now compared to at the time of said style was created?

Let's see...I'll answer my own questions:

Never

Nothing

It doesn't

No

No

Sounds to me that there's no reason to fix the wheel and/or reinvent the wheel. Wheel seems to be rolling just as great now as it was before. If it's not broken, then why fix it? I don't know, but, others like to "update" just to "update" because it's popular and/or it's the rage of the page.

Since when is the Martial Arts like a car that changes each and every new car year? The Martial Arts isn't a car, it's a way of life!

[Patrick]

Those are good points, sensei8. Updating for the sake of updating is certainly a waste of time.

On the other side of the coin, though, are you saying that your art can never be innovated on or improved upon in any way? After all, innovation or improvement is just another word for change or update.

I'm not a martial artist, so I'm just asking the question out of curiosity and in the interest of discussion, but I don't know if I believe that a style creator launches a style and thinks "this is perfect, this is the best it is ever going to be and it can never get any better. I have created the perfect style without exception and nothing can ever be discovered that would improve it in any way." After all, would you want to learn from someone who held this view about him or herself?

I'm not saying that age old traditions and techniques should be changed or anything, but I don't see a problem with having an open mind and considering the possibility of change or innovation. I'd agree with tallgeese, though, that I think the teacher should teach what they are qualified to teach and help the student apply it to their capabilities, limitations and environment.

[jorowi]

I've studied 2 different martial arts and my current instructor put it very succinctly for me: "There are only so many ways to throw a punch or kick."

What you can add are non-traditional weapons, some forms, maybe some grappling but you're not really changing the style you're supplementing it.

[tallgeese]

Yes, there are only so many ways to throw a punch or kick. There are better tactics and worse tactics to throw them depending on what their funciton is and if the function of the art is chaning that needs to be considered.

For instance, if you are training for the purpose of defending yourself, yet you train with weapons that are no longer readily available or deployable, then you might need to change. IF that is your goal.

I think the biggest change and/or innovation that occurs in the ma's has less to do with actual movements and more to do with methodology. We have signifigantly advanced in our understanding of both learning and physical training in the past decade, and we are lightyears ahead of the understanding of these fields that our ancestors had when most of these arts were developed. Those need to be taken into account, as do the social constraints (or lack there of) that have changed as well.

For instance, kata was devised in a large part to train in secrecy. That is no longer needed in todays world. Therefore, you could utilize more immediate training protocols that would more quickly burn those responses into one's skill set. And train them agaisnt live atttackers using more modern protective gear sooner. Just a thought.

This isn't to say that I'm touting doing away with kata. I'm simply using it as an example of how situations change that could lead to the very logical evolution of one's art.

More than movements, it's those things that could evolve an art to a more effective system.

[bushido_man96]

Can we add another one then ie - "My art is traditional, and with correct practice engenders good form that can be applied in the modern world"?

This is what I would prefer, but it isn't how my current school runs. I don't have a problem with tradition, but I like to see things from a modern standpoint, and dealing with applications in this way can work with applications from more traditional approaches. I think it can all work together.

[Wa-No-Michi]

Those are good points, sensei8. Updating for the sake of updating is certainly a waste of time.

On the other side of the coin, though, are you saying that your art can never be innovated on or improved upon in any way? After all, innovation or improvement is just another word for change or update.

I'm not a martial artist, so I'm just asking the question out of curiosity and in the interest of discussion, but I don't know if I believe that a style creator launches a style and thinks "this is perfect, this is the best it is ever going to be and it can never get any better. I have created the perfect style without exception and nothing can ever be discovered that would improve it in any way." After all, would you want to learn from someone who held this view about him or herself?

I'm not saying that age old traditions and techniques should be changed or anything, but I don't see a problem with having an open mind and considering the possibility of change or innovation. I'd agree with tallgeese, though, that I think the teacher should teach what they are qualified to teach and help the student apply it to their capabilities, limitations and environment.

Hi Patrick,

First, thanks a lot for allowing my suggestion. Very Kind of you.

Second, respect to you with your description above, as I think you are spot on.

Even in the most traditional terms, most Japanese ma buy in to the principle of Shu-Ha-Ri, which in a nutshell, is the qualified process of change or "evolution". They have to, because failing this the art would die.

[Patrick]

No worries. My pleasure.