Should the arts evolve?

[quinteros1963]

What are your thoughts on tradition vs evolution? Read the excerpt below and share your thoughts.

In the 1920′s, Okinawans arrived in Japan and were fully ready to adapt their Karate to the needs of the Japanese. They had come from a personalized, individualist approach which emphasized learning many different methods from various sources and synthesizing them into one’s own way of doing things. This made them adaptable and flexible in the face of a changing environment.

[Wastelander]

I believe that martial arts should--and, to some degree, must--evolve. Traditions are all well and good when they don't interfere with that evolution. Unfortunately, in every generation you end up getting people who take the evolution of their teachers and turn that into tradition, refusing to change it. That's when things stagnate, and that's how you get the "you're doing it wrong" arguments between styles, branches, and organizations.

[Drew]

I think this is a tricky question because whether something should be changed or not really depends on the value each individual puts on what they have. For example, I have a yard full of tall grass right now. I put negative value on tall grass because it harbors all kinds of creepy-crawlies that make me itch, so I'm going to rectify the situation in short order by cutting said grass. If you liked the tall grass, or needed it tall for some reason, you wouldn't change it because you have invested value on the state that the grass is in now.

So it goes with martial arts. If you have something that you value highly (and you probably value it because it fits your needs, whether they be recreation, self defense, ring fighting etc.) you are unlikely to want to change it. Lack of change due to lack of need to change - I would argue - is not tradition, it is simply a lack of evolution. The environment isn't changing so neither are survival needs.

Tradition waltzes in when the only reason change is not taking place is because that is the way things were done in the past. This isn't inherently bad. We can learn much from history and in many cultures tradition carries more history than the books do.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that whether something should or shouldn't evolve is case by case. If you need or want it to, sure. If you just like it because of historical value and don't want it to change, fine. Like fossils or frozen mammoths, tradition can help us understand the past so that we can better plod into the future.

[sensei8]

The practitioner should evolve!! But, the art evolving isn't always up to the practitioner...no...for the most part, the governing body decides its path.

Imho!!

[JusticeZero]

It's impossible to not evolve the art, and trying to hold the art rigid is likely to create twisted bits of silliness.None of the context is stationary. The material will be received differently by students than it was by the teachers. "ancient tradition" is a bit of a conceit.

[tallgeese]

Agreed.

Evolution is a must if the art is to: a)stay current based on our understanding of human learning, b) stay current based needs, c) stay current based on the individual practitioners.

Each individual will have different attributes, and situations that should dictate how each person uses the art they are doing.

[lowereastside]

sensei8 says " The practitioner should evolve!"

WELL SAID!

[Harkon72]

My Style is a product of Evolution, but the ethos is traditional. I say it can work and work well.

[quinteros1963]

If we are to evolve as artist, doesn't that imply that the Arts evolve as well? If we do then at some point we would out grow our particular style.

[Tkdampbjj]

There are many traditions that can be maintained such as bowing, showing respect, even sing the language of the country of origin.

These can be maintained while modifying and adding things to make the art more effective.