Technique(s)

Blog Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)

Martial systems tend to teach a lot of technique and another person I know of said, “Technique is the easiest part. Knowing when and how to apply the technique is the second easiest. Making yourself do it may be the hardest and that is the part I am not sure can really be taught.” - Rory Miller, Facing Violence

Now, the context that Mr. Miller wrote the quote is not where I am going with this, instead I am addressing a way that martial arts are taught that creates a chasm between it and self-defense. There is a term/word Mr. Miller uses that stresses what we all have to see in ourselves if we want to actually learn self-defense. I just can’t remember that word, sigh (ahhh it came to me “glitches.”).

Anyway, I can remember my first martial art self-defense lesson. In general, the sensei said when you are attacked like this (describes the actual attacking technique here) you will counter-attack like this (describes the actual counterattacking technique here). I thought, at the time, this is so cool. I am actually learning how to defend myself against (describes the actual attacking technique here). Today, I tend to think about how I would apply something where I stress the principles used to create force and power dependent on the situation and circumstance. It is more about the goal like, “Stop the threat,” than any one particular technique against the pre-ordained attack (usually made up by the sensei who in all likelihood got it from his sensei who had little or no experience in self-defense, etc.). 

It seems to me reflecting back that we ignored the harder aspects of the martial discipline both with and without the self-defense training. We gravitated for what ever reasons toward the easiest part to teach, the technique(s). I even looked at the MA triad of kihon (basics), kata and kumite. All of them pre-set arrangements and combinations meant to work against other pre-set arrangements and combinations. As I accumulate more knowledge and understanding toward conflict, violence and self-defense (thank you to folks like Rory Miller, Marc MacYoung, Peyton Quinn and many others).

Another reason I have come to understand as to why techniques are taught is because in a system that uses heavily grades and testing you have to have something to critique and grade before awarding rank, etc. You have to have something to grade and critique for competitions and other such things that detract from the essence of self-defense and more civil oriented self-defense applications of martial systems. It creates, to me, a larger distance a martial artists in self-defense has to jump to do what is required to “Stop the threat.” 

I found in my studies and understanding of that material martial arts self-defense is not self-defense but a program that allows us to grade, critique and self-soothe ourselves into believing we have the security, protection and ability to defend meaning defend and remain in the self-defense square (see In the Name of Self-defense by Marc MacYoung for more on the square :-) ). 

Technique lessons have their place and make it easier to physically feel and learn about such principles as structure, alignment and centering, etc., but when used to teach self-defense, i.e., technique-to-technique or attack-to-counterattack, they don’t work alone. Yes, learning how to apply a technique with principles is important but not a stand-alone self-defense system. There is just so much more to all of it and if you read Mr. Miller’s book, Facing Violence, you can get a bigger picture of what is truly involved. 

It would be nice to be able to learn and apply self-defense “Techniques” that worked but often it doesn’t and if it does it can be luck. Do you want to rely on luck alone? Remember, the depth and breadth of conflict, violence and self-defense far exceeds the comfort of self-defense techniques. 

Bibliography (Click the link)