Blog Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)
What makes a technique proper? I had to ask myself that question because I don't feel that most in karate actually know and understand what makes it proper or improper, they often look to the form presented and that question arises, "is form of technique proper and how does that translate to form vs. function, i.e., function being its application according to its intent."
It must be noted if you are a first time reader of my stuff that I no longer use technique-based teachings except as a beginner model because I prefer that one focus on a principled based fundamental model of methodologies to learn the more critical aspects of karate or martial arts for the intent of self-protection.
What is improper? ANSWER: when protecting oneself and it fails...
What is proper? ANSWER: when protecting oneself and it succeeds...
Both questions should initially be answered with, "It depends..." using the ellipse to indicate there is far more here than a simple and simplistic answer that humans lean heavily toward for a variety of reasons BECAUSE in the end the two questions and their answers above should dictate just how you teach the arts. Even with these simplistic perspectives the answers although good sound-bites leaves out a lot, i.e., for instance, when they work and when they don't work can mean that in the legal system even when you successfully protect yourself those skills used may end up sending you to jail anyway ergo they succeeded but they failed anyway.
To those who are committed to the technique-based programs this is NOT a hit on what you do BECAUSE one very proficient, knowledgable and expert karate-ka once stated, “I think the problem with is that they are often taught out of context… and that is totally OK when FIRST learning a technique. People see this INITIAL phase and MISTAKE it for the entirety of the process.” In short, technique-based is most excellent in teaching principles through a martial methodology so that when principles and multiple methodologies are then studied the foundation is laid properly and that is a good thing AND YET to remain static within a technique-based model hurts more than helps when working toward mastery of the discipline.
Note: this and all my articles are not meant to be a comprehensive encyclopedia of the how-to of martial arts or karate but rather a stimulus of the old gray cells so that one can perceive, discover and create the necessary methodologies and philosophies that govern the righteous honorable way of the empty hand. As you can readily imagine it is the discovery that is the impetus of greatness and not the repetitive practice of movement; it is the creativity of thought that spurs on the actions necessary to assimilate proper processes and concepts in one’s mind; it is how we excel and break the stagnation of such static, unmovable and unchanging practices.
What is proper technique? What is an improper technique? What is one’s intent in answering these questions? What is one’s intent in the training, practice and application that would answer these two questions? What other questions can you derive from this study?
Charles James
For reference and sources and professionals go here: Bibliography (Click the link)
No comments:
Post a Comment