Change is good. Or is it? Over the past several years we've seen a major shift in what people refer to as "martial arts." Currently, MMA is in vogue, and already there are thick boundaries drawn between what is considered nouveau and the time-honored traditional martial arts. It seems TMA are no longer fashionable, as heavy emphasis is being placed on the combat effectiveness of an art, quite often to the exclusion of all else. Asian martial arts in particular have always been shrouded in a little mystery. Chi/ki-energy, mind control, and superhuman abilities are the stuff of urban legends and hucksters. With the advent of reality fighting all bets are off. There are no secrets.
There's this place near my job that offers boxing, sambo, jiu-jitsu, the works. The area with mats is surrounded by a chain-link fence. In one corner of this school someone is working on a speed bag, while in another, basic self defense drills are taking place. This type of eclectic approach has become the norm, and I'm left wondering if becoming a jack of all trades is better than being a master of merely one. Is learning a hodgepodge of styles the direction that the martial arts are heading towards? Some of the old time masters forbade their students from cross-training in other styles, but the founders of many traditional systems did just that to develop their own curricula.
Previously, I mentioned TMA as being "time-honored" but truth be told, the majority of traditional styles are barely a century old. Tae kwon do, aikido and karate - while they have ancient roots - were all formally systemized in the twentieth century. Judo, which was created in 1882, actually negated the nasty martial applications found in jiu-jitsu so it could be taught to school children and the proletariat. Budo, the martial ways, flourished during Japanese peacetime as a dignified and ethical pursuit of warriorship. Today, we can watch bloody cage matches on TV or YouTube. So much for evolution. Change is not always good, but for sure it's inevitable.
There's this place near my job that offers boxing, sambo, jiu-jitsu, the works. The area with mats is surrounded by a chain-link fence. In one corner of this school someone is working on a speed bag, while in another, basic self defense drills are taking place. This type of eclectic approach has become the norm, and I'm left wondering if becoming a jack of all trades is better than being a master of merely one. Is learning a hodgepodge of styles the direction that the martial arts are heading towards? Some of the old time masters forbade their students from cross-training in other styles, but the founders of many traditional systems did just that to develop their own curricula.
Previously, I mentioned TMA as being "time-honored" but truth be told, the majority of traditional styles are barely a century old. Tae kwon do, aikido and karate - while they have ancient roots - were all formally systemized in the twentieth century. Judo, which was created in 1882, actually negated the nasty martial applications found in jiu-jitsu so it could be taught to school children and the proletariat. Budo, the martial ways, flourished during Japanese peacetime as a dignified and ethical pursuit of warriorship. Today, we can watch bloody cage matches on TV or YouTube. So much for evolution. Change is not always good, but for sure it's inevitable.