From: pauljone@aludra.usc.edu (Michael Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: Bruce Lee on Classical Karate
Date: 10 Apr 1992 15:13:23 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu

In article <1992Apr9.170123.25936@cs.brown.edu> tac@cs.brown.edu (Ted A. Camus) writes:
[snip]
> In 9/71 Black Belt, reprinted in this year's winter Yearbook, he wrote
> a famous article entitled "Liberate Yourself From Classical Karate",
> in which he basically says that regimented drills can only create 
> conditioned responses and inhibits the creativity and ultimate potential
> of the martial artist.  Let me focus on one particular quote :

>   "Through instictive feeling, each of us KNOWS [emp. his] our own 
>    most efficient and dynamic manner of achieving effective leverage, 
>    balance in motion, economical use of energy, etc."

I thought this was the whole philosophy of T'ai Chi Ch'uan.  Wu-Wei
(perhaps some more scholorly Toaist can correct my spelling),
Action in Non-action, moving naturally in an uncontrived manner.

Spontenaity is very important in the MA.  If you focus on techniques,
you learn a series of learned counters to a (possibly very comprehensive)
set of anticipated attacks.  If you focus on the flow of energy, you 
learn to avoid attacks, and enter openings, not because you've seen
this technique before and responded with this counter, but because, in
terms of the generation of force, there are very few variations.
Because many people focus on the physiscal technique, the placement of
the hands and feet, it difficult for them to learn to let the flow
of force, between you and your opponent, to guide your actions.

Perhaps this is what Bruce Lee was referring to.



> I think this statement basically says it all.  It's complete, total,
> unmitigated rubbish !!  There are *countless* attributes, characteristics,
> capabilities and even "secrets" of the human organism that take years 
> to even begin to discover.  And for everyone in the universe, except
> maybe for a handful of Bruce Lee's, they must be learned.  

There is a lot to be learned about the human body.  But in terms of
efficiently using your own body, I think there's more to be unlearned.
The best way is to stop interfering with the way it wants to move.
Of course, this simple idea is easier said than done.


> I think Bruce himself was simply an excellent MA with super-human physical
> attributes. For him, *any* attempt at systemization would be a hinderence!
> He has reached that often-quoted but never-realized stage "where all
> martial arts meet."  Adherence to any one style would necessarily limit 
> access to the others.  For those of us who are not as gifted (it takes no 
> humility whatsoever to include myself in this lot :), a more traditional
> approach is better.

Bruce Lee was definitely gifted and reached a pinnicle of martial arts
ability, but couldn't say one way or the other if he reached the point
where all martial arts meet.  From what I've seen in the movies, anyway.



> This discussion has important implications for Aikido, and the attempt
> to teach it as done so by O'Sensei is his later years --

I'd like to hear more about this, as I see a lot of similarity between
TCC and Aikido, in the philosophy of how to use your body efficiently.



JMNSHO,
Mike Jones



Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts