SimonX puts it fairly well. Different schools offer varying degrees of usefulness for a real situation. As I state above kata and “one-steps”; which is what you’re describing, are not very useful because they are not a good example of SBT or problem based learning. They create the completely wrong kind of learning for the animal brain, the one you will be using when you hit crunch time. So, I agree with you. That kind of training is not all that great, useless… no, it really all depends, it is possible for that kind of training to be so bad that it actually creates a step backwards for the student ability to defend themselves.
As I point out in my book “Lies My Sensei Told Me” (as yet unpublished so don’t go running out to the bookstores quite yet :)), you can typically point these people out by their insistance that their black belt somehow has granted them invincibility from violence. They use it almost like a magical token that prevents any fool from defeating them in battle. They also typically have had their heads stuffed with foolish notions that they are “warriors” continuing an ancient line of honourable, and lets not forget invincible, warriors and that, of course, the logic only follows that if the people who studied what we studied were great then so must we. :rolleyes:
I seriously would recommend reading “Real Fighting” by Peyton Quinn. This would be a very good primer for your entry into adapting your martial arts to the defensive mindset, the key to surviving adrenal stress. It might just disenchant you.
Also, you use the term artist and art (as in martial artist and martial art) with seeming great derision. This is not an uncommon reaction in the west because they do not understand the history of the word or its translation from Japanese to English.
The term art or artist has a very particular connotation in the modern west that isn’t quite inline with the meaning of the word or its original translation.
From the Meriam-Webster Dictionary:
Pronunciation: 'är-tist
Function: noun
Date: circa 1507
1 a obsolete : one skilled or versed in learned arts b archaic : PHYSICIAN c archaic : ARTISAN
2 a : one who professes and practices an imaginative art b : a person skilled in one of the fine arts
3 : a skilled performer; especially : ARTISTE
4 : one who is adept at something <con artist> <strikeout artist>
Which one of these do you think most closely matches the original translation?
The answer is either #1 or #4. You need to understand that to the Japanese at the time of contact with the Dutch and Spanish that the warrior was the superior class. They were the rulers. The Japanese had also a deep ingrained respect for the fighting arts that didn’t exist to the same degree in the west. For example, cannon, firearms and sabre were built by lower class craftsmen overseen by a master weaponsmith. In the East, the master swordsmith was an honoured man. The same is true for the fighting man. To the west, fighting was something you did, to the east, fighting was something you learnt and mastered. Hence the term artist as a translation. Accurate? Maybe, maybe not, but it is a translation from one language to another, so you get what you get I guess.
Anyway, don’t confuse it with western connotation. It is okay not to have respect for something but not out of a lack of understanding.
I’ve studied a few martial arts in my day (karate, TKD, BJJ and Krav Maga) and I’ve found Krav Maga to be the most practical. Check out more at Krav Maga.
