What kind of Martial Arts?

[GaryGrzybek]

I'm often asked "What kind of Martial Arts do you practice?"

It's funny how puzzled people become when I explain that our art is not of Eastern origin. Some will find the subject facinating while others seem to strugle in finding it's validity. I think this skepticizm comes from the fact that in many ways our western martial heritage has been schrouded within so many poor examples. Not only film but distorted facts written by supposed experts on the subject have done enough damage. The other issue is that so many people do not understand that there is a difference between the true art and the clown fighting or stage play so many are subject to. I do not condem these forms of entertainment but I wish people were more educated on the subject. The Asian arts seem to gain more acceptance since they have traditionally been kept alive and popularity has grown so large that it justifys a school on every street corner. We know that the "smoke and mirrors" theory only adds to the popularity since people have an undenyable facination to see super human feats. Anyway, this is not a west against east topic. I only wish to hear how others deal with the unedjucated and skeptical. Leading them to our website is certainly the most obvious.

[David Kite]

Unfortunately I have no answers to you question.

I just wanted to say it seems as though you have a nice possible editorial started here. Maybe you could work on writing one out, hm? <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

David Kite
ARMA in IN

[James_Knowles]

Given the variability of people's minds, there's no universal answer.

Up-front I'll use "martial arts" as a catch-all, but when they press further, I deviate from that terminology.

I generally avoid emphasising the term "martial art" and judicially use the term "war arts" or "what was used on the battlefield." Technically the same thing, but "martial arts" usually drags along a lot of EMA baggage.

Depending on the situation (e.g. when their eyes don't glaze over), I've found it useful to make references to the battle field ("speed, effectiveness, economy of motion, no nonsense") and explicitly contrast it with Hollywood ("as opposed to what one sees in movies"). While most people unconsciously accept what they see on TV and movies, when one makes explicit reference to how "we all know" that Hollywood is garbage, there's at least a moment of rational cognisance. <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> Most people have enough brains to understand that one can't play Neo on the battlefield.

They may not understand, but at least they generally realize that there is a difference between what we do and what they know from movies -- that they don't understand what the difference actually is doesn't bother me too much. At least they know we're not playing Captain Hook or Aragorn.

I also don't spend more than 30 seconds or so describing unless they're actually interested. Anything more is a waste of breath, in my experience. Something like, "We study swordfighting as it was practiced on the Mediaeval battlefield -- quick, efficient, to the point -- rather than the crazy stuff you see in movies -- flashy hack-and-slash."

It's very generalized and imprecise, but my goal is to use their sterotypes and move them from "drooling ignoramus" to "Huh. Interesting."

[GaryGrzybek]

Yes, your approach in dealing with this comes very close to how I usually handle it. You can often tell pretty quickly who's really interested and appreciative and who's not. I guess what I was trying to say was that people often react differently when introduced to WMA's than to EMA' s as a whole. That certain level of skepticism is often present until we explain what it is we do. If they don't get it within the first few minutes they probably never will <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

[leam hall]

James wrote:

I also don't spend more than 30 seconds or so describing unless they're actually interested. Anything more is a waste of breath, in my experience. Something like, "We study swordfighting as it was practiced on the Mediaeval battlefield -- quick, efficient, to the point -- rather than the crazy stuff you see in movies -- flashy hack-and-slash."


That is good! I tend to mention that we study the actual 15th and 16th century manuals just to let them know such things exist. But I like your short and to the point response. If they want more, we're ready for it. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[David Mastro]

I'm often asked "What kind of Martial Arts do you practice?"

It's funny how puzzled people become when I explain that our art is not of Eastern origin. Some will find the subject facinating while others seem to strugle in finding it's validity. I think this skepticizm comes from the fact that in many ways our western martial heritage has been schrouded within so many poor examples. Not only film but distorted facts written by supposed experts on the subject have done enough damage. The other issue is that so many people do not understand that there is a difference between the true art and the clown fighting or stage play so many are subject to. I do not condem these forms of entertainment but I wish people were more educated on the subject. The Asian arts seem to gain more acceptance since they have traditionally been kept alive and popularity has grown so large that it justifys a school on every street corner. We know that the "smoke and mirrors" theory only adds to the popularity since people have an undenyable facination to see super human feats. Anyway, this is not a west against east topic. I only wish to hear how others deal with the unedjucated and skeptical. Leading them to our website is certainly the most obvious.

Gary,

One thing that you don't appear to be considering, in terms of those "puzzled people", is the fact that, aside from the mainstream combat sports of modern fencing, boxing, and wrestling, and regional arts like savate, garote larense, etc., there isn't much in terms of surviving Western martial traditions. It's great that there are serious organization like ARMA, as well as other groups, but the hard fact remains that what is being done in terms of HEMA is a series of experiments and reconstructions. Some are better than others, and as more info becomes available (via manuals, period accounts, examination of antique weapons, etc), and as the talent pool of Western practitioners expands, those reconstructions should continue to be refined.

But they are still just reconstructions.

Please, everyone--this is not meant in any way whatsoever as a dismissal of any group's or individual's efforts, in terms of researching HEMA/WMA, but how else should we expect people (especially from established AMA backgrounds) to react? I think it's pretty natural, actually.

Respectfully,

David

[Aaron Pynenberg]

I tend to agree in most respects with what has been allready stated, but it is a real shame in my mind, that the history and unique martial aspects of WMA would be such a surprise to the majority.

Even though I have recently begun my study, I have always had an understanding of the historical richness of these arts, along with what I beleive to be a very strong warrior culture and background in the west-yet most people think you are talking about some fantasy dung-gens and dra-goons stuff-sometimes it gets irritating.

[John_Clements]

Please, everyone--this is not meant in any way whatsoever as a dismissal of any group's or individual's efforts, in terms of researching HEMA/WMA, but how else should we expect people (especially from established AMA backgrounds) to react? I think it's pretty natural, actually.

I agree. This is understandable and occurs all the time...that is, until such individuals are able to witness expert practioners such as ARMA's senior members perform.

JC

[J.Amiel_Angeles]

On that note, I know a lot of practitioners of the very old Japanese ryu who don't even consider the "dos" to be real 'martial arts' but as sports, or martial 'ways' (which is what 'do' means, anyway). I know of a popular EMA writer who gives judo or karate places the derogatory name of "McDojo".

Not to sound tendentious, or to muddy the waters, but the whole notion of what constitutes a 'martial art' is rather vague, especially these days. Some WMA establishments are assuredly more martial than some EMA, even if these practice something with long pedigrees.

[GaryGrzybek]

Agreed John, if they're able to see what goes on in our practice it usually changes and doubts they may have previously had.

[David Mastro]

I agree that many modern WMA reconstructionalists can be formidable. However, I suspect that one of the issues with AMA folks is not simply the case of whether or not what the current WMA/HEMA folk are doing is effective, but also its accuracy and historical/cultural validity. The fact that so many WMA people also have AMA backgrounds is sometimes brought up on AMA forums. It is then sometimes questioned just how much of what is being done by WMA folks is "legitimate" WMA technique. On the other side of the spectrum, there are quite a few other WMA/HEMA researchers with no practical MA or CS (combat sport) background (Eastern or Western) to speak of, and that can lead to a great deal of problems as well.

The other problem is that, despite all the research (via translating and interpreting manuals and period accounts), and all the experimentation (via drilling and sparring), the hard fact remains that what is being done is still not necessarily the same as what was being done by our Western martial ancestors. You cannot really learn an existing martial art from a book, so you should be able to see the problems with learning a dead art from one.

We unfortunately don't have the benefit of having Talhoffer, Marozzo, or Silver (or any of their students) by our side, to teach us the finer points of their arts. Not to sound negative (especially since I research this stuff as well), but unless someone invents a time machine, that situation isn't going to change.

[philippewillaume]

bur here is my view
Well
All across the planet we have the same body, so we are bound to find the same solution to the same problem.

Call it shiho nague ura wasa or 3 rd leg break still the same technique Or the proper leg break (as in breaking the leg) well they are exactly the same as defense against kick in aikido.
Aikido is a modern art but it takes its root in several traditional arts. There is not that many ways of throwing some off or to have generic way of using a sword open hand, a messer a spear all that in an out of armour on foot or on horse.
In any case it is used in both because it works.
If any other martial artist enquires as to why we do such techniques like we can supply him the 500 years old reference that he need.

The fact is that there is a bunch of charlatans, useless styles, ego pleasuring styles or right moronic style or money grabbing scheme out there
Every year you have a few guys that &amp;#8220;come up&amp;#8221; the ultimate super ultra bottom kicking fighting method. On those a very very small number last and has a genuine style.
It is not something that is that common in HEMA, so from our little world that does not seems to be a problem but mark my word it will come.

If you have done some EMA you know that it is much more common than what we see. Especially the &amp;#8220;I want to be called master without putting the time and the effort in&amp;#8221;. I would agree with some WMA practitioner, there is some Mc dojo out there.
So of course some EMA people will tar us with the same brush at least to start with. In some case it is even easier with EMA people than with Sportive fencing.


Personally I do not think we have anything to prove to anybody,
Should one think my longsword is phoo or my jousting poor, one should really show me I am always ready to learn, and after all I have done that for only 3-4 years.
If one do not want to show me well the saying going along the line that it reassuring to be taken for a moron by imbeciles springs to mind.

[J.Amiel_Angeles]

I agree with this, and this was what John Clements tried to answer in a recent essay, actually. I think this goes back to the annoyingly academic question of what you mean by the term 'martial art'. The mention of aikido is very instructive. It's thought of as a martial art by many, but it is recent and its purposes aren't martial at all (in the strictest sense of the word). In the end, I think it's only really intent and method that count, and at least the more respectable martial arts groups, EMA or WMA and of whatever pedigree, practice with real intent. Maybe it's one of those "I'll know it when I see it" questions.

[JeffGentry]

Hey guy's

I have been watching this thread for a few day's, i agree with John in that if people don't think this is a martial art, all they have to do is look at a few Senior free scholar's in ARMA and i am pretty sure they would change there mind, if some one doesn't believe the West had "martial art's" all they have to do is a little research and it is all there about fechtmeister's and school's of defense in england and such, as far as ARMA resurecting a dead art yes that is what we are attempting to do and that will only be done to a certain extent in Meyer's 1570 manuel there are all sort's of statement's that tell us "we need your words and thoughts in this art, first from notes you would clarify, then onto subjects important to read in training, then to other subjects you want to develop further, so that the discipline of fencing grows on properly understood principles you have contributed to, rather than relying on mindless juggling, thus greater the difference between juggling and fencing will become, and the Knightly art of Fencing will grow from Warriors far and wide," i guess we are further away than Meyer ever thought we would be, he also tell's us at the end of many of his technique description's that they can be done in many way's.

I have not realy had to explain my martial art to anyone i don't know manyu "martial artist" i do know one guy at work who is an ameture UFC fighter i have printed some of the wrestling stuff from othe rsite's for him and he is fascinated that they seem like alot of what he does and most other traditional AMA also teach but they tell you thing's like so now his arm is broken, he seem's very intrigued by the unarmed stuff and even the ringenschwert he still can't wrap his brain around the fact of throwing some on while holding a sword, it is funny to see his reaction, he just never considered how aggresive the European's were in battle.

Jeff

[John_Clements]

he case of whether or not what the current WMA/HEMA folk are doing is effective, but also its accuracy and historical/cultural validity. The fact that so many WMA people also have AMA backgrounds is sometimes brought up on AMA forums. It is then sometimes questioned just how much of what is being done by WMA folks is "legitimate" WMA technique. O

I dismiss this straw man argument. It's been discussed and soundly answered many times already (by several articles on this very website, in fact).

The reality is, what we are doing is arguably more accurate than what modern Asian stylists typically do in their extant because we follow not from hundreds of years of civilianization and sportification and alteration as they do, but from direct period instructional manuals by the very men who fought and taught and killed -extinct or not the sources material are undiluted and uncontaminated by modernism and cross-training.

The fact is, you CAN learn from a book because our very historical masters tell us so. They say you can do it and they themselves did it historically. This is itself a very part of our distinct Western martial heritage. I will accept their word on this over any Asian master or stylist who, having never studied our arts a bit, tells us that we can't. The proof I suspect can be demonstrated any time any of them want to come cross weapons with me or any of our senior practitioners. The door is always open.

Regards,

JC