Postby John_Clements » Wed Sep 22, 2004 11:33 am
Hi,
That’s a good question and one I’ve discussed before. I can’t reply at the moment in detail with the references as I would like, and others have already raised many good comments, but I feel the question itself may come from something of a false premise. Within Japanese and many other Asian martial arts, pedigree and continuity and tradition of extant transmission are often a great concern. For us however, without "living traditions" or any "surviving lineage" of Medieval and Renaissance fighting methods, and having to reconstruct and recover extinct combative systems, in exploring Renaissance martial arts we can focus exclusively on understanding how and why they did what they did.
For this we are fortunate not to be distracted by centuries of peacetime classroom alteration and civilianization watering methods down. W can rely instead on dozens of highly detailed technical volumes (often highly illustrated…in color no less) on proven principles, concepts and techniques. We have study guides and instructional fighting manuals by men who actually fought and killed during the age. These masters are telling us in their own words essentially, “Here is how you do it” and “Here is how to study when I am not around to teach you.” Therein is our preserved knowledge. Therein lies our authenticity. This is why the incredible richness of our Western martial heritage is so impressive and so many are now astonished at its efficacy, simplicity, and sophistication.
This reliance on extra-somatic information (i.e., “book learning”), btw, is itself a part of our very “tradition” in the West (and our source literature tells us of its importance for martial arts study). Of course, the problem and challenge for us, then, is in the area of translation and interpretation, followed by accurate understanding of application.
I should also point out that Renaissance martial arts are approached from a different cultural context than are its Asian equivalents (and I might note, one that is far less alien to Western civilization). What’s really exciting is that it’s not that hard. Renaissance martial arts does not suffer form any obsession with aesthetics and hierarchy or accumulation of titles and rankings. It follows an empirical dialectic. It doesn't involve mysticism and doesn’t take decades of esoteric effort under secret masters and hidden schools to learn the effectiveness of legitimate combat techniques. It’s not something spoon fed only to an enlightened and worthy few, but presented as a whole to be considered at length. In the process it still demands athleticism, self-discipline, and a martial spirit.
Additionally, we certainly don’t have the "continuity" problem experienced by that old children’s game of “Rumor” where one child whispers a short sentence in another’s ear and that child then whispers in the next and so on and so on down the line until the last child in the class stands up to speaks aloud the last whisper whereby everyone then laughs at how much it changed from the one they heard and the original. The same thing occurs over the generations with fighting arts that are removed from the necessity of survival to be taught in safe civilian classrooms or “preserved” by families and secret societies who have not used then in earnest for centuries. As I often explain in my seminars, the same thing can be witnessed in showing a dance routine to someone, then having them take someone else out and show it to them and so on and so on. With each passing transmission there is minute change and personalization no matter how hard they try to keep the "authenticity" consistent. It’s the nature of verbal information and movement patterns that they don’t remain constant. They evolve. The farther they move from the exigency of the original environment that necessitated their development, the less such teachings reflect the realities of survival in combat. As any anthropologist will tell you, this is the nature of the oral tradition. Everything not documented and recorded in detail and studied from books is subject to change over time as it is passed on---dances, songs, poems…and martial arts. But, when our sources are descriptive documents and technical manuals, we largely avoid that problem. After all, no one alive today knows exactly how warriors from the 13th to 17th centuries (European or Asian) truly fought like on foot against sword and spear and dagger or armors, etc. We must all to a degree merely theorize.
So, knowing this, in ARMA we try to approach our craft with the same mindset and concern that our historical source texts describe. Is our craft complete? No, its investigation is really in its infancy. It’s continually being rediscovered and reclaimed this very moment even as I write. I feel that act is itself part of carrying on and preserving a tradition.
JC
Do NOT send me private messages via Forum messenger. I NEVER read them. To contact me please use direct email instead.
