Devon Natario

I understand that Aikido is more traditional than eclectic, but where do Aikido instructors draw the line?

In your form of Aikido are techniques added from other arts? Do you add techniques for todays ground fighting spectacle? Do you teach how to defend from a single and double leg takedown (other than Kaiten Nage)? Do you show how to defend out of the arm bar? Do you show how to get out of the guillotine?

The topic in general about self defense got me to wonder how many instructors actually show self-defense techniques. Or maybe not even justly called "self-defense", but maybe more survival techniques.

As instructors is it not our job to show people how to survive, defend, and protect? Of course we have a duty to keep tradition alive and to keep the art intact, but at what cost? How many techniques and theories were lost along the path before we learned what we call Aikido?

I will always believe that we call it "martial" for a reason. We owe it to our students to make sure we teach them how to survive. Maybe it is my military background, maybe it is just me, but would you feel bad if one of your students was gravely injured because you did not teach them how to get out of a guillotine?

I know, none us knows every single technique and how to defend or get out of it, but something as common as a guillotine or single leg takedown should be discussed shouldnt it? Or is it our students job to seek out what he or she wants to learn?

I guess its an age old dilemma.

Is there anyone else that feels like me? Or am I a loner out here in Left Field trying to accomplish something I will never achieve with my students?