A discussion regarding Yoshinkan sytemization of training prompted a question that seemed to warrant a thread, so :
Quote:
|
Ron Tisdale wrote:
The amount of diversity is amazing, in light of the systemization...and it's quite nice to have as well.
|
I have had a limited exposure to Yoshinkan. I did intermittent training on periodic (5-6) stints to Yokosuka over two years, about 11-12 years back. (I swear it was Parker Sensei teaching there at the time; I was never told his name, and was too much of a junior no-account visitor to ask, but how many high rank black yudansha were teaching Yoshinkan in Yokosuka at the time?) I wish I had been there more often or had more time to train there.
I have wondered how much this systemization affects the development of, or the concept of, takemusu aiki -- the more improvisational aspect of aiki technique.
My sense is that the aspect of system that is very prominent in Yoshinkan and to a lesser degree in other flavors, such as Iwama (in which I have trained more extensively), must deal with this in a somewhat different manner, than, say Saotome or Tohei's curriculum.
How is this aspect of aikido dealt with in more systematic approaches to teaching?