View Single Post
Old 05-07-2008, 12:36 PM   #1275
G DiPierro
Location: Ohio
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 365
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido does not work at all in a fight.

Quote:
Matthew Gano wrote: View Post
I'm not sure any student can pick up all of what their teachers can do...assuming their teachers are always honing their own skills. My thinking is that as students we pick up whatever our teachers can teach us in any given moment and then it's up to us to make it our own and to creatively apply our own sense of things. I look at Aikido like Chiba Sensei, for example, and my lay-perspective sees something pretty effective. Is that all Osensei could do? I don't know, but it seems like it's a close enough of an approximation to begin with.
The problem with saying that all of Ueshiba's students got a full enough transmission is that they all look very different. In fact, I think that none of them would agree with you that they all got a full transmission. Most of them say that they couldn't even understand what he was talking about most of the time themselves, yet they all seem to think whatever they did manage to learn from him is correct and that the conflicting ideas held by their peers are incorrect. They all now teach according to a somewhat more rigid pedagogical model than he did, and try to get their students to look more like them and follow their ideas of what is most important in training more closely than he apparantly did.

It's not enough to say that they are all good martial artists, especially since many of them were already experienced in other arts and they were training intensively in a an environment with other serious martial artists. The question is what they did learn from Ueshiba that uniquely defines his art as aikido rather than just generic jujutsu? Or, if you prefer to think of aikido as merely jujutsu, then why are there so many variations and so little focus on effectiveness? If you want to claim that this transmission of aikido they received is something outside of the physical differences between them, then what is it specifically and how is it transmitted apart from the physical practice? And why do they now focus so much on the physical elements in their teaching?

Quote:
Ludwig Neveu wrote: View Post
Okay, but altering the learning method also carries the risk of throwing out the baby with the bath water.

If one is too goal orientated (the so-called efficiency), one might lose sight of what makes aikido what it is, and just end up with an undifferentiated fighting method.
Actually, aikido at this point already looks to me like an undifferentiated fighting method. It's not real clear what aikido is if you assume that everybody who claims to be doing aikido is doing it the way it should be done and that all of Ueshiba's students got a full transmission of what he was doing. The only way I see aikido as being unique as a martial art is if you assume that what most people in aikido are doing isn't what Ueshiba was doing and therefore was not transmitted properly. It looks to me like there is no baby left in the bath to throw out anymore, and if you blindly cling to the dingy bathwater that is left of aikido hoping that there might just a baby in there somewhere you are probably just going to end up with a tub full of scummy water. I think you are better off looking for the baby elsewhere.
  Reply With Quote