View Single Post
Old 05-19-2004, 10:20 AM   #14
senshincenter
 
senshincenter's Avatar
Dojo: Senshin Center
Location: Dojo Address: 193 Turnpike Rd. Santa Barbara, CA.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,422
United_States
Offline
Re: The Nage/Uke Dynamic - Guidelines

Hi Drew,

Again thank you for replying.

Again I have to make it clear that I am not out to say "what you do," etc. I'm discussing what you are thinking - what you are saying to me. I'm sorry that I seem to be unable to make that difference clear enough and so I'm sorry for the insult you feel is coming toward you. It's not intentional and it should not be there. In the example you continue to bring up: For me saying something is akin to something else in idea does not mean that both things are the same or that a person is doing one thing and not another. Things can't get any clearer than that. Also comparing ideas is certainly not making a universal judgment on either one, or on the person spouting one or the other. It's not an attack nor a response from being attacked. Ideas, particularly in this kind of setting, are here for the sake of being compared, contrasted, discussed, stressed for consistency, played through, played out, stretched, collected, etc. This is what one can do here, this is all one can do here (productively speaking), and in my opinion, this is what one should do here. Personally I can see no use in the usual "ah yes, I agree with that." "ah, no, I don't agree with that." "oh, we do it differently" "oh wow, that's interesting.", etc. That's not communication, that's not reflection, what's the point of that? What are we all statisticians? To me, that is what is close-minded. Personally I like when my ideas are put through the ideas of another's mind. I don't consider it out of the ordinary, condescending, being attacked, or someone else thinking they have all the answers, etc. So I was very grateful in you having done me that favor. I'm sorry it cannot be returned. If someone does not agree with your position and can state why, openly compare their ideas to yours, end up seeing things not originally visible through a process of thinking through things, etc., and you see that as close-minded, etc., then I have that attachment to ideas may be more the engine of what you are feeling than any insult that is actually taking place (which is not).

I can see that you make some allowances for learning curves in your understanding of kihon waza - particularly by going slow. I employ that same teaching strategy only I would never suggest that one can go slow AND still train "realistically". Going slow affects a lot. Timings are altered, several forces are reduced or absent, distances are changed, residual energies are reduced or absent, mechanical and emotional stresses are reduced, new allowances appear for particular angles and/or degrees of rotation, etc. Yet, I agree with the use of going slow to address the social reality of learning curves. As I said, this is another way of understanding what I mean when I say that kihon waza is all about the technical. I understand that you would like to say more - and I hope you understand that that "more" I would also agree with, only I place it in a different area of training. Since going slow affects so much of the training rep, it's hard for me to see why allowing nage to experience the waza fully (and letting uke experience the form - the ideal - fully) through all of the variations in their own learning curve is going to lead to the "deadness" you describe in one case but not in the case of going slow. In my reasoning and in my experience it simply does not. If your experience is different, and it seems to be, I would imagine it's because we are using different words to say the same thing or that we are not identifying that different element you are experiencing here properly.

I can't explain any more clearly why there is a relationship between solo forms in other types of training (including solo exercises in Aikido) and two man forms in kihon waza and why your position on what makes something dead or alive has to address that relationship. If you have chosen not to answer that, that's your choice. Perhaps someone else that sees that relationship can chime in and say things differently in order to make the point more clearly and less subject to being deemed an attack.

dmv
  Reply With Quote