Quote:
Ron Tisdale wrote:
Still enjoying this thread immensely....
Quote:
|
"LN: Many of the body/arm/hand motions that I use to complete the movement of a technique, are sword strike movements.
|
I know that my own instructor (Yoshinkan) uses sword strikes in many of his demonstration waza, especially if there are multiple attackers. He enters and cuts, enters, turns and cuts, over and over...if you aren't prepared for the ukemi, it can really hurt! And he is being careful...
I'd hate to receive one of those cuts when he wasn't being careful...
Best,
Ron (and I've been hit a fare amount...) |
When I said I use sword strikes, in this case I didn't mean as atemi per se - I meant as the movement that usually finally completes the technique. Often, for me, the final movement of a technique is a dropping motion/releasing of the center followed by the arm(s)/hand(s). That's where the "sword strike" comes into play for me.
In my Aikido, what often looks like atemi is most likely a movement to make sure I have my hand/arm in the right place to protect myself from uke's other hand deliberately or wildly striking, not as likely to be an unbalancing move/strike. If I "need" an atemi to unbalance someone in every or most situations, then to me, I am not in the right position in the first place to execute a throw. If I am in the right position, I wouldn't/shouldn't necessarily need the atemi to unbalance in the first place. Now, an argument, I think, might be made that one needs atemi to get into the right position in the first place, but in most cases, not to me.
But, I have never said that I -never- use atemi. I do, sometimes, in various ways. I just feel that (1) it needs to be used very carefully, so as not to allow the roles to be reversed and nage becomes the attacker, (2) it is not overly-relied on to make one's technique successful, and (3) it is not used in a way that begins to motivate nage "doing something to" uke in the sense of how I use that concept.
I have mostly been responding to statements like (these are just examples, I'm not singling anyone out):
- "There is no Aikido without Atemi. that is of course if you practice Aikido as a Martial Art."
- "I frankly don't see how Aikido exists in absence of atemi."
- "You seem to be from the aikido as movement practice camp. Personally, I don't really consider that to be aikido, as it lacks any martial component."
- "If you take the atemi out of Aikido there is no Budo. It's just a dance."
I understand these kinds of statements, but I come from a different place, where these are Not necessarily always true in all cases, that's all.
I've never said that there is no place at all for atemi in Aikido. But the where, when, how, and intention behind it are all important to me.
LN