Erick Mead

This post there was interesting, and -- just 'cuz -- last night we trained what Gleason showed. I used his examples -- but my explanations. I was pleased that my three relative noobs (well, one is bar bouncer -- and one has a CMA background -- but neither have anything that adds to this) were doing single point contact kuzushi by the end of class - and with minimal movement. We did that first one and the second one and then combined them into a one-handed ikkyo, no grabbing allowed. We didn't get to the third -- but I'll have some thoughts on that below.

So, my critique of the explanations:

First -- six directions -- it's not wrong-- and I know this has lineage and backup -- and I don't care -- it is confusingly counter-intuitive, not in the good way, and unnecessarily so.

"Six directions" is more simply just the three axes of space -- three is simpler than six and three axes puts it into sixth-grade coordinate graphing imagery - and a more immediate grasp of the significance of juji -- right angle orientations. People play lots of video games now -- lets' give them the benefit of the doubt on actual spatial geometry comprehension and imagination.

Second -- "expanding in all directions at once " -- also again not wrong -- and again, confusingly conflated.

Three axes means three - simultaneous -- axial expansions. Spherical expansion/contraction is accurate geometrically -- but also confusing -- because -- we aikidoka are not spherical -- (though some may tend that way ). Strictly and topologically we are "spherical," but that beyond one particular usage can be confusing (even stricter, topologically speaking -- we are toroidal, with a tube running through the middle --- but that just get's icky )

Torsion or expanding/contracting vortices, though, displays the same simultaneous 3-axis dynamic geometry as the expanding/contracting sphere -- think, water going down a drain. And for the geometry sticklers -- a drain-water cyclone or whirlpool funnel approximates half of what's known as a pseudosphere (look it up). OK fine, here.

And what we did in class: I taught two basic images -- the sphere and the drainwater funnel -- and two basic body actions, one expanding, one contracting.

The expanding/contracting sphere (dare I say, the dynamic sphere ) is the pneumatic jack of the lungs and diaphragm writ large. The sphere orients the needed double curvature of the stress applied in the body -- one curve horizontal to the floor and one curve vertical.

The expanding or contracting spiral funnel gives a correct and intuitive image of the linear orientation of applied stress of your own body (intent, if you prefer, again a needlessly confusing image) that creates three axis expansive or contractive effect. I pointed out the the streamlines in the drainwater funnel -- or the vine winding itself around the intersecting limb.

I explained the concept of field action -- like the whirlpool draws those streamlines across the whole surface of the water, or a hurricane 300 miles away can be seen to make clouds right over you circulate the wrong way. The point was to create that intensity of oriented stress dynamic in their body and let its field expand to occupy -- and affect everything connected in the whole interaction.

And like I said -- they got it -- and in one class went from correct body structure, stress orientation (intent), principle of dynamic action, and into a basic applied waza initiated on a point of contact only. They quickly saw for themselves the radical difference between one or two axis stress or rotation and the three axis variety, and toward the end began correcting themselves, when they got it wrong. They could distinguish "an effect" from "the effect," and the conditions necessary to do the one and not the other,

The transverse axis component of expansion (opening the chest) they get easily (once they distinguished this from rotating the waist -- but they tended to confuse the fore-and-aft extension component from the the vertical expansion component when the arm is engaged. To cure this -- I had them practice the vertical expansion compoent in isolation -- holding a jo vertically at full arm extension with one end resting on the floor and lift the end just off the floor using their breath alone. That worked, and then things went swimmingly.

We then practiced the inverse contracting phase also shown by Gleason to kuzushi.

We also played with the second example -- which is a more forthright cutting shear (te giri), exploiting the rotational stress implied in the coupled engagement of the arms -- if you don't try to stop it.

After practicing this to effect kuzushi to the engaged push, we then used the expanding phase we had practiced for the contact kuzushi of ikkyo and the contracting phase as foundation of the cutting mechanism of ikkyo -- and initially without the off-arm engaging uke's shoulder at all, to be sure that the action was correct and not dependent on forcible displacement.

On the last example from Gleason Sensei's video clip, this was IMO an example of the same stress field principle in action. In other words, applying the stress (intent, as you prefer) applicable in a movement elsewhere, the arm engages the uke into the same stress field though the point of contact where it is being restrained. Then the restraint is led where the stress field is directed. We'll play with that one another day, but it is just a different orientation of kokyu tanden ho with a more diffuse contact.

A word on intent. Is this really a useful training tool or image? What does the work is the stress field that enables a movement -- and thus again-- it's not wrong to say "intent" because the body disposes its stress to accommodate an intended action or load bearing activity. Zhan Zhuang sensitizes you to how much of this is going on and constantly. Intent implies that you already know how you are going to have to deal with the load -- and that is just not the case, and unnecessary since the body's mechanisms are more nimble and effective than your voluntary compensations ever could hope to be.

But people can be shown where and how they should be feeling and deploying stress, and people who have not developed good proprioception to begin with may have no idea what kind of felt stress the correct "intent" should exhibit. I think it adds nothing -- and distracts from what proximately causes the effect sought. The point is to introduce this manner of structural effect to the body's own mechanisms and let them eventually take over -- which requires training to build up.

But I do not think they are going to do that without being introduced to it -- and intent implies that they ought to know it before being introduced. Stress in the body can be shown and manipulated to illustrate both error and correction, and so allow the individual to get a correct interpretation of the stress and how to train the body in dealing with it.