View Single Post
Old 07-11-2006, 03:00 PM   #184
CNYMike
Dojo: Aikido of Central New York
Location: Cortland, NY
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,005
United_States
Offline
Re: Brawling with a friend

Quote:
Don Magee wrote:
..... I have two students in two classes. Each one learning aikido. One learns the way I was taught.

The teacher comes into class, says "Tonight we will being working on ikkyo", then he shows the technique.They have a partner shomen strike and they apply ikkyo. Reset, repeat, over and over. Eventually we move on to a new technique. At the end of the night there is a traditional 3 man randori and we work the jo kata.

The other learns in a environment similar to the training method I am talking about. The teacher comes in and says "Tonight we are going to learn about defenses against punches. What are some ways we can deal with punches? The student brings up ikkyo, and is asked to demonstrate it .....
My first question to you: How did he learn what ikkyo was in the first place?

Quote:
A few other students demonstrate some ways they know to deal with punches. Any obvious flaws are corrected, and they are told to partner up and explore punch defenses. The students start with static drills just like the first example, they throw static strikes and work their technique. Only some are working on ikkyo, some are working on other things. The teacher is there to monitor and give advice as needed, but lets the students help each other. He only steps in if the students just don't get it, are taking a course against the philosophy of aikido, or ask him directly. This static drilling goes on for 5 minutes. This ends the inquiry phase. The teacher then moves them to dynamic drilling. The students throw punches of random types at their partner, the partner is required to defend. This starts with static position, then the uke starts to move about, changing his angle of attack requiring tori to adjust his position and be more aware of his movement. Finally the uke resists the technique as it is applied at 25%, allowing the technique to work, but resisting any obvious flaws (such as being able to simply step out of a technique, or pull your arm out). At this point there are some obvious flaws and questions the students will have, so we end the isolation stage go back to the inquiry stage and start again. The teacher goes over the approaches he watched and gives suggestions for improvement, perhaps he demo's a technique or two. Finally at the end of the night we have some form of randori/sparing to fully integrate the lesson into the student.(a 3 on one randori where the goal of the attackers is to tie up nage and pin him to the ground would be good)"
Thak you! Remember I asked you if the I-method could be adapted to the kind of semi-free practice in Aikido. Apparently the answer is yes.

Quote:
How does the student lose the philosophy by training in the second method? How is the students learning suffering? .....
He won't if the instructor has been careful about it. When it comes to what you do on your own time, that's your own business. When it comes to teaching a formalized system, it's not about just you anymore. You may roll your eyes at debating whether that method should be used, but the question is there. It has to be answered. You may ignore it or give it an automatic yes but it is there. If one is a teacher in a formalized martial arts sytem, one has obligations to his seniors, his instructors, and to the system. Maybe he can do whatever he wants; maybe he can't. Or maybe he can as long as he does some other things. But those issues are there. On your own time, do whatever. Within a system, you have other concerns.

Quote:
.... I never disagreed with that. I have said that the training method doesn't disrupt the philosophy, but that they are two distinct things that can be taught in a variety of ways.
That's the problem. In Aikido, the philosophy isn't separate from the techniques but integrated with them; students internalize the philosophy by doing it. If you use an I-method, you have to maintane that integration. So you'd have to have a pretty good understanding of Aikido from the inside to "reverse engineer" and use the I-method. It's not a quesiton of reading a tract by O Sensei and then teaching joint locks and throws; teaching the joint locks and throws is meant to impart the philosophy. If the techniques lose the quality that makes them Aikido techniques, then the training method doesn't matter. It's not Aikido anymore.

So I'm not saying "We must never use the I-method because of tradition!" I am saying that someone who wants to try the I-method has to address many issues and be careful about it so at the end of the day, he's still teaching Aikido.

Let me try and sum this up. I think may formalized martila arts are the way they are because they face several issues. Having someone with some cool moves is the easy part. And let's assume they work:

1. Can you teach it to people with with no previous experience? TO someone who hasn't worked on motor skills since he learned to walk? You have to make life easy for beginners. In the case of Aikido, that's one reason, I think, why katate dori is used a lot: It's a simple, straightforward reference point. Whether you are teaching boxing, BJJ, or whatever, you have to make life easier for the new people. But then there's another level:

2. Can you teach people to teach other people without any help from you? Some of your students may become teachers, and their students become teachers, and so forth. 200 years after you die, can someone else teach Dan Magee Ryu to someone else? That's why I said martial arts are meant to be passed down.

Now, here's the kicker:

3. Can you do 1 and 2 at the same time?

That's where drills, exercises, and forms come in. You are not just teaching them the technques but teaching the formalized system they can use to teach others, at the same time. And even then:

4. Can 1-3 preserve the goals and intentions of the founder?

This is where things get tricky. This is why you have to be careful. If you use a new method and take the system away from what the founder wanted, you've failed; your not doing that system. If you are true to what the founder wanted in the course of using a new mothd, then you have succeeded. That assumes the method itself doesn't go against what the founder wanted; then you've got problems.

So, you want my final answet to "Can the I-method be used to teach Aikido?"

My answer: Maybe, but it's probably a bit trickier than you think it is.
  Reply With Quote