Quote:
John Powell wrote:
The O/P said, "Based on this definition, It is my opinion that aikido is primarily a striking art."
To which I'd respond, maybe your aikido is, mine isn't. I understand your logical basis and I think it is sound in the direction it is going. However, unless you define when I put my hand on someone to find them/feel them and their direction of movmeent and intent (fast or slow, I don't care) as a "strike" then I think what I do is more akin to grappling than striking.
Note, I can strike plenty good if/when the opportunity would present itself, but I don't think of that as very aiki, as that sort of impact doesn't seem "blendy" to me at all, except in the motorized sense.
|
How would it change your views if I clarified the meaning of 'striking' as being more offensive, regardless of whatever medium (fist, foot, grasp) through which aiki is expressed, rather than being a defensive art as most aikidoka would state of aikido? And as a result of this offensive nature, most of the techniques like ikkyo for example, are meant than as an offensive strike and their movements are exaggerated for training's sake?