Re: Pain - How Important?
I think I would like to address some of the comments I've seen here from my perspective.
First, pain is not required for effective technique. However, nage has a burden to illustrate the risk of non-compliance is not attractive. Nage has the burden of convincing uke there is a 100% percent chance uke will not "win" in continued interaction. Discomfort is a consequence of a poor decision, not the cause of the decision.
Second, pain is a subjective term and therefore volitile as an indicator of success. Pain is a symptom of the technique, not the cause. Applying nikyo to weakend wrist is much easier than applying the same technique to healthy strong wrist. Pain thresholds differ between students. All of these variable responses change uke's risk analysis and therefore the ultimate decision to comply (or not). Is nikyo successful if it causes pain? No, nikyo is successfull if it solicits compliance. I have never seen good aikido technique that could not cause discomfort [pain]; I have seen plenty of bad technique that could not cause discomfort.
Third, good technique creates risk for uke, the risk solicits a response. You need good mechanics in addition to a host of other elements for successful technique, and part of the mechanics is creating jeopardy for uke. As Janet said, she complied with nage because she felt her wrist was in jeopardy of being damanged. Do you think it is really important whether the nikyo was perfect? Nope. Nage has some homework to perform a better nikyo, but the technique was successful.
I don't think the decision to cause pain lies with nage. To debate whether nage should cause pain is incorrect. In other words, nage would not debate the following question, "should I hurt uke when I do nikyo?"
The decision to receive pain lies with uke. If uke chooses to stand there while nage cranks on nikyo, god bless 'em. In other words, the question from uke should be, "why should I resist nikyo if it causes pain?"