Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > General

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-29-2010, 05:40 AM   #1
Nicholas Eschenbruch
Dojo: TV Denzlingen
Location: Freiburg
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 308
Germany
Offline
Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

With deliberate one-sidedness (and a broad reference to Amdur, Goldsbury, Hobsbawm & Ranger) I would like to make the proposition that speaking of tradition in aikido is an unneccessary obfuscation that serves to cloud issues rather than clarify them. Let's just do without it.

First of all, Morihei Ueshiba himself was an innovator. If he had been a traditionalist, he would have studied a koryu and remained there. Instead, he expanded and revolutionised the practice of Takeda Sokakus Daito Ruy (which, as Ellis Amdur argues in HIPS, was quite probably an innovation itself). Also, in his spiritual quest, he joined a new religious movement (not an old one), and even went beyond that in his later years. To my knowledge, there are no indications that Ueshiba himself wanted or furthered the creation of a „traditional" canon of aikido.

Second, the giants amongst his close personal students were mostly innovators themselves -- for the simple fact that Ueshiba's practice was too multi-faceted (and in parts even obscure), too complex, and his teaching too unstructured to lend itself to simple copying. Even Saito Sensei states quite clearly that he himself structured (and thus „traditionalised") what he was taught by Ueshiba. Ueshiba simply had no clear practice to copy.

Third, as Keith Larman pointed out in another thread, the spread of aikido was such that „tradition" would mean something completely different in different parts of the world. In Scandinavia, Nishio Sensei's aikido could be called tradition, in Britain Kenshiro Abe's. On the US West coast, ki aikido is tradition, in Germany that came quite late. In France, tradition could be Tadashi Abe's take on aikido. There is no universal tradition in aikido.

That many claims to tradition - from the Scottish bagpipe, sponsored as a nationalist symbol against the Irish harp, to South German "traditional" carnival, institutionalised in many places by the folklorising Nazis - are made to legitimise invention has really been common knowledge in historical research since the eighties. Why should aikido be any different?

Tradition is often just a way of saying my lineage is better than yours.
Tradition is often just a way of claiming unquestioned authority.
Tradition is often just a way of glorifying the old days.

Whoever came up with tradition was an innovator.
What exactly do you mean when you speak of tradition in aikido?
The future of aikido is not „tradition" -- or is it?

Thoughts, opinions, objections?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 05:54 AM   #2
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,910
Spain
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote: View Post
With deliberate one-sidedness (and a broad reference to Amdur, Goldsbury, Hobsbawm & Ranger) I would like to make the proposition that speaking of tradition in aikido is a neccessary obfuscation that serves to cloud issues rather than clarify them.
Fixed

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 06:11 AM   #3
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,000
Japan
Online
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote: View Post
With deliberate one-sidedness (and a broad reference to Amdur, Goldsbury, Hobsbawm & Ranger) I would like to make the proposition that speaking of tradition in aikido is an unneccessary obfuscation that serves to cloud issues rather than clarify them. Let's just do without it.

Thoughts, opinions, objections?
Hello Nicholas,

Would you make a similar judgments about other martial arts or ways, apart from Daito-ryu and aikido? Judo and kendo obviously come to mind here, as do some koryu bujutsu, such as Kashima / Katori Shin / to Ryu.

All good wishes for 2011.

PAG

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 06:12 AM   #4
Nicholas Eschenbruch
Dojo: TV Denzlingen
Location: Freiburg
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 308
Germany
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
Fixed
Oopsss :-)

meant "unneccessary" of course.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 06:17 AM   #5
Nicholas Eschenbruch
Dojo: TV Denzlingen
Location: Freiburg
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 308
Germany
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Peter A Goldsbury wrote: View Post
Hello Nicholas,

Would you make a similar judgments about other martial arts or ways, apart from Daito-ryu and aikido? Judo and kendo obviously come to mind here, as do some koryu bujutsu, such as Kashima / Katori Shin / to Ryu.

All good wishes for 2011.

PAG
Peter (if I may),

I lack knowledge about those arts - though I am following some discussions on German forums about tradition and innovation in Judo. Those debates are very interesting, but overshadowed by a dichotomy between competitive sport vs. martial art, which we mostly dont have in aikido. So the traditionalists there claim to go back to the roots of Jigoro Kano's Judo. I would tend to claim they are re-inventing Judo though, with a lot of conscious and unconscious references to MMA in fact. But then, my knowledge of Kano and what he intended is very limited.

Good wishes for the New Year

N

Last edited by Nicholas Eschenbruch : 12-29-2010 at 06:17 AM. Reason: spelling
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 06:20 AM   #6
Gorgeous George
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 464
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote: View Post
With deliberate one-sidedness (and a broad reference to Amdur, Goldsbury, Hobsbawm & Ranger) I would like to make the proposition that speaking of tradition in aikido is an unneccessary obfuscation that serves to cloud issues rather than clarify them. Let's just do without it.

First of all, Morihei Ueshiba himself was an innovator. If he had been a traditionalist, he would have studied a koryu and remained there. Instead, he expanded and revolutionised the practice of Takeda Sokakus Daito Ruy (which, as Ellis Amdur argues in HIPS, was quite probably an innovation itself). Also, in his spiritual quest, he joined a new religious movement (not an old one), and even went beyond that in his later years. To my knowledge, there are no indications that Ueshiba himself wanted or furthered the creation of a „traditional" canon of aikido.

Second, the giants amongst his close personal students were mostly innovators themselves -- for the simple fact that Ueshiba's practice was too multi-faceted (and in parts even obscure), too complex, and his teaching too unstructured to lend itself to simple copying. Even Saito Sensei states quite clearly that he himself structured (and thus „traditionalised") what he was taught by Ueshiba. Ueshiba simply had no clear practice to copy.

Third, as Keith Larman pointed out in another thread, the spread of aikido was such that „tradition" would mean something completely different in different parts of the world. In Scandinavia, Nishio Sensei's aikido could be called tradition, in Britain Kenshiro Abe's. On the US West coast, ki aikido is tradition, in Germany that came quite late. In France, tradition could be Tadashi Abe's take on aikido. There is no universal tradition in aikido.

That many claims to tradition - from the Scottish bagpipe, sponsored as a nationalist symbol against the Irish harp, to South German "traditional" carnival, institutionalised in many places by the folklorising Nazis - are made to legitimise invention has really been common knowledge in historical research since the eighties. Why should aikido be any different?

Tradition is often just a way of saying my lineage is better than yours.
Tradition is often just a way of claiming unquestioned authority.
Tradition is often just a way of glorifying the old days.

Whoever came up with tradition was an innovator.
What exactly do you mean when you speak of tradition in aikido?
The future of aikido is not „tradition" -- or is it?

Thoughts, opinions, objections?
Thus Spake Zarathustra.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 07:01 AM   #7
Adam Huss
 
Adam Huss's Avatar
Location: Ohio
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 656
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

I've always felt M. Ueshiba, and others, trained in a rigorous traditional manner before striking out on their own and becoming innovative. Having that solid, "standardized" background where core basics (like "spiritual" and self development....we are talking "do" not "jutsu" after all) creates a base from which one can eventually start making the art their own. I've always felt those who try to start their training where the greats finished, risk pursuing a hollow practice of the art that only plays lip service to its original intent; growth and self-development, vice actually developing these attributes through the struggle and difficulties that must be overcome in traditionalism-based training. But that's what I pursue in my training...I say whatever training one feels is the equivalent worth of their time and money is just fine for them. Everyone trains for their own reasons, after all.

Ichi Go, Ichi Ei!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 07:34 AM   #8
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,910
Spain
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote: View Post
Oopsss :-)

meant "unneccessary" of course.
You wrote unnecessary. The "fixed" was somewhat in jest.

I think obfuscation is necessary.

BTW, have you read Green "Sense in Nonsense: The Role of Folk History in the Martial Arts" in Martial Arts in the Modern World or Inoue Shun "The Invention of the Martial Arts: Kanō Jigorō and Kōdōkan Judo" in Mirror of Modernity: Invented Traditions of Modern Japan.?

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 09:15 AM   #9
DarkShodan
Dojo: Shuurin Dojo - Omaha, Nebarska
Location: Omaha
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 157
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Interesting. I have had a few students from another dojo come into our dojo and tell me "I practice traditional Aikido. You don't really do Aikido, rather what you do is Hawaiian Aikido." To be honest this really insults me and my school. So I try to practice what my Sensei taught me by asking them to explain to me what is the difference between traditional Aikido and our Hawaiian Non-Aikido. I cannot get a straight answer from these people. I realize this is an idea and an attitude being passed on by their sensei, very unfortunate.

What we try is to preserve the Japanese Traditions that are a part of Aikido. IMHO Aikido is a moving concept not a rigid set of techniques. I have experienced many arts and the concepts are the same. Even in the hard style striking arts, once you get past the kata and forms, you need to expand to find the techniques within the techniques. Find the block within the strike, and the strike within the block. If you are perfecting the kata or form for the sake of the kata, then I think you're missing the point.

Victims, aren't we all.
-- Eric Draven
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 09:51 AM   #10
dave9nine
Dojo: Aikido Institute - Oakland
Location: Oakland
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 80
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Adam Huss wrote: View Post
I've always felt M. Ueshiba, and others, trained in a rigorous traditional manner before striking out on their own and becoming innovative. Having that solid, "standardized" background where core basics (like "spiritual" and self development....we are talking "do" not "jutsu" after all) creates a base from which one can eventually start making the art their own. I've always felt those who try to start their training where the greats finished, risk pursuing a hollow practice of the art that only plays lip service to its original intent; growth and self-development, vice actually developing these attributes through the struggle and difficulties that must be overcome in traditionalism-based training. But that's what I pursue in my training...I say whatever training one feels is the equivalent worth of their time and money is just fine for them. Everyone trains for their own reasons, after all.
well said.

i think the spirit behind the thoughts of the OP is good--aikido is an alive art and thus it necessarily should have room to grow...
but, it seems immensly important to put oneself through the same training as the person(s) who we hold up as models.

im always pondering this "tradition" thing, and i imagine i always will....while innovation is good, i shudder at the thought of someone walking into a dojo and saying "it's great that you guys have been training like this for so many years, but after you allow me to join, i think ill go ahead and follow my own model that i just thought of..."
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 09:56 AM   #11
Nicholas Eschenbruch
Dojo: TV Denzlingen
Location: Freiburg
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 308
Germany
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
BTW, have you read Green "Sense in Nonsense: The Role of Folk History in the Martial Arts" in Martial Arts in the Modern World or Inoue Shun "The Invention of the Martial Arts: Kanō Jigorō and Kōdōkan Judo" in Mirror of Modernity: Invented Traditions of Modern Japan.?
No, but will as soon as the martial arts books budget allows - which may be a while
Thanks!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 10:03 AM   #12
Nicholas Eschenbruch
Dojo: TV Denzlingen
Location: Freiburg
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 308
Germany
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Dave Lewin wrote: View Post
well said.

i think the spirit behind the thoughts of the OP is good--aikido is an alive art and thus it necessarily should have room to grow...
but, it seems immensly important to put oneself through the same training as the person(s) who we hold up as models.

im always pondering this "tradition" thing, and i imagine i always will....while innovation is good, i shudder at the thought of someone walking into a dojo and saying "it's great that you guys have been training like this for so many years, but after you allow me to join, i think ill go ahead and follow my own model that i just thought of..."
Agree, it's a very fine line to walk - but, just to make sure, I was not questioning the importance of rigorous structured training, neither was I advocating laissez-faire and fantasising oneself to be a master already. It's sort of interesting that should come up as reaction.

Is rigourous structured training necessarily "traditional"? Or is it maybe just what a good teacher in a credible lineage teaches as basics, regardless of "tradition"? What I am contemplating is, sort of, the side-effects of the use of the word tradition.

Or, in a different perspective again, is shu-ha-ri a one generation thing, or does it involve several generations' tradition?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 10:10 AM   #13
C. David Henderson
Location: Santa Fe New Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 606
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
I think obfuscation is necessary.
There is a lot potentially lurking in that sentence -- I've the feeling designedly so, although it's been left a bit obscure, as if in illustration....



Happy New Year to all.

David Henderson
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 10:16 AM   #14
SeiserL
 
SeiserL's Avatar
Dojo: Roswell Budokan, Kyushinkan Dojo, Aikido World Alliance
Location: Roswell, GA USA
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,715
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

IMHO, simplistically, saying I have no tradition would mean I have not history, no lineage, no established path I am following lead by those who came before me.

I am not that talented or innovative (or egotistical) to think it starts with me or that I could come up with this stuff on my own..

Tradition is not an unnecessary obscurity, but an appreciated clarity.

Lynn Seiser PhD
Yondan Aikido & FMA/JKD
We do not rise to the level of our expectations, but fall to the level of our training. Train well. KWATZ!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 10:51 AM   #15
Keith Larman
Location: California
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,556
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Nicholas:

I think you have an interesting point. I would further it by saying that we must be careful to distinguish which meaning we're using when we say traditional. We can talk about our Aikido as being part of the Aikido tradition meaning we're saying we come from a defined lineage that goes back to the founder of Aikido. As you pointed out (and as I mentioned elsewhere) those traditions tended to have different "nodes" along the way depending on who introduced Aikido in various locations.

The second meaning of "traditional" is subtly different. Some use the word to signify a claim of "correctness" of authenticity with what was "actually" being done by O-Sensei. This is quite a different usage of the term. The prior usage implies that the "lineage" simply goes back to Ueshiba Morihei. The latter usage implies that there is some "way" that is in fact more correct or more authentic than others. This latter view of course begs a lot of questions of how you define such a thing.

I wouldn't challenge tradition in the prior sense. It is in essence a term used somewhat similarly to saying one has a lineage that can be verified and traced back to the founder. The latter sense is a loaded usage of the term which carries implications of correctness, right/wrong, validity and authenticity independent of lineage. The latter involves a series of value-judgments about what is correct, what is right, etc. Of course there may very well be value in discussing the latter case as well. And I think that is an ongoing discussion and lately the work of Mr. Amdur as well as Dr. Goldsbury are shedding a tremendous amount of light on those points.

So... A "traditional" form of aikido (first sense -- lineage) may not be accepted by all as "traditional" (the latter sense - doing what it is perceived that the founder was *really* doing).

All that said, to those who dismiss much of Aikido as not being traditional in the latter sense, I really don't have much to say or argue about as any disagreement is really about the very nature of what Aikido *is* or *was* or *should be*. I think that is an open question and there are sincere people who believe very different things for very good reasons of their own.

So I'm left in a weird limbo. I feel that that Aikido morphed into a wide variety of things and continues to do so. *I* personally have some very strong opinions about what it *should* be, but I don't begrudge those who are following different paths themselves. I've said it many times -- the biggest strength of Aikido was its ability to reach far and wide gaining tremendous popularity. But at the same time that is its greatest weakness -- it became virtually all things to all people.

Back to work for me. Enough deep thoughts for one day.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 11:07 AM   #16
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,910
Spain
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote: View Post
No, but will as soon as the martial arts books budget allows - which may be a while
Thanks!
Meanwhile, you can try the previews in amazon and googlebooks to get a gist of them.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 05:04 PM   #17
Adam Huss
 
Adam Huss's Avatar
Location: Ohio
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 656
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote: View Post
Agree, it's a very fine line to walk - but, just to make sure, I was not questioning the importance of rigorous structured training, neither was I advocating laissez-faire and fantasising oneself to be a master already. It's sort of interesting that should come up as reaction.

Is rigourous structured training necessarily "traditional"? Or is it maybe just what a good teacher in a credible lineage teaches as basics, regardless of "tradition"? What I am contemplating is, sort of, the side-effects of the use of the word tradition.

Or, in a different perspective again, is shu-ha-ri a one generation thing, or does it involve several generations' tradition?
Good distinction. In my experience the two are synonymous but, of course, my experience is limited. Doing shihonage or warmups the way Shioda, Saito, or whomever taught it doesn't necessarily mean you are doing traditional aikido....its the way in which training is conducted and transferred to the students. Maybe replace the term 'traditional' with 'serious' study. You can certainly get some value out of training in a passive manner. For my training, however, I find I get more value out of highly involved, rigorous training where there are elements of risk, adversity, difficulty, and perseverance to overcome any personal limitations....in other words working to eliminate imperfections. The analogy being a student who is an unfinished sword, whose teacher is a knowledgable and talented sword smith that works with the student to polish away imperfections....and a teacher who works to know each student well enough to guide some level of their training to suit their individual needs. I equate this to traditional aikido, but again, the term traditional is just a word...its how training is gone about that counts. More so than the actual techniques.

Ichi Go, Ichi Ei!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 07:33 PM   #18
graham christian
Dojo: golden center aikido-highgate
Location: london
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,697
England
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Hi Nicholas,
The future of Aikido being tradition or not?

I would say you look at the various aspects of your Aikido and see which parts are tradition and which parts are innovations.

Do you wear traditional Aikido Gi or an Hakama? You may get innovative and wear a hat as well.

Do you call the names of the techniques in japanese? Why?

Do you bow? The point is I guarantee you will keep certain traditions no matter how innovative you feel you are being and I also guarantee you will innovate no matter how traditional you think you are being.

I think you probably disagree with people becoming too robotic or like sheep rather than what you said. (Just my opinion)

Hope this is added food for thought.

Happy new year. G.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 08:11 PM   #19
Lyle Laizure
 
Lyle Laizure's Avatar
Dojo: Hinode Dojo LLC
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 560
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Tradition is passed from one generation to another either by direct transmission, like those that trained directly with O'Sensei, or indirectly by those that train with someone that trained directly with O'Sensei or with someone who trained with someone who trained with O'Sensei and so on. Most of us are in the latter. For those of us who did train directly with O'Sensei we have to rely on what our sensei shares with us. This is from their interpretation, their understanding of what they learned from their sensei who taught them from their interpretation and understanding of what they were taught. I think it can be like playing the telephone game sometimes.

I beleive I teach traditional martial arts at my dojo but I am sure that I do not teach in a traditional manner at all times.

Lyle Laizure
www.hinodedojo.com
Deru kugi wa uta reru
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 09:33 PM   #20
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,113
United_States
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Any time "traditional" comes up I have to wonder at which tradition; How far back do they mean? Every tradition changes somewhat over time, some more slowly than others. Tradition is just the name we give to describe the things that were done before us; innovation is just the name we give to things we didn't know about before their invention (e.g. When my dad was a kid, he invented the bow and arrow; he was innovative for his situation, despite the fact that the concept had existed for thousands of years elsewhere).
Space flight innovative? I heard about some stuff that happened long long ago in a place far far away that makes our space flight look a bit weak.

Last edited by mathewjgano : 12-29-2010 at 09:36 PM.

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2010, 01:36 AM   #21
dps
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,169
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote: View Post
With deliberate one-sidedness (and a broad reference to Amdur, Goldsbury, Hobsbawm & Ranger) I would like to make the proposition that speaking of tradition in aikido is an unneccessary obfuscation that serves to cloud issues rather than clarify them. Let's just do without it.
There are no traditions in Aikido.

There are traditions in the Japanese culture that Aikido was created in and some try to obeserve these traditions as a part of Aikido.

The martial art of O'Sense is an eclectic modern art with no traditions.

David
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2010, 02:10 AM   #22
Tony Wagstaffe
Location: Winchester
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,211
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Tradition is something passed on...... things do get added, changed, chucked out, in the course of time......

It's a bit like names. The "traditional" thing is to pass it on to your offspring, unless they hate your guts and get it changed......
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2010, 02:20 AM   #23
Randall Lim
Dojo: Tendoryu Aikido Singapore
Location: Singapore
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 94
Singapore
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote: View Post
With deliberate one-sidedness (and a broad reference to Amdur, Goldsbury, Hobsbawm & Ranger) I would like to make the proposition that speaking of tradition in aikido is an unneccessary obfuscation that serves to cloud issues rather than clarify them. Let's just do without it.

First of all, Morihei Ueshiba himself was an innovator. If he had been a traditionalist, he would have studied a koryu and remained there. Instead, he expanded and revolutionised the practice of Takeda Sokakus Daito Ruy (which, as Ellis Amdur argues in HIPS, was quite probably an innovation itself). Also, in his spiritual quest, he joined a new religious movement (not an old one), and even went beyond that in his later years. To my knowledge, there are no indications that Ueshiba himself wanted or furthered the creation of a „traditional" canon of aikido.

Second, the giants amongst his close personal students were mostly innovators themselves -- for the simple fact that Ueshiba's practice was too multi-faceted (and in parts even obscure), too complex, and his teaching too unstructured to lend itself to simple copying. Even Saito Sensei states quite clearly that he himself structured (and thus „traditionalised") what he was taught by Ueshiba. Ueshiba simply had no clear practice to copy.

Third, as Keith Larman pointed out in another thread, the spread of aikido was such that „tradition" would mean something completely different in different parts of the world. In Scandinavia, Nishio Sensei's aikido could be called tradition, in Britain Kenshiro Abe's. On the US West coast, ki aikido is tradition, in Germany that came quite late. In France, tradition could be Tadashi Abe's take on aikido. There is no universal tradition in aikido.

That many claims to tradition - from the Scottish bagpipe, sponsored as a nationalist symbol against the Irish harp, to South German "traditional" carnival, institutionalised in many places by the folklorising Nazis - are made to legitimise invention has really been common knowledge in historical research since the eighties. Why should aikido be any different?

Tradition is often just a way of saying my lineage is better than yours.
Tradition is often just a way of claiming unquestioned authority.
Tradition is often just a way of glorifying the old days.

Whoever came up with tradition was an innovator.
What exactly do you mean when you speak of tradition in aikido?
The future of aikido is not „tradition" -- or is it?

Thoughts, opinions, objections?
In my opinion, O'Sensei's own personal style changed, refined & evolved over the many phases of his life. Along with this continual refinement, came along changes in the "original tradition" which he started.

As O'Sensei took in a number of live-in students in the different phases of his life, each of these students took back with himself the "tradition" with O'Sensei imparted at that particular stage in his life. The "tradition" which each student took back would then be different.

In my opinion, Aikido has not real tradition. It is understanding, practising & passing on its Essence that really matters.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2010, 02:48 AM   #24
Ellis Amdur
Location: Seattle
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 815
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

This question has so many ramifications.
Koryu is usually considered a "living museum piece" - inviolate, unchanged. Some are maintained that way. Others, however, are not. I have participated in the renovation of old kata, and the creation of new kata in two ryu. I've seen other ryu do the same. When I practice outside, (sometimes in the rain and the ground gets wet), we usually wear shoes and street clothes (just as the bushi did back when kimono and hakama were street clothes. But what point is too much? I use weapons made of woods the Japanese never used, and construction methods the same (laminated spears of vera wood, for example). But "improving" a kusarigama by changing the chain to piano wire, for example, just seems wrong. When one asserts that one is attempting to train in "combatively sound" methods, then what is one doing with weapons that were archaic 500 years ago? At what point would my Araki-ryu no longer be Araki-ryu? Shall I replace bokken with aluminum baseball bats? If not, why not? To be quite honest, it's hard to explain why not? The maintenance of tradition (the clothes, the etiquette, the roots in Japanese culture) circumscribes the art in a way that enables one to use kan - a kind of intuitive sense - to say, "that's not x-ryu." I remember when I was detailed to revive some kusarigama kata for Toda-ha Buko-ryu, and after a year, showed them to Nitta sensei, and she said, "Buko-ryu rashiku-nai n desu ga . . ." which mean, "It somehow doesn't have the essential quality of Buko-ryu." It took me another half-year to extinguish what she correctly perceived as subtle contaminants from Araki-ryu. Paradoxically, the kata were, in some senses, stronger in the original version, but the latter version contributed to the development of technique throughout ALL the techniques of the school in a way that the former did not.
Aikido Nicholas, in his original note, outlined the critique on tradition well. But here is the problem. Yokomen-uchi, Shomen-uchi, tsuki, etc. Ushiro-dori (double wrist grab from behind), ryote-mochi (two hands on one wrist grab), etc.
If one says, "Well, we don't need the keikko gi and hakama, and the bowing in and the Japanese formalism, then why the impractical attacks, which are very culture bound. [I think that if one did abandon all of that, you'd have something like Systema].
However, if my theory of HIPS is correct, then the formalism is, in fact, necessary. Those particular attacks and techniques are for the purpose of a) softening all the joints, as Ueshiba M. stated b) developing the kind of ki/kokyu that Ueshiba M. manifested.
In a way, the cultural formalism creates, for both non-Japanese and Japanese a feeling of being "somewhere else," outside of day-to-day life, with it's considerations of street boxing and aluminum baseball bats. It becomes a kind of a laboratory, where one can possibly study "something else," that is only possible when one abandons the logic of the modern day exercise physiology, combat sport world. Terry Dobson retorted to other uchi-deshi, who criticized him for training with Wang Shu Chin, "I don't want to be Osensei's student. I want to BE Osensei." Maybe, just maybe, the tradition is necessary to make that possible. . .. to be sure, there are other ways of training in internal strength, but Morihei's particular amalgam of skills may require tradition.

Ellis Amdur

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2010, 03:32 AM   #25
Nicholas Eschenbruch
Dojo: TV Denzlingen
Location: Freiburg
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 308
Germany
Offline
Re: Challenging notions of "tradition" in aikido

Quote:
Ellis Amdur wrote: View Post
This question has so many ramifications.
(...)
The maintenance of tradition (the clothes, the etiquette, the roots in Japanese culture) circumscribes the art in a way that enables one to use kan - a kind of intuitive sense - to say, "that's not x-ryu." I remember when I was detailed to revive some kusarigama kata for Toda-ha Buko-ryu, and after a year, showed them to Nitta sensei, and she said, "Buko-ryu rashiku-nai n desu ga . . ." which mean, "It somehow doesn't have the essential quality of Buko-ryu." It took me another half-year to extinguish what she correctly perceived as subtle contaminants from Araki-ryu. Paradoxically, the kata were, in some senses, stronger in the original version, but the latter version contributed to the development of technique throughout ALL the techniques of the school in a way that the former did not.
(...)
Ellis Amdur
That is a very intriguing direction, thank you very much! So, in addition to the two very helpful meanings of tradition that Keith outlined, I would like to expand your point into a third one (reminding me of a dormant academic hobby, "social aesthetics"): an insistence on tradition could be an insistence on wanting to pass on all the elements of an art - not only its techniques thought of in a utilitarian sense, but its whole presentation: the atmosphere of the space it is practiced in, its manners, bodily attitudes, and the like. All its elements that are sensuous, felt, possibly pre-linguistic, yet make an essential contribution to the art in ways that one possibly only understands much later on. Its style, in a way, its aesthetics in an older sense of the term. Sorry for the rambling, this is by definition difficult to put into words.

Of course, that would assume one studies with a teacher who embodied all that, which in Koryu may be the norm, but in aikido, for reasons discussed very often, is rarely the case.

Thanks, everybody, for a very interesting discussion, and all the best for your life and training in 2011.

Last edited by Nicholas Eschenbruch : 12-30-2010 at 03:34 AM. Reason: Distinguish own stuff from previous post more clearly....
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Aikido DVDs and Video Downloads - by George Ledyard Sensei & other great teachers from AikidoDVDS.Com



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I'm Leaving Aikido Daniel Ranger-Holt General 122 10-07-2010 08:01 PM
Steven Seagal Interview ad_adrian General 45 01-15-2010 03:34 PM
The continued Evolution of Aikido salim General 716 12-27-2008 10:00 PM
Baseline skillset eyrie Non-Aikido Martial Traditions 1633 05-23-2008 01:35 PM
For Ted Ehara - Boundary of your aikido? billybob General 123 12-18-2006 04:52 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:12 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate