When traditionalism goes wrong

I avoid criticizing traditional martial arts for a number of reasons. Probably the main reason I avoid making criticisms is the fact that the net is loaded with tons of "anti-traditional martial arts" commentary and I don't feel that the need to contribute. However, this is not to say traditional martial arts are above criticism. Nothing in the world is above criticism. However, criticism is not an insult if it is deliberate, educated criticism posed at a particular malady.

For many, there is a distinct dislike for the traditional arts because of the lack of effectiveness of the techniques. Bruce Lee applied brilliant criticism to this by pointing out that much of the lack of realism to the techniques derives from a constant process of adding as opposed to refining and that there was a decided lack of realistic training or resistance.

When looking at the traditional arts, the item that seems to undermine much of it is that techniques are often trained based on very deliberate lines (say, constant use of a reverse punch with hands on the hip) and lack of resistance (the person performing the technique does so almost exclusively on a non-resisting opponent)

For example, when you watch many demonstrations of traditional arts, you will see workable throws intermixed with tons of added on, unnecessary and unworkable techniques. This buries the workable techniques into a mass of non-functional material. From this, a bizarre choreographed dance is created with limited resemblance to reality. The conplete lack of clinching, for example, shows that the lack of resistance training has removed reality from the equation of many of these arts. Because the arts are embodied by tradition, the evolution to add realistic training becomes buried in a world of belts, uniforms, mythical founders of the style, etc.

CONTINUED