|
Post by justin520 on Feb 28, 2015 18:09:59 GMT
I saw this video (below), that claims to be a bujinkan demo covering odachi, tsurugi ken, and katana. The dude looks like he's using a jian. Now I suspect some bullshido is at play but I'm not sure. Would it have been something you'd see in Japans feudal periods (a jian), would the "ninja" train for its use? This seems out of place.
|
|
|
Post by Rob C on Mar 1, 2015 0:20:05 GMT
Disclaimer: not an expert on Japanese matters but I know a few things, take everything I'm going to say as an opinion.
On the techniques: to me it seems like a combination of bullshido and authentic techniques. A few examples of what I think is bullshido are found on the following times of the video:
00:10 00:19 1:21 (the first part of the technique I find it ok, what makes me scratch my head is the second) 1:38 1:43
It's not so much about that you can't do those things, I just think those in particular could be done in much more efficient ways and faster or are outright bull and there's no reason to use those. Most of the rest of the techniques seem to make sense. However I noticed that those which used the swords that seem foreign to Japanese swordsmanship presented the most bull.
On the swords: From what I know, in the very early period of Japanese history there were straight swords which borrowed heavily on Chinese designs, however not so much that I would call them a jian or something, there were chokutos which were straight but they were single edged and looked nothing like jians, they looked more like very thin and straightened daos. I didn't see any ninja-to on the video but I might have missed one, in any case there is no evidence of existence of ninja-tos during the historical periods of japan until the 20th century that I know of.
Bottom-line: In my opinion, some combination of bull with authentic techniques with a weird choice of weapons which could be due to availability or just marketing or whatever. Let's see what those who are more knowledgable on Japanese martial arts have to say.
|
|
|
Post by justin520 on Mar 1, 2015 0:28:23 GMT
This isn't the only bujinkan jian stuff I found btw.
|
|
|
Post by justin520 on Mar 1, 2015 0:34:25 GMT
Also I'm large in part self trained (manuals and sparring) and that $#!+ at 19 seconds just looked hilarious.
|
|
|
Post by Rob C on Mar 1, 2015 0:43:27 GMT
Unfortunately it seems that asian martial arts, particularly Korean, Chinese and above all Japanese are filled with more bull than any other martial arts, not because the martial arts themselves are wrong but because of people trying to capitalize on the wow factor and they sometimes use exotic weapons and weird techniques that look flashy. I wouldn't be surprised if more than one has done the same thing.
And yah, 00:19 is the absolute worst of the video XD
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Mar 1, 2015 1:24:00 GMT
In Hatsumi's old video Ken, Tachi, Katana, his ken is a ring-pommel straight dao (with filled-in ring). Basically, a Tang dao or Korean Three Kingdoms dao. I don't the source of their tradition for this. If they're doing jian these days (and apparently 2013 was some kind of "Year of the Jian" in the Buj), then that's newer. Whether they're just doing straight dao stuff with it, or have new material, I don't know. Watch and see if they use the false/back edge.
No surprise to see silly stuff in demos and compliant drills. There are silly applications in well-respected Chinese swordsmanship books (applications for moves from forms which require the opponent to attack at the wrong range, etc.). So no surprise to see silly stuff in Chinese swordsmanship demos and compliant drills from the Buj.
|
|
|
Post by Jussi Ekholm on Mar 1, 2015 11:11:11 GMT
Bujinkan is modern art, I think you should take a look into it's history. Not wanting to put it down but I would look historical stuff elsewhere.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 14:42:19 GMT
Not to defend Bujinkan stuff or anything, but there's nothing wrong with compliant drills. If you're trying to show how something works, then somebody trying to thwart you before you can work it out by the numbers is pointless, it is training not a duel simulator. Jump into everybody fighting each other before they have basics handled and you end up with a sloppy mess. See just about any tournament video for reference. Techniques exist within a context, in order to practice anything both people are in agreement that they are working together. Some of the worst people to train with treat techniques like competition where they "win" by either executing their technique or by preventing the other person from doing so. An absolutely toxic attitude.
The compliance aspect isn't really an issue for me, there's something else that makes it "silly". Shidachi is not countering uchidachi in time, nor is he controlling uchidachi in some manner that would allow him the interval to make his separate action. Uchidachi swings and then arbitrarily arrests his own movement.
There's a marked difference between the clip in the first post and the one Jussi provided. Whatever you think of Hatsumi or Bujinkan in general, he doesn't seem to be making that error at least.
As far as the weapons go, whatever. If Hatsumi wants to include pitchforks in his curriculum it's his purview to do so.
|
|
|
Post by justin520 on Mar 1, 2015 15:09:42 GMT
It's not compliant drills that I found to be bs, I know the importance of that. It's just some of the moves done were actually dubious. You'd die if you tried them in conflict.
I'm not against bujinkan doing whatever non Japanese blades they like, I just wanna know the lineage of it and if Chinese swords could've existed in Edo.
|
|
|
Post by LG Martial Arts on Mar 1, 2015 15:54:20 GMT
Training using compliant drills is necessary at earlier stages of martial arts development. Once the person is versed in the techniques, he/she can start free form sparring/randori. The skills learned in paired compliant drills allows one to gain insight about what to do in certain situations. On a related note, what happens when a skilled opponent meets up with an unskilled (yet potentially larger) opponent? Check this vid out
|
|
LiamBoyle
Member
Fechtmeister the Clueless of H.A.S.C.
Posts: 478
|
Post by LiamBoyle on Mar 1, 2015 16:43:36 GMT
It's not compliant drills that I found to be bs, I know the importance of that. It's just some of the moves done were actually dubious. You'd die if you tried them in conflict. I'm not against bujinkan doing whatever non Japanese blades they like, I just wanna know the lineage of it and if Chinese swords could've existed in Edo. The Japanese originally used Chinese weapons before developing their own variations, and the jian has been around since the Han dynasty app 206 BC to 220 AD. So, some folks in Japan training with Chinese swords at any period is not mutch of a stretch. Not defending the vid per se but a Jian or Dao in Japan isn't all that unrealistic.
|
|
|
Post by justin520 on Mar 1, 2015 16:55:42 GMT
That's where I was trying to go with this. It seems if civilians wanted illegal swords maybe acquiring them through Ryukyuan trade was best. This probably resulted in some dao and jian being available.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 17:09:36 GMT
Whether something works in conflict is often times beside the point. Without knowing what these guys are trying to accomplish, or more importantly, what they are hoping to instill in their students, it's futile conjecture. This is a big part of why trying to build a repertoire of techniques from a salad bar approach of grabbing a little from here and a little from there isn't the best idea, context matters a lot!
Training does a lot more than lock in "IF X THEN DO Y ELSE Z" pre-programmed routines.
Doing scales improves musicianship, but when somebody worth listening to gets up on stage they don't just blast one text book scale after another from the muscle memory or whatever, that would be absurd. Fighting and training are two different things.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Mar 1, 2015 20:46:06 GMT
Not to defend Bujinkan stuff or anything, but there's nothing wrong with compliant drills. Of course (if they're not mis-used). They're an important first step. A potential problem is that "technique works in a compliant drill" doesn't mean that the technique actually works. In the example here, that potential problem has been realised. If the attacker is trying to actual hit the defender, and will act realistically instead of freezing in place to let the defender dance around and counter, that kind of "technique" won't survive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 22:22:32 GMT
We'd have to know what they were trying to do to be able to draw any conclusions on whether it's viable or not. We're looking at a particular moment in time without any context. For all we know they're talking about footwork and whatever flourish he does with his hands or the sword is beside the point. Or it could be terrible sword work. To be fair, it most likely is, so we're not necessarily in disagreement here especially with this particular example. Sometimes, some videos just aren't very good at conveying information.
I don't like that the second guy just freezes there without a reason - if the Shihan there had locked him up or even just simply struck him or something, it would make sense that the attacker would need a moment to either free himself or recover which would allow the interval for the follow up attacks, but that is not a specific problem to bujinkan stuff, you see that kind of thing all over the place.
Solving that actually isn't as simple might seem. If the second guy is going to follow up his unsuccessful attack, then there can be a psychological game where he already knows whatever he's going to open with won't work so he doesn't present the attack with sincere power or distancing, giving himself a little "extra" so he can land that second or third attack. He becomes preoccupied with what he might do to the detriment of whatever they are trying to work on there and then, either consciously or subconsciously. That can bend, or even break, the context for what you were trying to do in the first place. If you're fighting someone, then it probably makes sense to thwart their efforts. If you're showing up to class to sabotage the training (and if you haven't encountered someone that does this you're lucky!) then what's the point of showing up in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by Rob C on Mar 2, 2015 7:09:08 GMT
What bugs me about this particular video is not so much the compliance, certain degree of compliance is necessary on early stages. What bugs me is that a few of those techniques are quite suspicious looking (not all of them, I actually liked one or two).
On the other hand I wouldn't be surprised if some wako pirate or something got their hands on a jian or a dao, what should be the question is how often would this happen and if it has an actually relationship with bujinkan or not. I tend to believe that it has not. I could be wrong but there are some points pointing that it is actually the case.
Availability is the main factor, for quite a long time certain weapons were restricted in japan and also trade so probably getting a foreign sword would be hard to obtain since the Heian period or even before (I'm not sure, not an expert).
The sheer amount of charlatans on asian martial arts, not all are bad, definitely there are some valuable people but there is also a fair share of charlatans.
I would not criticize bujinkan by being modern as long as it is WELL RESEARCHED, I cannot comment on that because my experience in Bujinkan is very limited (just attended 3 classes). Though it seems to depend a lot on who is teaching.
|
|
LiamBoyle
Member
Fechtmeister the Clueless of H.A.S.C.
Posts: 478
|
Post by LiamBoyle on Mar 5, 2015 11:49:32 GMT
Though it seems to depend a lot on who is teaching. This. Particularly in the US pretty much anybody can start a martial arts school without having to have any type of formal certification. Research any MA school before going.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2015 12:52:59 GMT
Though it seems to depend a lot on who is teaching. This. Particularly in the US pretty much anybody can start a martial arts school without having to have any type of formal certification. Research any MA school before going. Yes. If you can sign a lease or convince someone to do it on your behalf, then you can be a 'teacher'.
|
|
|
Post by jam on Mar 5, 2015 15:29:43 GMT
It is a requirement for a sensei to name his sensei ("name" is a bit of an understatement - to give all credit too is more like it, but I can't think of the word for it in english), and to state the school name. A statement like below removes all doubt and is the hallmark of a genuine sensei or teacher of a JMA.
I am X. I trained under Sensei Y for Z number of years in the martial art "insert school name here" ryu (link to lineage or insert lineage). I received my sensei's blessing to start my own dojo on such-and-such a date. Then list any pertinent gradings, such as any ranks in that art or a related art (pertinent being optimum here - poor form to list judo belts if running an iai school, say).
I know this all seems Japanese, but the statement can be adapted for any martial school, if a teacher or person can't make such a statement then a lesser one can be made right down to something like.
I am X. I haven't formally trained in any martial art, but I think swords are cool and I seek a training partner to have a bit of fun with.
I can only think of negative reasons why a "teacher" would not be willing to make such a declaration.
|
|
|
Post by jam on Mar 5, 2015 17:08:05 GMT
The japanese sword gets its shape quite late on in the process, so I wonder if the untreated straight blades being forged may have confused observers that there were two differing shapes of swords. whereas in reality the straight swords were yet to become curved. Just a thought.
|
|