Once upon a time...
I was having a discussion with one of my students about the violent nature of JKD. I am not sure I would have referred to it as "violent." Maybe "efficient."
He took a sequence that we were practicing as an example. As the attacker stepped in with a primary attack, our response "began" with eye jabs and groin kicks -- then it got worse.
We followed with a punch and an elbow strike straight through the nose. And we were sweeping the legs at the same time. Whew.
Just imagine -- he thought JKD was violent. Go figure.
Anyway, he started removing some of the hits from our next sequence. This is the antithesis of what I was taught -- I always try to add even more hits in.
But he decided to remove them. One by one, he/we took them out. Until he was left with just a trap -- nothing more than a control, with no follow-up.
He had completely taken the sting out of JKD. But that got me to thinking ....
Note: Purists, please don't write in! Yes, I understand
the passive nature ofmany branches of classical Aikido.
And yes, I get that it is "The Way of Harmony."
But for those of us who occasionally have need to train
in a more aggressive style, this is a valuable exercise.
We gain by studying a passive art in a more aggressive
manner. We are "thinking out of the box."
Start by looking at the movements in Aikido where your hands tie up your opponent's in some sort of control. Usually, this control comes when you are redirecting energy and are "tossing" your opponent.
For those familiar with Aikido, you could try techniques like "tai no tenkan," or "Kaiten-nage." Any technique where you control/trap your opponent's hands, as you throw.
Now to modify a technique by "adding" hits, you should look at all three phases of the technique.
If you were to hit as your attacker grabs you, would this change your attacker's response enough that you couldn't execute the original control?
If you could hit as you are grabbing, then you have a better chance of continuing with the motion.
Note: Of course, in real life this could never be
planned -- you are just creating a sequence to practice
over and over, and to analyze.
If the positions were to change in a real-life
situation, you would just adapt -- you would modify
technique automatically.
The second stage of the technique occurs after you have made contact. You are getting control. Now, could you lift a hand for a punch -- for just an instant, while the other hand keeps holding?
Does it matter which you start with?
Try alternating hands.
The idea of this second stage is to get control, punch, and then instantly replace the hand, so you can proceed with the classical throw.
Get it? You want to punch so quickly and replace, that your hand isn't even missed. It's slick, when you can pull it off.
The last stage, is of course, wailing on your attacker, as you complete the throw/control. Do you have to wait for your opponent to hit the ground, before you continue punching and kicking?
I wouldn't wait ... ahhh ... well ... if it weren't a life or death situation, and the police were on their way ... then I might, just maybe, take it easier on the attacker.
You do what your conscience and the law allow.
The point is, once you have first gained control or thrown your opponent, it is not necessarily over. There may still be some punch left in your attacker, so there better be some left in you.
So, are there any passive techniques that you could add some punch .. or kick to?
Even though Bruce Lee often talked about "eliminating," rather than "accumulating," I feel that the above article is not in juxtaposition with the philosophies of JKD.
I have stated in several places that you need to get your body to move in a variety of "stylized," efficient movements, before you can progress back to a freer state. It almost like the "when a punch once again becomes a punch" argument.
You train yourself to react in a variety of ways. You explore the most efficient path in a variety of situations. You train your body to react efficiently and freely.
It almost seems like a paradox -- to "train" to react in an "untrained" manner.
Towards the end of a Bruce Lee essay found on pages 120 and 121 of "Bruce Lee: Artist of Life," Edited by John Little (Tuttle, 1999), he says ...
"In primary freedom one uses all ways, and is bound by none, and likewise one uses any technique or means that serves one's end. Efficiency is anything that scores."So, yes, you do use technique. You just aren't bound to, or by, it.
A little earlier in his essay, Bruce expressed his idea of not being bound to the technique, but being able to incorporate all technique....
"When one has reached the maturity in this art, one will have the formless form.... When one has no form, one can be all forms; when one has no style, one can fit with any style."
 
FREE
Martial Arts
Weekly ezine
Mastery