Your Jeet Kune Do or Mine?

[Great Sage]

Your Jeet Kune Do or Mine?
by the Great Sage

So much has been said about Jeet Kune Do that I think it’s been blown out of context. As a matter of fact, no two Jeet Kune Do are the same. Understand that Jeet Kune Do is an expression of self. It’s a concept, Bruce Lee’s concept and no one else’s. Personally, I don’t buy into the whole idea of “this is Jeet Kune do,” or “this is how it’s done.” For Bruce Lee even stated “I cannot teach you what you must learn.”

Therefore, Tae Kwon Do is my Jeet Kune Do. It’s my expression of the martial-arts, but it’s not REAL Jeet Kune Do, that was Bruce Lee’s expression. It’s hogwash that so many martial-artists are condemning the traditional martial arts. They don’t restrict anymore than any form of mixed martial arts. Traditional styles simply teach fundamentals which every martial arts has. What you do with that is your business. For instance, we all learn how to write, yet no two people write the same.

People who have no understanding of the traditional arts assume that a karate man will automatically start performing kata or start throwing reverse punches in a fight. That’s a mistaken perception. Those are merely tools to shape awareness and good form, the same principles that are applied when you practice anything else. Creative freedom? That’s inherent in everything so Bruce Lee got it wrong. If Jeet Kune Do says that one should have “no way” then why does one need to train at all? For there is a “way” to training. Even Bruce Lee’s methods consisted of pre-arranged techniques to simulate fighting. Isn’t that very much like a form, kata or sparring?

Although I revere Bruce Lee for he was my childhood idol, he was a functionalist and therefore bias against traditional martial arts. In my martial art, spirituality and tradition are as important as the art or function. These days, Bruce Lee has been made up to look like a Christian Jesus. Just as Christians believe there is only one way to do something, so do most JKD afficionados. But as Bruce Lee will point out, there is no right or wrong way, only your way.

[akja]

Its true that the JKD world is differant in many ways but that dosen't mean that anything can be JKD.
No way tha TKD can fall under the guidelines of what the "majority' of the world would agree that JKD is.

JKD needs to be learned by someone qualified to teach it. If a TKD guy that hasn't actually trained in it says I'm teaching JKD because its my truth, HE'S dead wrong. Bruce Lee taught James Lee and James Lee taught Felix Macias Sr. and he taught Felix Macias Jr. and he taught me.

Am I qualified to teach JKD? I don't expect a TKD to be able to answer that!

You can read all the books on JKD but that dosen't mean "your truth" is JKD!

And you haven't read enough because you don't understand:
"USING NO WAY AS WAY!"

[Ryu (JKD?)]

So much relativism crap in JKD these days (except for good instructors etc.)

Ryu

[robertlee]

I have found more politics in jkd then any art. People think any thing is jkd. they thinkonly this group can teach it. They read a book then know it all. by a tape then teach it. The boat is sinking. Yes no two peolpe think alike there for wont fight a like and must understand the tools to fighting as they only can . ANY teacher knows this. YOUR jkd is not my jkd. It mearly means even though the samew path has been walked we arre different TKD is TKD. modified with the concept of jkd it is still tkd. But probably better understood. Form Is only a book of tools put together fo solo training. TO many see more then there is in them. Each movement is a seperated single application of defence . NOT combined or fighting any one. BREAK it down and you can learn to apply thetools that you can use. Look at it as a whole and you are foerever lost. jun fan/// or jkd which was modified nonclassical gunf fu with excerpts of american boxing , fencing and modfied wing chun. the core to what bruce used in his jkd and taught to others. That was jkd. To develop from there was the student of jkd to bring into his way of doing what worked for him. JKD is more doing then in the end. tkd has its way of balance as any art does. But will never be jkd. IF it makes you good fine. but tkd by itself is not the answer. As no one art has it all. IF the politics of jkd would just go away it has a very good path to learn from. And no way of set bounderies. Style in the past was protected to keep its so called secrets. Simply put so others would not see it and understand its tools . Surprise is allways the one that gets you. Those days are gone Train hard in any art and you get better.

[pcarney]

This is JKD...no, wait..that is JKD. I'm doing JKD! No you're not, I'm doing JKD!

I suppose these arguement are inevitable..and at times, intresting. All I know is that the school I go to is the right one for me, and it teaches something called Jeet Kune Do. There are other people who go to schools right for them, and those schools teach BJJ, or muy thai, or egyptian thumb wrestling. Its all semantics- what matters is that you do something you like (that includes your opinion of whether its 'effective' or not).

[Ryu (JKD?)]

"effectiveness" is something that is measurable.

[sikal]

Originally posted by Ryu (JKD?)
"effectiveness" is something that is measurable.

But it's still relative so it's only measurable with paramaters.

A hand grenade is "effective" ... but not a preferred option in a phone booth.

A tank is "effective" ... but not in the middle of an ocean.

What is "effective" for one person may be useless for another person. What is "effective" in one environment may be useless in another.

"Effectiveness" is a very subjective term.

Mike

[Ryu (JKD?)]

Effectiveness" is a very subjective term.

Not really. Because whether a "grenade" or a "tank" you still have to make sure either weapon is up to the task, made correctly, is working properly, etc.

Technique may be relative to situations, but training methods are usually not. If you're "techniques" don't have power, speed, timing, experience, etc. you're not going to pull them off. Regardless of the "relative" technique you use.

Relativism and objectivism can exist in the same plane of truth. Not just in martial arts, but in a lot of differet avenues of thought as well.

Ryu

[sikal]

<< Technique may be relative to situations, but training methods are usually not. If you're "techniques" don't have power, speed, timing, experience, etc. you're not going to pull them off. Regardless of the "relative" technique you use. >>

OK ... I can go with that

Mike

[pcarney]

Joe Nobody studies Drunken Frog Kung Fu. He loves it- the long, drawn out forms, the leaping kicks, the 'tongue strikes'. He enters forms competitions and wins, he excels in the art, and he devotes his live to it. Its also completly ineffective. Do you think you have the right to tell Joe Nobody everything he's doing is wrong? Sure, he's fooling himself- but hell, we all fool ourselves in some way (even if it isn't in MA.)

Thoughts?

[sikal]

Originally posted by pcarney
Joe Nobody studies Drunken Frog Kung Fu. He loves it- the long, drawn out forms, the leaping kicks, the 'tongue strikes'. He enters forms competitions and wins, he excels in the art, and he devotes his live to it. Its also completly ineffective. Do you think you have the right to tell Joe Nobody everything he's doing is wrong? Sure, he's fooling himself- but hell, we all fool ourselves in some way (even if it isn't in MA.)

Thoughts?

Nope. Everyone studies for different reasons. He seems to be getting what he wants from the training. That'd be like a bicyclist telling a runner that he's wasting his time ... a bicycle is much more efficient.

If, however, Joe Nobody *thinks* he's getting effective self-defense then, yes, you should at least try to explain to him that that's not what he's getting. If he doesn't want to listen then, most likely, he's not looking for effective self-defense to begin with.

In the long run, everyone ends up training in the system and with the instructor that they deserve/earn ... regardless of what they may verbally claim they want. If they are shown that what they're doing isn't what they claim to want and they choose to ignore it then, obviousvly, what they *claim* isn't what they really want.

What Joe Nobody is training in, though, *is* effective ... in competitions (he's winning). And if that's where he wants to be, great

Mike

[lethal_lee_jkd]

"No way" vs "Having no way".You have to have a way first before you can have no way. Having no way is definitely not the way either..

[Freedom]

There is a difference between no "way" and "no way". The former is just daft. Not having any particular techniques, or form. The latter is freedom. Not being restricted to any one particular way. Thats just the way i see it...

[payon23]

Hi there is some interesting points here.

I believe Bruce Lee said that Jeet Kune Do is just a name and if there was argument about what JKD was or wasn't then we should just stop using the name.

As I understand it, from what I have read of JKD, there is a core art which is sometimes reffered to as Jun Fan Gung Fu and the student progresses from there to find their own "truth".

It's about experiencing the different techniques, of the different arts and then developing your own skills from that.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by payon23

As I understand it, from what I have read of JKD, there is a core art which is sometimes reffered to as Jun Fan Gung Fu and the student progresses from there to find their own "truth".

Yes thats true. Jun fan is the only part about which you can argue what is right and wrong. It is an established system of progression. JKD is your own personal expression of the martial arts, and its rude and arrogant to tell someone that their JKD is wrong.

And as for all of those authenticity and lineage arguments, did anyone ever wonder where Bruce Lee's lineage came from? He did his own research and discovered what was the best for him, rather than what the political minefield that is JKD told him to do, or told him what was right or wrong.