My "JKD" rant.

[chinesecowboy]

First off, I'm a huge Bruce Lee fan and i'm in no way trying to disrespect him/his art/or his followers. I'm just gonna let off what's on my mind. I feel the philosophy behind JKD, incorporating Zen/Taoist ideas, is one of his most important contributions. I don't understand how "JKD" can be currently taught and organized as a school or style, cause it's exactly what BL was against and regreted ever giving his "style" the name JKD. I visited a "JKD" school in NYC and can't help but think what total B.S. this is. Students were wearing the SCHOOL UNIFORM, being taught FORMS and the head instructor(who's supposily been trained by one of BL's students) wasn't even there. Posters of BL were on the wall and I couldn't help but think how pissed BL would be if he sees what's become of his Art. I feel JKD was Bruce's style and ONLY his style and emphasised others to FIND THEIRS. That's his most important lesson and I feel people have missed the point. Remember his article, LIBERATE YOURSELF FROM CLASSIC KARATE? Now in 2002, substitute Classic Karate for JKD or JFJKD. From what i understand JKD is not a "static" art and changes and improves along with the indivdual. This is in reaction to people who want to learn "JKD" and to those questioning "JKD's" effectiveness today. To truely understand JKD, read Tao of Jeet Kune Do, esp the first few chapters covering buddhist/taoist philosophies. "Understand the root and you understand all it's blossumings"... something like that....

[Ryu (JKD?)]

I agree.

I train boxing, ground and pound, BJJ, judo newaza, first strike principles, knives, firearms, etc. My experience in training and MA has lead me down that path to find what's truly functional in a fight. I trained in JKDC for a while, and was even awarded an instructorship. But even I am hesitent to call what I do JKD because I've already been yelled at by one of the leaders of the OJKD movements! LOL But seriously, I think people like Paul Vunak, Matt Thornton, Burton Richardson, Demi Barbito and even other reality guys like Sammy Franco and Richard Demitri have the right idea. JKD is about experiences plain and simple. It's personal experiences. Bruce always said
"They expect you to just be that product, it doesn't matter who you are, what you are, how you are structured, how you are made... you just go in there and be that product...and that to me is not right."

Ryu

[SD fma]

JKD

Hi Chinesecowboy,

Yes, if you read anything on the topic, check out Ron Balicki's book. He addresses exactly what you are asking. Jeet kune do (I'm not a practitioner of JKD, but I respect the goal) is a journey and not a style. In one of his many articles, Guro Dan Inosanto teaches that you must first start with a baseline martial art and then look into other arts to fill in holes that may exist in your baseline system. Keep doing this until you have "discovered" your own truth in combat. It is like a snowflake-no two will be the same.

Why do you think Guro Dan is an instructor in so many different martial arts? I suspect that he wants the full understanding of techniques in each respective art before he determines what is useful/useless.

Just my opinion,

SD fma

[gungfuhero]

You're absolutely right about Guro Inosanto. At one of his St. Louis Camps he told us the importance of having a deep understanding of something before throwing it away or assimilating it.

JKD is a pathless path. Jun Fan is the starting point for JKD, but JKD has no end. Remember, Liberate Yourself from Classical Karate used JKD as an example for martial artists of all paths. A lot of non-JKD martial artists are practicing their own formless form and sometimes are better role models than JKD men.

[SD fma]

Gungfuhero,

Well said.

SD fma

[JKDMAN]

I genuinely like the point and posts of this thread. Just a real quick post to say Good Job ya'll. I am pleased to see people who always strive to move beyond the name and just grow as a martial artist.

[Jerik]

no style ?

I agree, Bruce never want JKD to be a style. I personaly think JKD never exist, he just have to give his art of Fighting a name to cool down the comercials and the Film industry who might ask him a lot of time what his MA is spelled.

JKD trainers meet from time to time, to set up JKD, but they finally made it a Style, even if they say they don´t, but they sell it as style.

JKD is not a Style, you dont even train it to "fill your lacks in your own fight style"

how do you define a "lack" in your style?`beeing slow? hit to weak? bad blocks?, well all those things can be picked up by yourself, and if you do so you, you make your own "JKD" your own style which makes you perfect for yourself, and let you feel save, thats was Bruce Lee was, and thats what he called JKD. No style, just a name for his own art of fighting.

[JKogas]

No disrespect to anyone but, I don't necessarily agree that Jun Fan is the starting point for JKD. Does it have to be? If so, why? These are questions you have to ask.

I just don't feel that Jun Fan is necessary for one's development as a fighter. Anyone else here agree? Disagree?

-John

[sikal]

Originally posted by JKogas
No disrespect to anyone but, I don't necessarily agree that Jun Fan is the starting point for JKD. Does it have to be? If so, why? These are questions you have to ask.

I just don't feel that Jun Fan is necessary for one's development as a fighter. Anyone else here agree? Disagree?

-John

No ... Jun Fan isn't necessary for development as a fighter. But, IMHO, if Jun Fan isn't the core and foundation of what someone does then what they're doing shouldn't be called "JKD."

I say this because "JKD" is a specific philosophy developed by Bruce Lee. Is it unique? Certainly not. But if someone is teaching something they call "JKD" then there should be a direct link back to Bruce Lee ... which means Jun Fan (the system he developed as a platform for the development of one's own expression of "JKD").

IMHO, it has more to do with giving credit where it's due and not misleading people. If a person claims to be teaching "JKD" and they have no (training) link to Bruce Lee then they're just cashing in on the term "JKD" for marketing reasons.

If someone gets to the same philosophy without using Jun Fan as their foundation then, IMHO, they should call their thing something other than JKD.

Reading what I've just written, it could be perceived that I'm a Jun Fan player who's simply justifying my usage of Jun Fan. If anyone is thinking that ... it's not the case. I've never formally trained in Jun Fan and don't consider myself a JKD man ... for the very reasons I've stated here. While I've had a fair amount of exposure to Jun Fan, it didn't have a pivotal role in my development and it isn't the core or foundation of my understanding. Kali and Silat are my core and foundation and I consider myself a Kali and Silat man.

I just feel (personally) that if someone is labeling what they do as "JKD" then Jun Fan should be their foundation.

Mike

[SD fma]

Hi JKogas,

No, not in the ideal form...I imagine if you started in say, TKD or Muay Thai, you would find a void in maybe weapons or trapping techniques...TKD or Muay Thai are good arts, but now you are just researching and adding to what you know...

But does Jun Fan have you be your base art?...I would argue, no..unless you started in it first by design...

SD fma

[SD fma]

I agree with Sikal...

If you believe in JKD as a philosophy as opposed to an art, then anything will work---JUST DON'T CAPITALIZE ON THE JKD NAME--

With that being said, if you look at it as an art, then yes, Jun Fan should be an integral part of it...because JKD is synonymous with Bruce Lee....just like Lameco is PG Edgar Sulite...and so on...

Likewise, I am not a JKD player, but my base is FMA...and I also keep a crosstraining/research perspective...my base is Babao Arnis, but we also are taught Villabrille/Largusa Kali, and GM Cacoy Canete's Doce Pares Eskrido...

What Bruce Lee had in mind wasn't a bad idea...

SD fma

[JKogas]

You see, I'm under the impression that NO ONE can "own" JKD -- not even Bruce Lee. It's like saying that someone can "own" truth and that it must "look" a certain way. Whereas, truth is different for each individual.

Why MUST we have a link back to Bruce Lee? Just because he "came up" with the concepts? If you want to get down to brass tacks, he DIDN'T come up with it - Krishnamurti did. Bruce Lee said that he was just a "pointer to the truth" meaning, that he wasn't a conduit.

I'm not trying to be argumentive or disrespectful. This is often misconstrued across the net. What I AM trying to impart is that, IMHO, Jun Fan is another "ritual" for the sake of ritual - something that we must do because someone else said that we "wouldn't be doing JKD, if we don't start with Jun Fan".

Classical mess is what it becomes. To each his own however.





Respectfully,
-John

[sikal]

Originally posted by JKogas
You see, I'm under the impression that NO ONE can "own" JKD -- not even Bruce Lee. It's like saying that someone can "own" truth and that it must "look" a certain way. Whereas, truth is different for each individual.

Why MUST we have a link back to Bruce Lee? Just because he "came up" with the concepts? If you want to get down to brass tacks, he DIDN'T come up with it - Krishnamurti did. Bruce Lee said that he was just a "pointer to the truth" meaning, that he wasn't a conduit.

I'm not trying to be argumentive or disrespectful. This is often misconstrued across the net. What I AM trying to impart is that, IMHO, Jun Fan is another "ritual" for the sake of ritual - something that we must do because someone else said that we "wouldn't be doing JKD, if we don't start with Jun Fan".

Classical mess is what it becomes. To each his own however.

Respectfully,
-John

I would even say that Krishnamurti didn't come up with it. The concepts and principles are universal because of the way human beings are built.

It just seems to me that there are only two reasons for someone to use the JKD name. One: they're a student in the lineage and it's a sign of respect. Two: they're just trying to cash in on the "JKD" name. And possibly a third where these two overlap to some extent.

If someone isn't using Jun Fan as their base then why would they call it "JKD" ... except as a marketing ploy. I don't think it's "wrong" per se ... I just think it's pitiful.

For me, as I mentioned previously, it really has more to do with proper respect and nothing to do with "well, so and so said it so it must be."

You're absolutely right that Jun Fan is, technically, part of the "classical mess." But everything is. It's impossible to free yourself from the "classical mess" if you don't go through the "classical mess."

You have to have *some* sort of foundation and core. You have to learn proper body mechanics, torque, relaxation, awareness (mental and tactile), etc. somewhere. Whether it's Boxing, Savate, Wrestling, Capoeira, Kali, Wing Chun, etc.

My point is that if the platform isn't Jun Fan then *why* would anyone call what they do "JKD" if they have no links to BL?

If they don't have links to BL then they should call it something else. They should be creative. If it's good it'll stand on its own merit without trying to cash in on the "JKD" name.

If they have links to BL then they're giving credit where it's due and that's a critter of a different breed.

Mike

[JKogas]

You see, again we are referring to "links back to Bruce Lee". Which has absolutely NOTHING to do with fighting. JKD is about pursuing the truth in combat. It's about pursuing concepts which govern your training.

We call what we do JKD to honor Bruce Lee, but that can be done WITHOUT imitating him. That ISN'T the highest form of flattery!

I'm not arguing with anyone here, so please note that. I feel that Jeet Kune Do is a conceptual system. I feel that Jun Fan is a "style" if you will. They are simply separate as I see it.

For the record, I have trained in Jun Fan in the late 80's and early 90's. I have not "done" Jun Fan since '95. I just don't see the point. It's the trapping that turned me off and all of the dead drills that we were required to do. It never showed itself when sparring and much is completely (to me) unusable.

Many others are now finding the same thing. So, one must wonder, what's the deal with Jun Fan...other than just a tip of the hat to some long-since-dead Chinese man?

As one of those who train JKD without the Jun Fan base, I can say without any reservation that I feel that we are doing exactly what Bruce Lee had in mind when his art began to evolve. I also feel that if he were alive today, JKD would have continued to evolve to something similar in appearance to what we are doing today as JKD (without Jun Fan). Of course, Lee would have ALWAYS been doing Jun Fan wouldn't he...it was his NAME!

If something is "dead" and unusable anymore, drop it off and let it go. The concepts will ALWAYS remain, and they are what is important -- not some style. It just turns out that "MY" JKD is different than Lee's and is apparently different than others as well. That's ok..it's supposed to be.

As I said, to each his own. I respect everyone's opinion here. We all have the right to pursue the truth as we see fit -- and WITHOUT politics! They have no place in fight training.

-John "Not a politician" Kogas

[sikal]

Excellent post. I see where you're coming from and agree to a certain extent.

<< It's the trapping that turned me off and all of the dead drills that we were required to do. It never showed itself when sparring and much is completely (to me) unusable. >>

I've seen reference to this from others as well. It seems to me that the "aliveness" or "deadness" of a drill is all in how it's trained ... but maybe that's a semantics issue.

Same with trapping. I see trapping as very usable and I use it all the time in sparring. Every fight that I've ever seen or been in has had trapping used. Again, though, this may be semantics.

Rather than re-type my definition of trap hands, though, here's a link to an article I wrote on the subject.

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=40

I'd be interested in your (or anyone else's) opinion on the article.

I understand what you're saying about the term "JKD" ... but I still don't, personally, agree with it.

Mike