Copyright © IJCMAS ICMAUA. All rights
reserved
# 13. 2013
The international Journal of Combat Martial Arts and Sciences
ICMAUA
Current articles (All rights reserved by authors):
REMINISCING:
Donald Miskel (12.2013)
STRENGTH
TRAINING AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: Donald Miskel (12.2013)
CROIX DU COMBATTANT : Frederic Paezkiewiecz (12.2013)
FIFTY-SIXTH
YEAR OBSERVATIONS: Donald Miskel (10.2013)
WILD WILD
WEST (MARTIAL ARTS IN A GUN ORIENTED SOCIETY): Donald Miskel (09.2013)
DEVELOPING
SPEED IN THE MARTIAL ARTS: Donald Miskel (09.2013)
NEW BIRTHS
AND FRESH PERSPECTIVES: Donald Miskel (07.2013)
GRANDMASTER
KIM BYUNG CHUN YONG MOO DO CUP 2013. PAKISTAN NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS: Rizwan
Mustafa Zubairi (06.2013)
WEEDING OUT
THE WEEDS: Donald Miskel (06.2013)
THE LITTLE
THINGS: Donald Miskel (06.2013)
NO HOLDS
BARRED: Donald Miskel (05.2013)
TRANSPARENCY
IN THE MARTIAL ARTS: Donald Miskel (05.2013)
THE LEGACY
OF PANKRATION: MIXED MARTIAL ARTS AND THE POSTHUMAN REVIVAL OF A FIGHTING
CULTURE: Magnus Stenius (05.2013)
PUTTING
YOUR BEST FOOT FORWARD: Donald Miskel (05.2013)
STILLNESS
IN COMBAT: Donald Miskel (04.2013)
STRENGTH IN
UNITY: Donald Miskel (04.2013)
STUDENTS OF
THE HEART: Donald Miskel (03.2013)
WHITE BELT
KARATE FOR THE BLACK BELT FIGHTER: Donald Miskel (03.2013)
DING ON A
PREEXISTING FOU: Donald Miskel (03.2013)
BUILDING ON
A PREEXISTING FOUNDATION: Donald Miskel (02.2013)
REMINISCING
Donald
Miskel
The
old have a tendency to do a lot of that. At sixty six I find myself looking
back over my life. There are some things that I am quite proud of but there are
a lot of things that I regret. Some of the things that I regret weren’t
choices. Much of what I did was simply for survival in a harsh environment.
Back
in the day there was a detective series called ‘The Concrete Jungle’. Usually
when we think of a jungle we think in terms of dense rain forest inhabited by a
host of beasts and predators that would kill you or devour you alive. That was
the environment I grew up in minus the rain forest. Poverty, desperation and
hopelessness tend to make for a dangerous environment. The neighborhoods I grew
up in were uncompromising and unforgiving. I watched more than one of my
friends being cut down by the streets. It is simply by the grace of God that I
survived and even thrived with the life I lived. Out of necessity I learned to
fight. I’m not talking about play ground scraps or bar room brawls. I’m talking
about fighting for survival. More than once I was left a broken bleeding heap
in the streets. At least once I was left for dead but as you see I’m still here.
Like the old Timex commercial used to say, take a licking and keep on ticking.
I
am the survivor of a real war with a couple of tours of duty in some unsavory
places but I never took the beating there that I took in my everyday life. I
experienced some traumatic experiences during my military career but I managed
to get out minus shrapnel or bullet holes. Not so in the streets. I’ve been
shot, stabbed, knocked in the head and ran down since I mustered out of the
service. Out there running with the big dogs as they used to say on the corner.
As
a rule I don’t brag about my exploits. Not that there is that much to brag
about. I was never a tournament champion. I fought in a few point tournaments
and a number of intra school semi contact matches. I found them uninteresting.
After fighting in the streets I found them unrealistic. There were occasions
that I lost to opponents that I would massacre in a real street fight. I did
some amateur boxing and I wrestled in school. That’s the extent of my
experience in sports. I can’t claim the experience of men like Frank Dux, Jimmy
McMutrie or Irving Soto but I have fought in some nasty pit fights. They were
rowdy and brutal affairs fought in barns, old warehouses, and empty fields or
on barges. Wherever they could be held without interference from the law. I’m
sure that there were some bribes and more than a few palms were greased in the
process. They were illegal since they were supported by bets and wagers. I did
well in them but I was better trained than the individuals that I fought. That
isn’t to say that the fighters weren’t tough. Most were experienced street
fighters, bouncers, enforcers, brawlers and any and everything in between. I
did need the money but that wasn’t my real purpose for fighting. I wanted to test
some of the ideas that I was developing then. Those ideas along with the input
of a number of local martial art instructors would form the core of the system
that I teach now. I fought off and on for a couple of years and I fared well
enough. I took some beatings but I never lost a match.
Again
I won’t try to bill myself as some kind of fighting champion. I wasn’t fighting
the caliber of fighters that the fore mentioned fighters did. I see all of the
grief that some of them get by recounting their experience. I don’t need that.
I’m pretty sure that they don’t either but notoriety brings some pretty harsh
backlash.
I
am not a fighter. I’ll go out of my way to avoid a fight. I’m a minister and
for the most part I left that behind with my former life. I was gang related as
a youth and participated in more gang fights and all out brawls than I care to
think about. I’ve worked as a bouncer, a collector, an enforcer, a body guard
and a personal security specialist. In my career I worked as a psych tech,
therapist, a crisis counselor, prison chaplain and as a university hospital
policeman. All of those professions offer a number of opportunities for
physical confrontation. Fortunately all of that is in my past.
Unfortunately
I’ve had a couple of violent situations in the last few that led to physical
altercations. On those occasions I had to defend myself. I can’t really call
them fights. I dealt with the situations without getting hurt and without
seriously hurting my attackers. I’m more proud of that then of any violent
victories that I’ve managed. In a fight
there is never really a winner. Violence is bad for everyone involved whether
the loser or the victor. There is nothing noble about fighting.
I
listen to a lot of martial artists snarling, growling and beating their chests.
They brag about all of their physical prowess and expertise. I wonder how many
of them have been in a life or death confrontation. Without putting them down I
wonder how well would most of them fare in the back allies and concrete jungles
of the inner cities of any major city. I’ve seen some of the real life
gangsters, prisoners and back ally brawlers. I was one of them at one time. How
many of them have ever been in a real knife fight? How many of them have been
shot, cut or stabbed? How many of them have had to take a human life barehanded
or with a weapon. I’ve been there and as they say, “it ain’t nothing nice”. No
sane individual would want to go there. It isn’t like the movies. It’s nasty
and down and dirty.
All
I want to do in my old age is live my life in peace. I’m not proud of many of
the things I’ve done but I am the sum total of all of those experiences whether
positive or negative. Given the chance to do it all over again I would have
walked a different path entirely. I lived a crazy life but that was in my past.
Through it all I had the martial arts. To a large extent that’s what kept me
from going off the deep end. Later I reaffirmed my faith and answered the
calling on my life. I became a minister and accrued graduate and post graduate
degrees in various religious studies. That is my primary life focus now. I’m a
minister and pastor and a licensed and ordained minister. I still train and
occasionally I’ll do a little teaching. Now days I spend most of my time in the
arts focusing on the growth and day to day operations of the martial art
organizations that I head or represent. I spend more time dealing with the
philosophies of the arts than in actually teaching techniques. I have a few
select students that I teach and I’ll do the occasional seminar but more of my
teaching is accomplished in doing hat I’m doing now, writing and mentoring.
I
have much to account for in my past but I try to balance out the ill that I’ve
done by the good that I do now. You can’t earn or work your way into heaven but
I can try to even the scales.
In
the end we all teach by precept and example. In my instance God’s word and the
philosophies and teachings of the martial arts are the precept but I offer
myself up as the example. I pray that in my old age I will be a good one.
God
bless you, my brethren. Train hard and go with God.
Rev.
Dr. Donald Miskel, ThD, PhD, MDiv
STRENGTH
TRAINING AND THE MARTIAL ARTS
Donald
Miskel
I
just crawled out of my home gym. I have both a gym and a small dojo in my home.
I do most of my training at home. Occasionally one of my students comes to
Chicago to train with me. Other than those rare occasions or when the grand
mistress trains with me I train alone. I have a bag stand with a hundred pound
heavy bag and speed bag but they’re out in my outdoor dojo. Too cold in Chicago
to abuse them.
I’m
an avid weight lifter and strength trainer. At one point in my life I was a
body builder. I never competed but at 5’9” I was carrying around 245# of raw
muscle. At that time I was a cop at a large hospital complex. A person can look
at you and not realize that you’re a martial art master but strength and muscle
speak for themselves. It kept me from having to wrestle with a lot of irate
individuals. They took one look at my size and thought better of it. I have
also worked as a psych professional. I have worked for social service agencies,
hospital psych units and the penal system, all of them as a psych worker. You
can’t kick, punch, lock or throw a psych patient. All you have to work with is
your wits and your physical prowess. Believe me, strength and size matters.
I
began my martial art career in judo and boxing. I started strength training
shortly after that. No-one ever questioned my predisposition with weights in
the judo or jiu jitsu dojo. Though judo and jiu jitsu depend more on technique
than on raw power everyone that studies them know that strength matters.
There’s a reason why most combative e sports have weight classes. During the
era of point karate there was a lot of sparring with mixed weight classes. That
worked because there was little or no actual contact. Let’s face it; anyone
with good sense would rather be hit by a middle weight than a heavy weight. Put
a light weight against a heavyweight in a fight and the light weight will make
the heavy weight look slow and clumsy. He’ll move around and pepper the bigger
man with quick strikes. He may cut him up and bruise him a bit but sooner or later
in a real confrontation the big man will make contact. I don’t have to explain
the outcome.
I’m
primarily a kempo and karate stylist. I have advanced rank in jiu jitsu and
aikijitsu but I am primarily a striker. I can lock an opponent up and toss him
on his rearmost extremities with the best of them but if I get in one good
strike the fight is over. Back in the day I loved to kick but extensive back
surgeries made too much of that impractical but I’m pretty good with my hands.
I love punching and striking.
I
did a lot of street fighting when I was younger. Some of it by choice but most
of it for survival. Growing up in the inner city of any city in those days you
had to be good with your hands. I was better than most. I’ve always been pretty quick but my
advantage was my strength.
When
I started studying karate I was constantly told to leave the weights alone. It
was the common opinion that you would become muscle bound and wouldn’t be able
to strike or move well. In extreme cases too much size can be a hindrance but
if you know how to train effectively you will only become stronger and more
effective with your martial art if you train for strength. I’m not advocating
that you become a power lifter or extreme body builder but that you use
strength training to enhance your martial art training.
Individuals
like Master Ernie Reynolds guided me into the realistic advantage of weight
training for the martial artist. I didn’t know him personally in those days but
he was a mentor by example. He was both a successful body builder and a skilled
martial artist. His ability in the martial arts wasn’t in spite of his weight
training but because of it. I don’t miss an opportunity to thank him for the
example he offered. I styled myself after him in that regard. I became a better
martial artist for it. After fifty six years in the arts I still strength
train.
Boxers
avoid putting on too much muscle beyond their natural body weight. Pro boxers
have to be able to go ten or twelve rounds and all of that mass would fatigue
them too soon. As martial artists we don’t have to worry about that problem.
Any real fight in the streets is going to last for less than five minutes; six
or seven at the most. If you can’t take an adversary out in that amount of time
you need to go back to the drawing board. Karate as it was originally taught is
a one hit system counter punching system. If you’re trading a hundred punches
with an opponent there is something wrong with your system, your ability or
skill. Sometimes people choose a martial art that doesn’t complement their body
type or their temperament. If you’re built like a sumo wrestler with short
bowed legs taekwondo might not be your best choices in a martial art. You have
to be realistic and find an art that compliments your body type.
Many
fights are lost in the streets because of a lack of conditioning and stamina.
Knowing a technique isn’t enough. You have to have the ability and conditioning
to pull it off. Just training to kick and punch or even to take down an
opponent isn’t enough. Conditioning should accompany training. Aerobic training
is necessary. Speed training would be nice but strength training will enhance
your ability. Heavy training will increase strength. Light weights lifted in a
ballistic manner will increase speed. Heavy weights in multiple sets will
increase mass. You choose your method according to your needs but I advise you
not to overlook the training advantage offered by weights.
During
our conference in Mississippi some of the martial artists that participated saw
me in a tee shirt rather than a gi. They remarked on my conditioning,
musculature and physical shape. Considering that they ranged in age from their
twenties to their early forties and that I am sixty six years old that was good
to hear.
Today
I did a full strength training workout. Tomorrow I’ll do some light spot
training. I advocate training for chi and I love the internal martial arts but
aside from being able to activate your chi meridians I can probably pick you up
and body slam you. Just kidding. I don’t want to take it that far. Considering
the fact that my back is held together with nuts and bolts I’d probably do
myself more harm than I would you. With that being said I will say that if I
manage to hit you you’ll become a believer. Believe me, my brother, strength
counts. I would like to recommend that you consider adding strength training to
your regimen. Believe me you won’t regret it.
Train
Hard my brethren and Go with God.
Rev
Dr. Donald Miskel.
CROIX DU COMBATTANT
Frederic Paezkiewiecz
On
November 11th Frederic Paezkiewiecz was awarded the "Croix du
Combattant" (Cross of war), like veteran of the 4th generation on war.
This medal is one of the most prestigious official award given by Ministry of
defense. This cross reward military honours received for act of courage in
2002, operating in Kosovo.
The
ceremony was presided by the mayor of Rumilly and by the assistant prefect of
department Haute Savoie, in the presence
of a platoon of 27th Bataillon de Chasseurs Alpins (special mountain unit).
The
medal was handed by the Colonel André Laperle, veteran of Indochina and North
Africa wars and president of official federal union of veterans.
FIFTY-SIXTH
YEAR OBSERVATIONS
Donald
Miskel
Today
is October seventeenth, two thousand and thirteenth. Today I made sixty six
years of age. That means I am no longer young. Actually I haven’t been young
for a long time now. Being a senior citizen means I can get away with saying
some things that a younger person couldn’t get away with. People have a
tendency to chalk up older people’s indiscretions to advanced age; Maybe a
little senility or dementia. So if I say something offensive blame it on old
age.
This
month also marks my fifty sixth year in the martial arts. In all that time I
should have learned something. Considering how opinionated I am I need to have
at least a tiny bit of wisdom. I tend to be a prolific if not an insightful
writer. That being said let me comment on yet another observation. If I offend
someone in the process please remember I’m an old man. Please also remember
that this old man could very possibly knock your hat around backwards.
In
my several years of involvement in the martial arts I have seen trends come and
go. I have watched the martial arts evolve in America. In the process we’ve
learned more but understand less. We’ve developed a lot of pretty good practitioners
but fewer really effective technicians. More emphasis is placed on the art than
the martial aspects of the martial arts. We’ve grown more esoteric while losing
much of the combat effectiveness in our various arts. I am convinced that the
martial arts were developed for self defense and combat. Its development of
body, spirit and mind is a happy byproduct but was never the intended purpose
of those arts. They were a means of conquest and survival. Remove those aspects
and you lose much of the effectiveness of the arts.
How
many of you remember the popularity of point karate in the sixties? No contact
was allowed because we were convinced that our techniques were too deadly for
contact fighting. In those days we were determined to forge our hands into lethal
weapons. We beat our hands on padded boards and thrust our hands in sand,
gravel and iron shot. The kung fu stylists beat their hands on iron palm bags
and then tried to minimize the damage to their hands with various lotions and
potions. Some of us even broke our hands so that they would grow back stronger.
I question the wisdom of all of that but we were serious about being
deadly.
We
conditioned our bodies even as we conditioned our weapons. We trained like real
athletes and not like weekend warriors. In those days a black belt meant
something.
When
I was aspiring for a black belt in the early sixties we were taught a hand full
of pressure points. Not the dim mak or kyoshu jitsu that is taught today. We
were taught about ten target areas to disable or even kill an opponent. With
the knowledge of those easily assessable targets and hand and body conditioning
when we hit a person they had a tendency to stay hit. Now we teach over a
hundred nerve centers, pressure points and chi meridians that are said to
disable an opponent. Being of limited intelligence and burdened with a growing
learning disability I am overwhelmed with the intricacy of the arts that have
developed around all of this knowledge.
Being
the dim witted individual that I am I embrace the ‘more is less’ philosophy. I
have taken the time and made the effort to learn if not perfect several martial
arts. With the time I’ve invested in these arts I have managed to accrue
advanced rank in several of them. I found many of them to be a bit top heavy.
Many of the techniques they taught were more traditional than practical. I’m
sure that they were more than efficient in dealing with the challenges that
they were created to address but things have changed radically since those
days. We no longer need flying kicks to unseat an opponent on horseback or
techniques to address a sword or spear wielding adversary. Consequently some of
what we were taught had little or no application according to the challenges of
today.
In
the systems that I’ve developed and teach I adhere to that same ‘more is less’
theory. I teach a combat system that I feel is more applicable to the needs and
challenges presented by today’s society. I love the traditional systems but I
don’t claim to teach them as such. Many of my students have been police
officers, personal security specialists, prison and mental health workers or
worked in other high risk professions. The art that I developed and teach
reflects their needs and the challenges presented by the mean city streets that
many of us grew up in.
My
concept of pressure points and nerve center strikes is based little on chi or
acupressure points. I teach a handful of
critical targets. They attack vision, breathing, consciousness and foundation.
My philosophy is that if a man can’t see he can’t fight. If he can’t breathe he
can’t fight. If he can’t stand he can’t fight. And of course if he’s
unconscious he can’t fight. Several of the said targets can be lethal but we
try to avoid killing or seriously injuring an opponent. For control we use a
number of jiu jitsu and aikijitsu techniques. By the way, I teach both the
striking and grappling systems separately but I blend them into a practical
cohesive system that transitions from striking to grappling. We teach a handful
of karate/kempo kata to teach basic balance and flow but we teach more with
waza and scenario based training. Our Kukeren Gojute Kempo ( Dan Te Ryu) and
Jute Ryu Aikijitsu are modified systems that are purely combat oriented.
Many
of my peers teach dim mak and kyosho jitsu. I’ve studied the systems myself. I
admire them for what they do and I wouldn’t dare question or criticize them or
the arts they teach but for those of limited ability and minimal retention the
arts that I teach are a perfect and very effective alternative.
Combat
isn’t rocket science. There’s nothing scientific about gouging someone in the
eye or kicking them in the knee cap but those kinds of crude techniques can
bring a fight to a quick halt. Nothing complex or esoteric about them but it’s
hard to argue against effectiveness. I look at the challenges of combat as
improper fractions. My tendency is to reduce them to their lowest terms. Makes
them easier to work with and the problems that they present easier to deal
with. There you have it. The Don Miskel approach to combat and self defense.
Fighting made easy. Call it old man kung fu. It ain’t cute but you can bet your
a--, I mean your rear most extremity, that they work.
Thank
you for listening to the rambling observations of an old man. Apparently your
studies in the martial arts have garnered you with both respect and patience. I
appreciate both.
Train
hard my brethren and go with God
Rev.
Dr. Donald Miskel
WILD
WILD WEST (MARTIAL ARTS IN A GUN ORIENTED SOCIETY)
Donald
Miskel
What a time we live in. It’s frightening and it’s
frustrating. It’s frightening because you don’t know what life threatening
challenges you might face from one day to the next. It’s frustrating because as
individuals we can only do so much to deal with these challenges.
I live in Chicago. Actually I live in the burbs a
little south of Chicago. Unfortunately the city influence doesn’t recognize
town lines. Much of my life and business is centered in the city. Many of the
areas I find myself in are dangerous and have a history of violence. The young
people in the city are calling Chicago Chiraq. Many of the students I have
taught live in the city and are challenged with the threats that the city
offers. It is my endeavor to give those students a sense of confidence and the
tools to survive in the neighborhoods that they have to live in.
The combat some of us saw during the Viet Nam conflict
wasn’t as frightening. In the end you can come home from a war. Not so anymore.
War is at our back door and the enemy is us. I made it out of the military and
the danger of war in South East Asia. I came out with minimal damage. I’ve
suffered more damage in and around the streets of Chicago than in any war I was
a part of. I’ve been shot in a racially motivated assault. I’ve been wounded
several times and by various methods since I was released from the military.
That in spite of my physical prowess. I’m an excellent pistol shot. I’m adept
with most small arms and explosives. I’m considered a martial art master
specializing in self defense, unarmed combat and personal security. I grew up
in some of the toughest areas of a tough city and I was a terror as a street
fighter. With all of that I don’t feel especially safe or secure in the city
that I call home.
When I was a kid being tough gave you some security in
the neighborhood. If you could give good account of yourself and weren’t a
bully or unnecessarily combative you were respected and lived pretty much free
from threat. That no longer is true. We’ve digressed to the code of the west.
The gun is the primary tool of conflict resolution.
Many factions cry out for the right to bear arms. We
aren’t just talking about a handgun, rifle or shotgun for home or personal
security. We’re talking about fully automatic and assault weapons. Our solution
for our nation’s problems seem to be greater fire power. Many of us are
actually arming ourselves in fear of a class, economic or race war. Others are
arming themselves because of their fear, distrust and disapproval of their own
government. We’re afraid of terrorism from outside factions when we’re as much
in danger of domestic terrorism. How do we deal with this? Where do we draw the
line?
Poverty, inequality and greed have always been a
contributing factor to violence, especially in overcrowded urban areas. In the
past those challenges were limited to certain areas and to certain social
economic groups. That is no longer the case. Poverty has become an equal
opportunity situation and violence is becoming as prevalent in the formally
more affluent area as in some of the nation’s ghettos. Unexpected violence has
threatened and on occasion destroyed our, schools, homes and work places.
No-one and no place seem to be safe. The causes and motivation are difference
but in all reality when facing an imminent threat the cause isn’t an immediate
concern.
There was a time when martial ability translated into a
deterrent to physical violence. If you were a half way decent martial artist
you were more than able to deal with the average day to day threats of the
communities we lived in. Not so anymore. The most innocuous conflict or
argument can result in extreme violence today. A perceived slight, an
unintentional glance, road rage and any of a number of other minor altercations
can become life threatening. Since these situations are more subject to be
dealt with by a weapons assault than fisticuffs why should we continue to study
the martial arts? On the surface it would seem to be a waste of time and
effort. It seems that we are practicing hand to hand combat in a weapon
oriented society.
As any dedicated martial artist knows the martial arts
offer a lot more than just physical prowess. Realistic martial art training
does put one in a better stead in the event of a threat that is up close and
personal. Muggers, rapists, barroom brawlers and suchlike don’t generally shoot
at a victim from across the street. Their endeavors require them to be in your
face. It’s in those areas where martial art training is most effective. That’s
in the event of an actual threat or attack. Unfortunately aggressors often
attack from a safe distance. In such an instance no amount of physical prowess
or training in close quarter combat will do you any good. So what do the martial
arts offer in such a case?
Actually if the situation has evolved to that extent
even a trained martial artist is in serious trouble. In such an eventuality
fleeing or evasion is the best approach. In a realistic martial art it would be
a good idea to understand the threat and limitations of the weapons that we may
face. Learning to flee or evade such a situation effectively requires as much
skill as physical combat. Those skills should be a part of any realistic
martial art training.
Some of us who live in urban and even a more rural area
have been challenged with roaches, centipedes and other such pests. Most of you
will agree that it isn’t always easy to send those little monsters to their
next incarnation. Swatting or squashing them can be a challenge. They often
exhibit an uncanny ability to evade our efforts. They have complex evasion
patterns hardwired into their DNA. Evasion is their primary form of survival
against wholesale smushing.
Fleeing a threat isn’t cowardly. We should know when to
flee and when to stand and fight. We should pick our battles and then stack the
deck to maximize our chances of success and survival. Reason and not pride
should determine our line of action. Misplaced pride can be fatal. You have
better have a game plan. Strategy is as important as execution. By the way,
those types of decisions shouldn’t be considered when confronted with an
eminent threat. Learning how to react to a threat require forethought and
preplanning. It doesn’t happen in the moment. Think and plan for such a
situation before it happens. Like combat, if you have to think about it it
won’t work. These things need to be
preplanned. You can’t plan for every eventuality but you can learn how to react
to various provocation.
Realistic martial art training should give you options
and realistic levels of action. Fighting should never be a martial artist’s
only option. Fighting should be the last option. It should be a worse case
scenario but when called on to fight we should go into total fight mode. You either
fight or you don’t fight. You can’t half fight. Combat requires total
commitment. Being defensive in a deadly situation can and probably will get you
hurt or killed.
With that being said, the confidence and sense of awareness
that martial art training offers should give the martial artist the ability to
avoid most threatening situations. A martial artist should have enough
confidence and presence of mind to remove himself from a threat should he find
himself unable to avoid it. When avoidance isn’t possible walking away or
fleeing the threat should be the next choice. If fleeing isn’t possible
practical conflict resolution, de-escalation and reason should come to sway.
All of which has to be accomplished without a show of fear or weakness. Fear
and weakness encourages the predator. Always deal from strength even when
begging for peace. Training and enhanced ability will give a martial artist
that sense of strength and confidence. Actually that sense of confidence will discourage
many predators. Predators aren’t looking for a difficult fight. They look for a
soft target.
Let’s face it, we can’t catch bullets in our teeth or
catch a samurai sword between our sweaty palms. What we can do is learn to
avoid the people, places and things that expose us to danger. We can carry
ourselves with the sense of confidence, balance and awareness that mark us as
hard targets. We can have a plan and be prepared for the eventuality of
personal threat or violence. We can learn conflict resolution and de-escalation
in a potentially violent situation. And, of course, if all else fails we can
fight like an enraged tiger.
To a large extent a martial artist trains for the pure
joy of training. It’s an excellent form of physical exercise and a means of
self discovery. It isn’t the ‘be all, end all’ solution for every possible
problem but it helps to equip us to deal with life on life’s own turns. And if
push comes to shove and all else fails it gives us the tools to survive a heads
up confrontation. Even in the ‘wild wild west’.
God bless you, my brethren. Train hard and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel
DEVELOPING
SPEED IN THE MARTIAL ARTS
Donald
Miskel
There are several concepts in the martial arts that are
deceptive and often misinterpreted. Things aren’t always what they appear to be
or what they look like on the surface. There are no hidden secrets or secret
techniques that give a master super human capabilities. If anything is hidden
it’s hidden in plain sight. We often see but we don’t understand what it is we
see. ”There is nothing wrong with your eyes Hoppa Grass, it’s your perception
or lack thereof”.
Too often people misinterpret power for strength or
positioning for footwork. No, my friend, all of the hopping around and dancing
in place that we see these days is not karate. Kick boxing has become confused
with karate. Karate requires a strong base and a rooted stance to garner the
power that is its earmark. That doesn’t mean we just stand in one place. We use
tai sabaki or body positioning to address an opponent’s aggression. We also
turn and position the body of our adversary to place him at a disadvantage.
Too often a karateka will try to substitute strength
for kime (focus). Proper body physics,
alignment and sequence coordination produce more power than raw strength
alone. Understanding such simple
principles will ultimately mean the difference between success and failure in
the arts.
I could spend hours talking about such principles but
that would be like trying to reveal the entire foundation of the art in a few
paragraphs. Such an undertaking would require much more time and space than I
am allotted here. What I would like to talk about is speed.
First of all speed is misleading. What the average
person would consider raw speed isn’t what it seems. When we think of speed we
generally consider forward momentum or acceleration. Like saying a car can go
from zero to sixty in six point seven seconds. That’s raw speed. The time it
takes to get from point A to point B.
That type of speed is important but having speed in the martial arts
require more than that. It requires more than just hand speed.
What we interpret as speed involves several elements.
One is deliberation. In a fight you won’t have time to interpret your
opponent’s intentions, choose a response and act on it. By the time you go
through that process you’ll be hit and probably on your way to dreamland if not
the hospital or the morgue. Self defense depends on muscle memory. You have to
develop that in the dojo. You don’t have the luxury of learning to fight during
the conflict. Muscle memory is developed by repetition. You would have had to
do a technique over a thousand times for it to become reflexive. If you have to
think about it it isn’t going to work. The seiken zuki of karate is a straight
line punch that hits with as much or more power than a roundhouse punch or
haymaker. Instead of the drawing back of the hand or the long wind up it
depends on the twisting of the hips to create both power and speed. The seiken zuki
creates tremendous speed and power over a short line of execution.
What we perceive as speed requires good eye hand
coordination. Knowing how doesn’t always translate into the done deal. That’s
why constant practice is necessary. The difference between the master and the
average student is in the basics not in superior technique. Practicing the
basics create the natural ability make speed and every other element in karate
possible.
Another consideration in what we perceive as speed is
reaction time. Responding to the opponent’s action without hesitation. Again this is possible because the response
is hard wired into neurological network of the karateka. Thousands of
repetitions of a given technique, especially in relation to various stimuli
makes this possible. This kind of
reaction is said to originate from the spine rather than the brain. It bypasses
the recognition/response sequence. And of course there is timing. Without
timing reaction time is of no accord.
It’s possible to be too fast. If a block is too fast it can get there
before the attack and still result in the defender getting hit.
Often the missing element in speed of execution is foot
work and positioning. This principle is called tai sabaki. With superior
footwork and positioning eye blazing speed is no longer necessary. With this
concept it is possible to position yourself and your opponent to your
advantage. From that advantage point it is often possible to throw one or
several shots to an opponent’s exposed
pressure points with impunity.
The result gives the illusion of speed because it allows several unanswered
techniques in quick succession with no effective defensive reaction from the
opponent.
Another element of speed is the narrowing of the
defense/counter attack sequence. Eventually defense and counter will be
accomplished in the same motion. An experienced practitioner should be able to
go from the two beat block counter sequence, to the half beat counter and
eventually the simultaneous defense and counter attack.
Slipping, dodging and ducking attacks while attacking
the exposed parts of the opponent’s body also results in superior speed.
Various techniques such as parrying, jamming, locking,
trapping and such like stacks the deck for the karateka and results in more
effective defense and counter attacks. In combat the direct, least complicated
approach is generally the best approach.
Lastly the ability to move the defending or attacking
weapon from point A to point B or what we call raw speed can be developed. All
of these elements work together to achieve actual and relative speed.
Conservation of energy may often mean being no faster than success requires.
Overtaxing the body by going beyond the requirements of the situation isn’t a
good practice. One never knows what other challenges awaits. Spending all of
your energy on one opponent can mean disaster if another opponent presents
himself.
There are many elements that add up to together to
create an effective fighter. Speed is just one of them. All of them must be taken
into consideration to create the well rounded fighter. It’s possible to be fast
and yet be ineffective. By the same token it’s possible to be strong and have
little or no power. Every link in the chain has to be present to offer a chance
of success. Any link in the chain can spell a lack of success and even
disaster. The art of karate or any other
martial art must be practiced in its entirety. To perfect one element to the
detriment of another will result in a less than effective system. The study of
any martial art requires a balanced effort. It’s a package deal. All of these
fine points taken together will equal a total art. With the proper study,
training and application that total art should translate into an effective art.
In the end, the art is no more effective than the practitioner and the
practitioner is no more effective than his training.
Train hard my brethren and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel
NEW
BIRTHS AND FRESH PERSPECTIVES
Donald
Miskel
As most of you know by now I don’t buy into the
traditional ranking system. In a sense I’m a nontraditional traditionalist.
Like many western martial artists I have created my own system. Actually I
didn’t create anything. The techniques I use have been used since the martial
arts were created in antiquity. Mine is just a difference of application and
how I deal with certain situations.
That being said I would like to talk about the new
systems that are cropping up in the martial art community. We may not like it
and we may question the validity of the arts and their creators but like it or
not the phenomenon has become a fact of life. It’s like a brush fire in a dry
climate. It’s impossible to stamp them out so we’ll have to find a way to live
with them.
All systems are not created equal. How well a system is
put together and how well it works depend on a lot of things. Of course every
fighting system has to be built on some kind of foundation. Mine came out of a
lifelong involvement in the traditional martial arts. In a sense, building on a
preexisting foundation.
Knowledge of combat should be the foundation of any
martial art. How we come by that knowledge is the question. It would either
require prior training or a good deal of personal experience. Let’s be honest
with ourselves. A street fighter that has grown up fighting has a better sense
of real combat and what it requires than the dojo trained weekend warrior. A
lot of my fellow martial artists would disagree with this but how many of them
have stood toe to toe with a seasoned street brawler? I’m not talking about the
drunk in a bar. I’m talking about an individual who lives in an environment of
constant violence and is a seasoned fighter.
There are fighting systems that have come out of our
nations prisons that are well thought out and really dangerous. They were
designed to deal with violent people in a violent environment. I would advise a
martial art enthusiast to stand toe to toe with one of these combatants before
they talk to me about combat. It might be hard to convince some of them but
most traditional martial artist have no real concept of combat. Theory doesn’t
always translate into reality. You’ll never know how practical your training is
until it’s tried by fire. Not many would care to do that. not many should.
The Black Lotus Martial Arts Association and its
subsequent arts came about because of the failure of some young black belts in
the streets of Chicago. Too many of them were being trashed in the streets. On
occasion the failure dealt with the individual but too often the fault was in
what they were trained in and how they were trained. Many of them were battle
ready if they faced a foe from the feudal era of Japan or Okinawa.
Unfortunately those skills didn’t translate to the reality of the streets. The
BLMAA began as a collaboration of established martial art masters and
instructors who came together to address these failures. That doesn’t make the
system that came out of that superior to any other but it addressed the
problem.
Another consideration is how innovative is the creator
of these new arts. How well thought out is the system? Does it address the
problems that it’s created to address and how well? In the end the efficiency
of the system justifies it. It either works or it doesn’t.
Too often we determine the acceptability of the art by
the lineage of its creator. We might need to accept the fact that no-one has a
monopoly on knowledge. It doesn’t matter how it’s acquired. If it’s correct it
doesn’t have to be qualified through lineage.
Practicality and efficiency describes an art however it
came about. If the creator is good at what he does and can recreate that level
of efficiency in others he has a system that should be taken seriously.
Many of us would discard of these new systems piece
mill. Instead we should take a closer look at them and see if they are
something that should be accepted and perhaps sanctioned by the martial art
community. We should realize that they aren’t going to just roll over and die.
Not if they have a following. I propose that we find a way to evaluate these
systems and determine if they are viable. Instead of rejecting them unseen
perhaps we should see if they have anything to offer and if so see what we can
do to help them reach their full potential. Most of the creators of these
systems won’t want to be regulated by any oversight committee but they may
accept any sincere help in getting their systems recognized and to the level
where they will be accepted by the martial art community.
I try to offer such an atmosphere within the BLMAA and
to encourage the same in the Black Dragon Fighting Society. There should be a
place for these systems and their creators if they have something to offer.
Let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Some of the most venerated
systems came from dubious circumstances. Everything has to start somewhere.
Instead of being elitist and dogmatic in our attitude perhaps we can help see
that these systems and the individuals that create them can reach their full
potential. They may never be accepted in the traditional sector but that
doesn’t mean that they have nothing to offer. Old doesn’t always mean better.
Working together we can keep the martial art new and fresh. We don’t want to be
stagnant. Let’s work and grow together. I believe that we’ll all profit from
it. More can be accomplished through cooperation than through opposition.
God bless you, my brethren. Train hard and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel ThD, DCC, MDiv.
Judan Shodai Soke, BLMAA
Patriarch and Head of Family, IFAA BDFS
Traditional Historian, World Wide Dojo
GRANDMASTER
KIM BYUNG CHUN YONG MOO DO CUP 2013.
PAKISTAN
NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS
Rizwan
Mustafa Zubairi
The Pakistan Yong Moo Do Federation had conducted the
“Grandmaster Kim Byung Chun Yong Moo Do Cup 2013, Pakistan National
Championship on 1st June 2013 at Bader-Ul-Hassan Sports Complex, Nazimabad # 3,
Karachi, Pakistan, under the rules and regulation of World Yong Moo Do
Federation. Korea.
Grandmaster Kim Byung Chun is the President of World
Yong Moo Do Federation, had officially approved the event from world
Headquarter, Korea.
The chief Guest of the event was Mr. Nadeem Omer,
Director Omer Associates and sports consultant.
The Chief Referee was Master Rizwan Mustafa Zubairi who
is also the Yong Moo Do founder in Pakistan.
The Jury Panel included. Dilawer Bhatti, Nasir Ali,
Ahmed Din and Mubashir Hassan.
The winners first, second and third positions in
different Weight categories in Sparring event are as follows:
-45 KGS
1-Razi Ahmed. 2-Obaid Ullah. 3-Bilal
-50 Kgs
1-Abdullah.
2-Ehtesham-Ul-Haq. 3-Ahmed Sohail
-55 KGS
1-Mohammad Ali Sohail.
2-Aqeel 3-Dilawer Khan
-60 KGS
1-Tajdar Ali Mehdi. 2-Jawaid. 3-Luqman
-65 KGS
1-Owais Ahmed 2-Sher Dil 3-Safder Ali
-70 KGS
1- Abdul Rehman 2- Amir Siddique 3-Muhammad Zaheer
Mughal
-75 KGS
1-Muhammad Munir. 2-Sher Dil. 3-M.Sawal.
Suqrat Ahmed Farooqi had shown the demonstration of
Yong Moo Do Kibons while Dilawer Bhatti had demonstrated body breaking.
Master Zubairi awarded the international Yong Moo Do
Dan black belts certificate of World Yong Moo Do Federation to the following
instructors.
1-Dilawer Bhatti,2- Nasir Ali,3- Ahmed Din ,4-Danish
Khan,5- Mubashir Hassan , 6-AN Samey Khan , 7-Shahbaz John ,8-Tajdar Mehdi
Al,9-Nehal Ahmed,10- Mohammad Taha Farooqi,11- Suqrat Ahmed Farooqi,12- Mobin
Arif ,13- Naeem Akhtae,14-Choudhry Shahzad Ali,15- Mohammad Arif Abbasi,
16-Ubaid Ullah Arif.
Grandmaster Kim Byung Chun Trophies were awarded to the
following Yong Moo Do Instructors for their active participation and promotion
of Yong Moo Do in Pakistan.
1-Ahmed Deen (Karachi Yong Moo Do Association), 2-Nasir
Ali (Secretary Sindh Yong Moo Do Association), 3-Dilawer Bhatti (Dilawer Yong
Moo Do Academy),4-Mubashir Hassan (President-Mubashir Yong Moo Do
Society),5-Danish Khan (Secretary-Karachi Yong Moo Do Association), 6-Naeem
Akhtar ( President Falcon Yong Moo Do Academy).
7-Mohammad Arif Abbasi.(President-Abbasi Yong Moo Do Academy)8-Choudhry Shahzad
Al (President-Shahzad Yong Moo Do Club)i,9-Suqrat Ahmed Farooqi
(Member-Zubairi’s Martial Arts Centre),10-Mobeen Arif (President-Mobeen Yong
Moo Do Academy).
Regards,
Rizwan Mustafa Zubairi.
Yong Moo Do Founder in Pakistan.
Yong Moo Do International Master Instructor &
Referee.
President-Pakistan Yong Moo Do Federation.
Address: Savanna City A-1/512 Gulshan-e-Iqbal
13/D/3, Karachi-PAKISTAN.Mobile: 0300-2344288
WEEDING
OUT THE WEEDS
Donald
Miskel
Oh really? One man’s weed is
another man’s cuisine. Take the lowly dandelion. Weed? Flower? Pest or
foodstuff? Dandelions are used for food in some cultures. Dandelion greens are
nourishing and rich in vitamin C. Wine is made of the flowers and textiles can
be woven from the strands of the stalks. So taking that into consideration is a
dandelion a weed? Is it worthless? You may not want it to take over your lawn
but the lowly weed that is so despised has more value than you may realize.
Just because you don’t see it as acceptable doesn’t mean that it has no value.
Wonder where I’m going with
this? If you know me you probably have a pretty good idea. Hopefully this is
the last time I’ll have to do such an article. Not that I expect to change the
minds of those whose minds are already made up but I hope that those amongst
the ranks of the organizations I am a member and representative of will hear my
argument.
The martial arts are too
political. There is an imperialistic attitude that some of its factions hold. That
same attitude divides the martial art community into factions of inclusion and
exclusion. Too many individuals seem to feel that they are martial art
aristocracy. Others feel that they are the guardians of the fold. They have and
should have a voice amongst their constituency but their voice isn’t universal.
They may speak for some but they don’t speak for everyone. They don’t nor
should they have the final word in who is accepted and who is rejected.
There are too many levels of
training and skill to put under one umbrella. I agree that there are those who
exaggerate their backgrounds and accomplishments and even create a persona or
alter ego to promote themselves. These
individuals don’t let their level of knowledge and expertise speak for them.
Instead they fabricate a fantasy to fill in the blanks. This shouldn’t be but
to a greater or lesser degree this is too prevalent in the martial arts.
Everyone wants to be bigger than life. The danger of this is that some
individuals can get so entangled in the web they weave that they become lost in
their own self created fantasies. In so doing some really good martial artists
damage their own credibility. Actually some of the better known and accepted
individuals in the arts wouldn’t fare well if their experience was examined
under a microscope. That being said how do we weed out the real martial artists
from the fakes? Easier said than done.
In my estimation there are a
lot of false claims but those who make them aren’t particularly fake martial
artists. Those who train in an art at whatever level they train at are to
varying or lesser degrees martial artists. They may not be very good martial
artists but they are martial artists nevertheless. It isn’t their backgrounds
that disqualify them but their level of skill.
In my organization I tend to
look past all of the claims that a martial artist makes and look to his
knowledge, skill and ability. If he claims to be an instructor or master I look
more at his knowledge and the quality of what he teaches than his credentials.
Credentials are cheap. They can be created on a computer, printed up by a
printer or bought online. Even if an individual is recognized by some
organization or another I still look to his skill set. That describes a martial
artist more accurately than his rank or inclusion in the ranks of some
organization or another.
Knowledge can come from many
places and be acquired in many different ways. Some people can train with some
of the best teachers and still be inept. Others can learn from books or videos
and be devastatingly effective in what they do. Lineage doesn’t always
translate into perfection.
In times past when a martial
artist’s skill could very well mean life or death their knowledge was jealously
guarded. Teachers were very secretive of their knowledge sometimes even amongst
their own students. That’s why any training manuals were kept out of the hands
of possible opposing factions and training was done away from the curious eye
of any errant spectator.
I know of one judo sensei
who acquired his initial black belt rank after training from a book on the
martial art that he studied. No school was available in his area so the book he
studied from was his only resource. With the knowledge acquired from the pages
of that manual he tested for his black belt and became a legend and AAU
champion. How many of us would call him a charlatan by today’s standards? If
you judge his rank according to how he acquired his knowledge and who he
trained under he might be suspect but if you look at his skill you might have
to reassess your opinion.
I tend to look at this argument from several
positions. I see it as a martial artist, as a minister and as a psychologist.
As a martial artist and the head of a couple of international organizations and
a representative of several others I consider background but I weigh skill
heavier in the balance. As a minister I call for honesty and transparency in
the area of self promotion but I’m realistic about my expectations. As a
psychologist or rather as a therapist I look at the psychological implications
of these many self created persona that are created for the public and the
martial art community. Exclusion and none acceptance can create an exaggerated
need to be accepted. Too often those who crave recognition and acceptance from
the community they want to be a part of will go to extreme measures to garner
acceptance.
Unfortunately this creates a
problem in the martial arts. There are inept individuals creating ineffective
systems and teaching them to an unsuspecting public. But again by the same
token there are traditionally trained individuals that are as inept as their
untrained counterparts. In the end if we are going to assess an instructor we
should look at his knowledge and skill and look at the ability of his students.
That will tell the story and offer an accurate assessment of the person in
question.
All martial arts and all
martial artists are not created equal. There are classical systems that aren’t
worth much as real combat systems but may offer other benefits. On the other
hand there are some nontraditional systems that are extremely effective in
combat. Either may fulfill the needs of an individual according to his personal
needs and his reason for studying. If it serves the need of the practitioner
and is efficient in what it is designed to do who am I to criticize it?
Please understand I’m not
justifying dishonesty, exaggeration or false claims. That kind of thing is too
common in the arts. What I am suggesting is that we reassess the way that we
judge those individuals that exist on the fringes of the martial art community.
Sometimes they are where they are not because of a lack of knowledge or ability
but because of how they acquired their knowledge.
In conclusion I suggest that
a teacher or a technician should be judged by his ability if he is judged at
all. Likewise a system should be judged by its effectiveness. I believe that
none traditional systems should be labeled as such as should eclectic
approaches to the arts. Being
nontraditional shouldn’t disqualify a system or disqualify a proficient
instructor or practitioner. To the nontraditional martial artist I encourage
you to be realistic about who you are and be honest about how you came by your
knowledge. Let your ability speak for itself. If you are sound in your martial
skill you don’t have to apologize for not traveling the traditional road. There
is a place for you in the martial arts. You don’t have to be anything other
than what you are. Let your ability speak for you.
God bless you my brethren.
Train hard and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel.
THE
LITTLE THINGS
Donald
Miskel
True martial arts are a
study in precision. Every stance, every move, every technique have been
carefully thought out. Martial arts were developed over years, not in weeks or
months. A lot of observation, a lot of thought, a lot of trial and error have
gone into the final distillation.
There’s a difference between
a martial art and a combat or self defense system. A combat or combat system is
developed for those with immediate needs or who are in high risk
professions. A lot of time isn’t
available for learning a usable system to address their needs. They are simple
and must be easily learned in a short time. A martial art is more concise and
much more advanced. It will take years to learn and many more to perfect.
Most martial art subtleties
are catalogued and sometimes hidden if their forms or what we call kata in the
Okinawan/Japanese systems. The kata were created in such a way that they
required careful learning, training and much repetition to acquire the skill
and learn the lessons that they each. They are designed to make a technician
train and study. It was the only way to access their deeper meanings. Most of the secrets of the art is hidden in
its forms and it requires years of study and training to learn those secrets.
On the surface most kata are
relatively simple. The average green belt student can learn the basic moves of
most forms but it takes many years of patient training and exploration to extrapolate
the deeper lessons they teach. In a traditional or classic art such as karate
or kempo the kata is the art.
These days a student will
learn many kata but that isn’t the way that it was done in years past. A
student would learn a kata or a school of kata in the lifetime of his art. Take
the pinian or hein kata for instance. The series of five kata is an entire
fighting system. The same with the bassai and tekki forms. Each series is a
fighting system within itself. A martial artist will perfect only a handful of kata
in a lifetime. Many of karate’s greatest warriors knew only one or two.
I often quote Master Gichen
Funakosi. When asked what is the kata for the beginner he quickly stated
taikioka. When asked what was the kata for the master, he thought for a minute
and replied, taikioka. Think about it.
When one sees the symbol for
karate one sees a fist in the seiken zuki position. The bread and butter
techniques of karate are the oi zuki (lunge punch) and the gyaku zuki (the
reverse punch). There are many other techniques in karate but those two are the
true power techniques in karate. That isn’t to say that I would want to be
struck with the infamous karate chop or be the recipient of a karate side kick
but the karate punch, especially the reverse punch, is probably karate’s most
devastating technique.
The things that make a
technique efficient or that keeps it from working is in the details; the small
things. Sometime the way a foot is turned (as in the toeing in of the front foot
in zen kutsu dachi) or a slight variation of angle of application can mean the
difference between the success or failure of an applied technique.
Distance learning has become
popular of late. While studying for my masters and both of my doctorates I took
most of my courses on line. I feel that I’m too old to be sitting for hours in
a classroom, especially with students who are young enough to be my
grandchildren. Most colleges and universities offer distance learning courses
online or however they are done. That same trend is becoming more prevalent in
the martial arts. Many schools and organizations offer video training.
I have nothing against
martial art DVDs. I have over five hundred myself and I’m working on a series
of such myself. They make an excellent reference to the various arts available
and insight into their techniques and methodology. I do have mixed feelings
about students who make that their only form of training. It’s not unlike the
students from years past that studied solely from books. There have been the
occasional student that fared well from this type of training and that became
exceptional practitioners but I believe that they are the exception rather than
the rule.
Distance learning is better
than none at all. In areas where schools or instructors aren’t available they
may offer the only alternative. However one must keep in mind that a DVD, tape
or book doesn’t take the place of a good instructor. They offer good
reinforcement to what an instructor is teaching but for the most part they make
a poor substitute for hands on training. They offer general information but
they don’t correct those little things of which we’ve spoken. An instructor can
reposition a hand or correct a stance. He can address the little things that
sabotage the effectiveness of an art’s techniques.
I won’t discourage a student
from purchasing DVDs and using them to supplement his training. If the
logistics make training in a dojo impractical or impossible, again I say that
that kind of training is better than no training at all. Half of anything is
better than all of nothing. Still, I admonish those long distance students to
seek the input of a good instructor at some juncture in their training,
preferably early in their efforts. Bad habits are easy to learn and are often
difficult to unlearn. Effective martial art training requires fine tuning and
distant learning make that difficult if not impossible. Keep in mind, like the
bible states, “It’s the small foxes that destroy the vines”. Those small things
must be addressed if one if to become a competent martial artist.
Train however you can but
avail yourself of the best alternative available. And remember to concentrate
on the little things that make up the perfecting of the martial artist and his
chosen art.
God bless you, my brethren.
Train hard and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel,
MDIV, Thd, DCC
NO
HOLDS BARRED
Donald
Miskel
I just finished watching an
excellent documentary about mixed martial arts. Like many lifelong martial arts
I’ve watched it grow from its infancy to where it is now and like most of my
peers I have mixed feelings about it. It is probably the fastest growing sport
in the world today. It is definitely a lucrative business and a serious money
maker. Promoters and some fighters have made a fortune in the business. Say
what you want about it, it is successful beyond anything most martial artists
would have ever expected. Like it or not, for better or worse, it is probably here to stay.
Most traditional martial
artists look upon MMA with a jaundiced eye. It doesn’t have the esoteric appeal
that classical martial arts have boasted over the years. Gone is the spiritual
aspect that has been attributed to the traditional martial artist. Gone is the
almost ethereal calm of the martial artists of the past. In its place you have a lot of loud in your
face competitors more reminiscent of pro wrestlers than the long held image of
the martial artist of yore.
My foundation is in the
traditional martial arts but I’m not a traditional teacher or practitioner.
Like many American martial art instructors I teach an eclectic approach to the
arts that are for all practical purposes a mixed martial art. Even so I have a
love hate relationship with MMA.
I’ve never been much of a
competitor. I studied the martial arts for a completely different reason. I was
attracted to the mystical appeal and spiritual air that the arts wore back in
the day. I grew up in a tough neighborhood in the inner city on Chicago’s mean
South Side. I was a competent street brawler and was considered tough and
brutal in an atmosphere that bred tough fighters. Amongst some nasty brawlers
and street fighters I stood out. I didn’t really need martial arts for self
defense. I could take care of myself.
I started studying judo and jiu
jitsu at about the same time that I started boxing. Eventually I changed my
focus in the martial arts to karate and kempo. I was a good boxer and enjoyed
the sport but it was just that; a sport. I wasn’t into sports. I liked karate
because it added other practical weapons to my natural arsenal. I was initially
attracted to karate because of its potential as a fighting system. I wanted
more than the unfocused aggression of the average street brawler. I wanted
science rather than raw violence. With my stint in the military during the Viet
Nam conflict the nature of real combat impressed itself upon me. Combat was a
reality. Violence is a fact of life and
I wanted to be the absolute best.
By the time I came out of
the military I had been involved in the martial arts for well over a decade. I
had studied with several instructors in a number of systems and was beginning
to form my own ideas about combat and the martial arts. Tournaments didn’t
offer the opportunity to put my theories to the test. There were too many rules
and sparring was still mostly no contact or controlled contact. I didn’t want
to spar. I wanted to fight. I found what I was looking for in the underground
pit matches that were cropping up during that time. Such fights have always
existed. They were popular during the depression but they have never completely
died out. They were fought in old barns, warehouses or wherever they could take
place away from the watchful eye of the law. They were illegal and money was
made mostly by side bets. They were brutal and bloody but few martial artists
were attracted to them and the skill level wasn’t that high. However what they
lacked in skill they made up for in brutality.
I make no boast about a
great fight record. I was effective in the streets where it counted and I did
well in those underground matches but they were a far cry from the bloodsport
matches that some of my peers fought. They were more like brawls than matches
but I made a little money and I learned what I wanted to know. In those matches
and on the streets I’ve sat straddling another fighter’s chest and tried to
punch his lights out. Never did I dream that something like that would be
embraced in a sport setting.
Had MMA been popular when I was
young enough to compete I probably still would have avoided the sport. Like I
said I’m not a competitor. I’ve never been shy about fighting. I did a lot of
it and I didn’t lose fights. Not so much because of my skill level but because
I’d do whatever was necessary to win. In my mind the only rule that governs a
fight is don’t get hurt and don’t lose. With all of the skill and knowledge
that I’ve accrued since I started this journey in the late fifties I’m still
basically a street brawler. That mindset is hard wired into my DNA at this
point. I look on my martial arts like I do a pistol. Don’t pull it out unless
you’re willing to seriously injure or kill someone with it. It isn’t a contest
with me and it definitely isn’t a game. Fighting is about survival or at least
it was where I grew up.
I don’t train fighters for
tournament fighting no more than I train competitors for MMA. As brutal as MMA
is it’s still a sport. Sports have rules. Fighting doesn’t. I teach a combat
oriented system. I’m not interested in turning out tournament champions or MMA
competitors. For the most part I train individual in high risk professions.
I’ll watch the occasional
MMA match as I will a boxing match but I’m not particularly enamored with
either. They’re beautiful for what they are but they aren’t real combat. Please
understand; I’m not saying that I could stand toe to toe with some MMA
champion. Perhaps I never could have. However my system has served me well and
kept me safe in a very violent environment. My skill and abilities have seen me
through a war and have helped me survive life in some tough neighborhoods. In
the long run that’s what a martial system is designed to do.
I’m up in age now and in
spite of the implications of a hundred Saturday morning kung fu flicks I realize
that the old wise eighty year old kung fu master can’t go toe to toe with a
young fighting champion. As I’ve said to my competent young students in the
past, I can be your worst nightmare for two or three minutes but if you can
last beyond that you’ve got me. Of course, you have to last those few minutes.
I won’t criticize MMA or its
competitors though I don’t care for some of their attitudes. MAA is a fact of
life and as much as I would like to see the traditional martial arts at the
pinnacle of the martial art movement MMA will have its day. Whether it stands
the test of time remains to be seen. I just hope that there will always be a
place for the traditional schools of martial arts. Those schools have the
ability to shape and change young lives. The traditional arts are more than a
punch or a kick. They are treasures that offer more than competition or
violence. They offer an opportunity of self discovery and growth that MMA
doesn’t.
It would be easy to become
discouraged having to compete with the popularity of MMA but the traditional
arts are treasures hidden in plain sight. Those who teach them realize that and
those who pursue them and what they have to offer will be greatly rewarded.
Don’t throw in the towel, my brothers. Keep on doing what you are doing. We
must see that there is always a place for the traditional martial arts.
Keep the faith, my martial
art brethren. Train hard and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel
TRANSPARENCY
IN THE MARTIAL ARTS
Donald
Miskel
Recently something was
brought to my attention that concerns me. The claims of several very
recognizable martial artists are being put to question. Apparently several have
been something less than forthcoming in their history. Actually such
oversights, exaggerations and downright dishonesty aren’t that unusual in the
martial art world. Several controversial individuals are being questioned and a
few actually dragged over the coals because of claims they have made or because
of questionable qualifications. In some instances that is a shame in that some
of those in question are very credible and on a few occasions are excellent
martial artists. The credibility I speak of isn’t in the level of technical
skill that these individuals have displayed. They are good technicians but their
backgrounds are a little shaky.
Transparency in the martial
arts is the ideal but translucency and sometime opaqueness is more common. By
the way this isn’t limited just to those who are on the outskirts of the
martial arts. Many who are pretty much accepted in most martial art circles and
are well thought of by the martial art community couldn’t stand to be put under
a microscope.
Let’s be honest with
ourselves. Most people have a tendency to exaggerate and embellish a little bit
when presenting themselves. Some of the greats in martial art history came with
some less than sterling creds. If I cared to traumatize some of the more naïve
members of the community I could state the questionable credentials of a
several founders of what are now considered traditional arts. It would serve no
purpose to name names or examine these instances in as much as the arts that
they founded have proven to be quite efficient.
I’m not a cynic but I have a
tendency to take everything with a grain of salt. There are many individuals
today that wear the titles of masters or grandmasters myself included. I have
enough sense to realize that I can’t go into the dojo of some master in Okinawa
or Japan and expect them to kowtow when I announce my rank. The rank I wear is
recognized by my peers and the several organizations I am affiliated with. Very few of the masters in these new arts
would be recognized outside of the confines of the U.S.
There are a number of unique
American martial arts that have cropped up over the last several decades.
Though these arts may claim oriental roots most are strictly American arts that
address American needs. All aren’t created equal but some are quite creditable.
They serve the purposes of those who create and those that practice them. They
require little else to recommend them. They don’t need some dark mysterious
past or esoteric roots to be viable. They only need to be viable.
Unfortunately many of the
creators and practitioners of these arts feel that they have to exaggerate
their backgrounds and their accomplishments to validate themselves or the arts
that they teach or study. I tend to evaluate a martial artist according to his
ability not his background or history. As long as his skill level is what it
should be and his art is sound I don’t worry too much about where he acquired
his knowledge. Too often you have to wade through a mile of B.S. to get an inch
of truth. I find that path too dark to tread when it’s too easy to just
evaluate the person according to his ability.
Transparency is always the
best case scenario but I’ve come to expect much of the translucency that
describes the average martial artist. I take fantastic claims in stride and
look past them to see the person instead. A lot of egotism is tied into the
claims of so many martial artists. Many have put their whole lives into their
arts, some to the exclusion of all else. Many have all of their eggs in that
one basket. The martial arts is the one accomplishment that they can claim.
Because of that many present themselves as bigger than life. Even so, some with
shaky pasts have grown into really fantastic martial artists, all outlandish
claims to the contrary.
I haven’t won any major
tournaments. I’m not nor have I ever been that turned on by competition. I
learned martial arts for survival. The only claim I can make is that I’ve been
involved in the martial arts for most of my life. Most of my fighting has been
in the streets or in the military. I’m probably not the best martial artist in
the world but I’m fairly knowledgeable and I can hold my own in a nasty
situation. I’ve survived the ghettos and inner city streets of Chicago and have
lived through actual combat but I’m Bruce Lee. I don’t claim to be nor should I
have to. My survival is what describes the effectiveness of what I teach. I’ve trained with some really good people and
I’ve done more than my share of self training. I don’t feel that I’ve mastered
anything. After well over half a century I’m still a student. Still I stand on
what I know and what I have learned. I pass that on to those who believe in
what I do. I need no other claims. I’m above board and I’m good at what I do.
If anything, that’s my claim to fame. I don’t feel I have to be anything more
than that. Nor should you.
My brothers let’s just be
ourselves. No apologies made nor undue explanations given. In the true martial
arts you only need to prove yourself to two people; yourself and the opponent
that you may have to face. You don’t have to be more than what you are. You
don’t have to be a secret student of Ed Parker, William Chow or Bruce Lee. You
just have to be good at what you’re doing. Be transparent and let you knowledge
and your ability speak for you. In the end your skill will speak for itself. To
the best of our ability let’s be as transparent as possible. In the end that
will always serve you best.
Train hard my brethren and
go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel
THE
LEGACY OF PANKRATION: MIXED MARTIAL ARTS AND THE POSTHUMAN REVIVAL OF A
FIGHTING CULTURE
Magnus
Stenius
Umeå University Department
of Culture and Media Studies Sweden
and Umeå Center for Gender
Studies (UCGS) Graduate School
Guest Scholar Duke
University 2013/2014 Dept. of Culturalanthropology Durham, NC USA.
Abstract
Based on participant
observation in a mixed martial arts club, this article analyzes the concept of
cultural performativity in mixed martial arts (MMA) in relation to the ancient
sport of pankration, which is considered to be the origin of MMA. Informed by
performative theory on culture, I explore the bodily performances of MMA in
combat sports and in a postmodern stand. Thus, the aim of this article is to
acquire contemporaneous knowledge about Pankration and MMA and the connections
they have to modern representations in combat fighting. Hence, this analysis
discusses MMA’s legacy and the posthuman impact of human violence that modern
combat sports performance have on our postmodern cultures and societal
norms.
Key words: ancient, fighting, Greece, MMA, Pankration,
phenomenology, posthuman theory
Introduction
Every Tuesday at 8:00 p.m., I am at the
mixed martial arts gym in my hometown. The gym is located in a basement that
has blue mats and painted red walls. Usually, before the class starts, I and the
other fighters sit against one of the walls, leaning back and watching the
advanced session, when fighters with a professional record of competing in
mixed martial arts (MMA) matches practice. We keep silent and MMA apprentices
show respect for the pros.
At my club, where I am currently carrying
out my participant observation, two fighters have records of competing in Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC)
matches. Finally it is our turn. The instructor orders us to start running in
circles. “OK, you can start to carry each other in your arms,” David, who is
the main coach today at the gym, screams out loud, and after some two minutes
he adds, “OK shift partner and carry another partner on your back.” This drill
continues for what seems to be an eternity, and after some twenty-five minutes
of warmup I am exhausted and have a hard time breathing because my mouthguard
restricts my inhalation immensely. My body is shaking and my muscles are really
drained out.
David then sits down on the floor in the
middle of the gym and gathers everyone around him. He explains how to pass and
cross someone’s half guard when in a
dominant position and trying to mount the opponent. He uses one of the most
adept fighters in the class and then demonstrates how to perform a full-mount
technique; shifting his arms and legs, he uses his elbows to press the
combatant’s head down onto the mat. David reflects, “Just like the old Greeks
used to do it,” and a big smile spreads all over his face, “Great work, guys,
we will practice these grappling techniques more next week. We’re finished for
today. Thanks, everyone.” And the training session is over for that day.
After the shower I go home thinking;
Greeks, fighting and antique warfare, Pankration,
the link towards MMA and start writing down notes as soon as I sit down at my
desk. Martial Arts practice and fighting combat sports has through the last two
decades become increasingly popular and made reassessed via the extremely
popular mixed martial arts turn. Therefore, it becomes vital to analyze and
interpreter how this increased forms of martial arts specialties has rendered
society with sufficient material to study. Cultural norms, values and
ideologies to some extensions affect societal behaviors and
constructs/deconstructs how discourses on especially combat sports are handled
and made innovative over and over.
Mixed
Martial Arts and Pankration
During interviews relating to my
ethnographical research at the local MMA gym in Sweden, the practitioners, or
as we (anthropologists) call them, the others (the fighters in this case), or
in academic terms, “the informants,” usually like to talk about how mixed
martial arts is actually based on an ancient fighting style borne out of
unarmed combat called “Pankration.”
Pankration is a Greek word deriving from
“pan” and “kratos,” meaning “all” and “powers”.[i]
Its roots can be traced back to 648 B.C. when pankration was featured at the
33rd Olympiad. Pankration combat allowed fighting in an all out, every possible
bloody brutal way, letting contesters e.g. pull hair, kneeing, elbowing and
only biting and gouging were barred.[ii]
It is said to have been a cruel and a vicious extreme form of unarmed warfare.
Pankration
is the hybridization of Hellenic boxing and antique wrestling into a freestyle
fighting sport. The sport was revered in ancient Greece and served as the
climactic final event of the Olympics for centuries.[iii]
Like its predecessor, pankration, competition in mixed martial arts has
attracted attention because of the sheer (controlled and disciplined) violence
that takes place in a public stadium.[iv]
Consequently, MMA fighting, a new, kind of a postmodern martial arts phenomenon
derived from pankration, is surely an “all” “powerful” combat sport which sets
“two contestants wearing only trunks, small gloves and a mouth guard in a cage,
and unleashes a multitude of full-force punches, elbow strikes, knee strikes,
kicks, stomps, neck chokes, body throws and other grappling techniques against
each other”.[v]
A mixed martial arts fighter seeks victory
by concussing an opponent into defenselessness, causing syncope by way of a
neck choke, or by coercing an opponent into submission by any variation of
these methods.[vi] Accordingly, this renewed
and action-filled combat sport has awakened many critics, who argue that MMA is
a brutal phenomenon, very much like ancient gladiators fighting in an arena as
a spectator event, attracting many fans.
Greek pankration in juxtaposition may be
among the oldest of martial art forms. It was very well documented before the
coming of Christ, and its practice required the application of both athletics
and warfare.[vii] The popular Ultimate
Fighting Championships (UFC) and other similar mixed martial arts events are
modeled after this ancient Greek combat sport and hitherto combat sports
contest as the Japanese Kumetei, have the bearings of MMA and Pankrations
fighting, pitting two contesters in a ring against each other, with the use of
the very body as sole weapon in martial arts action.
Posthuman
Bodies and Postmodern Martial Arts
This study emphasizes the performative
perceptions in fighting culture and the legacy of pankration’s influences, as
seen in a posthuman perspective of bodies in MMA fighting. It also covers some
background relating to Grecian combat, its role in modern martial arts events,
and its influence on other forms of fighting, including the recent trend in
no-holds-barred (NBH) bouts. The original form of pankration no longer exists,
but it is still around today in various other forms (e.g. Brazilian Jiujutsu, Sambo,
Shoot, and Savate, etc.).
Pankration has been redesigned its form as
an ancient combat, and it has, through the sport of MMA, been given recognition
for its controlled, focused, and disciplined style.[viii]
Structurally, pankration is patterned after the original Hellenic and ancient
integrating striking and grappling techniques in what was among the very first
forms of mixed martial arts fighting. Seen in a juxtaposed perspective it is
the resemblances between the two versions, one ancient, thousand years ago and
one modern, drawn upon the original versions of combat warfare. I stress that
there is a situated ontological complicity that are implicated in the
distinction between pankration and MMA fighting, at the gym and in its historical
diversity that keeps them apart but in a fighting contexts also brings them
together. Further more, this is what makes this sport so vital and interesting
to modern combat sports and contact sports theoretical reflections and issues
that are examined. MMA and pankration is on a narrow line, in a tight landscape
addressing deep questions in our postmodern society, why ancient way of
fighting has been brought up in contemporary society to be recognized and
legitimized again? More so, it is these present questions, which is here to
make the researcher aware of the epistemological oppositions that are integral
in this interrelationship between the two martial arts specialties. That’s one
of the major aspects that needs to be scrutinized in order to be able in
getting reliable answers on contemporary combat sport of today, exemplified
through the posthuman phenomena of mixed martial arts full contact
fighting.
Hence, this study opens up a general
discussion of performance, performativity and representation in MMA and combat
sports. Thus, the central logic and the topic of this paper is the extraction
of the performative legacy in fighting culture from mixed martial arts practice
in a postmodern era of combat sports. The study emphasizes MMA fighting in the light
of “posthuman bodies,” in that the emerging political, ideological, and
technological aspects of the moving body in the wake of postmodernity are
essential and interdisciplinary sites of investigation.[ix]
Moreover, it is those legitimate issues that come at stake clarifying MMA
combat sports of today, whether being ‘sportive, violent, a masculine domain’
etc. and ultimately; in the wake of a postmodern cultural phenomenon a revival
that has been resurrected in new forms. A new arrangement that has brought
reconsolidation to the sportive instrumental of the martial arts specialty
thereby deepened the technical and tactical refinements of the bouts outcome.
This has indubitably adjudicated the sport of ultimate fighting, via mixed
martial arts practice with vitalized incitements of legitimate sports
access.
In thinking about a contemporary combat
sport as MMA, resurgence the typological models of staged violence indicting:
the rise of a popular culture, vis-à-vis men measuring men in a full contact
unarmed battle, just like in ancient warfare. However, such a comparison is
also in lieu of pankrations locus of a staged event-taking place in an
auditorium in antique Greece. Henceforward, public access to these hyper-modern
battles in UFC events, broadcasted via high tech media (I pad, IPhone, PC and
TV, etc.) allows for any viewers to be a part of a simulacrum that represents
fighting in the light of posthuman bodies performing in front of our very
eyes. Though these hyper-simulacra of
battles, recreates pankration resemblances, we cannot travel back in time to
discover and retrieve these antique events that took place. Yet, we can compare
and via the juxtaposed similarities in todays MMA fighting and yesterdays
pankration warfare understand more of a postmodern singularity that is taking
place. Combat sports has reached a sort of a reconciliation, and this system of
full contact fighting addresses significant debates on MMA and what our society
allows us to do with our very bodies at hand. Yet, these discussions how to
define violence will depend on narratives.
Mixed
Martial Arts: A Performative and a Representative Return
While reading the books Pankration, The Traditional Greek Combat
Sport and Modern Mixed Martial Art, edited by Jim Arvanitis (2003) and No Holds Barred, The Complete History of
Mixed Martial Arts in America, by Clyde Gentry (2011), I observe how
frequently the authors of these texts use a terminology that is taken from the
fields of anthropology and performance studies.[x]
More specifically, the authors speak in terms of performance and ultra modern
fighting cultures, or, as Jim Arvanitis explicitly puts it: “mixed combat and
the modern world’s version of fighting performances”.[xi]
Gentry in turn, speak of extreme performances of bodies that clash into each
other in a postmodern society.[xii]
This performance
terminology that is used in relation to combat fighting refers to an analytical
approach to culture called the performative
turn, a methodological approach adopted by the social sciences and
humanities that became particularly fashionable during the 1990s.[xiii]
In short, what is essential to the performative turn is an urge to
conceptualize how human bodily practices relate to their contexts in a way that
goes beyond traditional approaches to culture and society in that it takes the
heuristic factor into account.[xiv]
Its theoretical standpoint attempts to go beyond a concept of the lived body
itself by not seeing the body as an object or a “thing” or a notion in its
undivided entity. Rather, the performative turn tries to unlock the human body
and look upon how embodied experience responses in a comingling of the body’s
specific actions.[xv] Men’s bouts in mixed
martial arts contests are strongly characterized by polarized oppositions, between
winning and loosing, sacrificing the very corporeal existence in the ring.
Fighters then serve as archetypal representatives in their battles
performances, becoming the stereotype of a popular cultural inducement via
actions that are utterly depended on a violent performativity in this
case.
This is something, which also stresses
that MMA fighting is carried out by way of a rational, instrumental, or
affective form of violence. This affective form is made through a fighter’s
engagement of autotelic violence used with the balance of confrontational
tension in between them.[xvi]
However, fighters do this with a great knowledge of combat and a “normalized”
mimetic experience of the chaos of the sport, where anything can happen.[xvii]
So, through the commentary on MMA fights
and the responses of research subjects (fighters bodies: as subjects with
agency), it can be seen how mixed martial arts, from a postmodern view of the
fighting experiences of bodies in the “return” of pankration’s legacy, shows us
how the performative violence of “unnatural” chaotic acts becomes “natural”,
mimetic, mnemonic and autotelic by the use of physical force, defined in
sportive terms, as sites of natural performance.[xviii]
This is what MMA comes down to: an act of natural performance or unnatural act
of representation? What seems to be at stake here is how mixed martial arts
fighting are to be judged, perceived and negotiated as harmful or non harmful
by its critics and by its fans?
As MMA still is a relatively young sport in
its own remark, having existed since 1993, approximately two decades,
ultimate-fighting contexts may bee in need of more data income, over a longer
period of time. Taking narrow and stressed conclusions might be misleading and
a source of more prejudiced opinions against the sports composition.
Nonetheless, dissecting MMA locus via the posthuman bodily stance can direct
some fundamental upbringings that has been neglected and conceded in earlier
research in MMA.
Posthuman
Proficiency and Implementation of Legacy
A posthuman perspective concentrating on
fighters’ violent combat, might therefore be reevaluated in the light of a
postmodern gaze to view personal (e.g. two contesters/ fighters brute struggled
displayed in the octagon) performance as either a phenomenological approach to
the world (in which bodies are in an unambiguous cultural sphere of sportive or
violent framings, presenting an performative act;[xix]
in that the representation is perceived as violent from the audience’s perspective,
or as a sensory autoethnographical knowledge, in which it is an experimental,
embodied understanding that relates to that specific situation occurring.[xx]
Sources of this type are intended to associate MMA with being interdisciplinary
and having an inside perspective, not reflecting on the cultural outcome of
these events. Obviously, a cutting edge existing here, perhaps even more,
comprehensive members of martial arts combat would not agree to outer sociality
opinions criticizing the sport for being so overdriven in its controlled and
disciplined violent framing. Rather proponents, argue the necessity for
grasping across the allowance in what bodies may do to other human beings.
Full-contact combat is therefore a
situated individual enactment of existing corporeal conceptualizations of autotelic
and mimetic fighting transpiring, which relates to a person’s or bodily primary
dyad of relationships.[xxi]
It involves the descriptions of the senses and the sociality of research
participants through the embodied experience of pain and injury and the senses
and rhythm of combat. There is a correlation in MMA that points towards
building bodies, and yet, as a simultaneous coprocess, breaking them down
again. Seen in this perspective, the pugilist implementation of fighting is an
indecisive target for mixed martial artists, as it is framed in a regulated
arena and there are certain rules to follow, characterized by a dualism:
success and failure, fit bodies and damaged bodies, and routine training and a
public performance of bodily spectacles.[xxii]
Ultimately, bodies are thus punctuated and symbolized broken and defeated.
Further more, if these symbolic actions then are a way of reinstating the
contender’s corporeal capital, in a ‘Pierre Bourdieu’ habitus sense of transpiring into manifested events of ‘brutal’
unarmed war, then these matches are indeed scenes of ‘postmodern pankration’
manifesto occurring.
Hence, calibrating these contest into an
analyze consisting of performative returns
and turns of actions in a new posthuman
(where bodies ultimately are at the core of clashing into each other) era
clearly demonstrates that there is a cultural materiality in a cutting edge going on here.
New-materialism theory in which the body is seen as an agent affected and
effected of its cultural milieu, depicted in the sociality, has shown that some
parts fit into MMA:s recital habitat
and others are not allowed. These actions would for instance be, emotional
behavior that are restricted to minimum and instrumental agency are heightened
to maximum in order to meet the demands of a legacy in such a return of an
ancient sport revisited. Concluding that MMA in a macro format legitimate the
macro level of pankration heritage and on a global scale instigating MMA in
legacy of antique unarmed battle. Though, there are no concrete rejoinders, it
is likely to enhance MMA:s legacy hereon.
Subsequently, conceptions like performance
and inheritance function both as representations and as analytical tools in
providing the means for framing and analyzing the construction of social and
cultural phenomena in combat sports as performed practices, e.g. the impression
of violent mixed martial arts performances. Where performance is the embodied
re-actualization of symbolic systems, e.g. “men fighting in a cage,” it thereby
connotes aggression, fear, and violence.[xxiii]
More so, it is also on the verge of an unarmed war.
Accordingly a posthuman idea, then,
consists of considering what an individual person’s body has done in an explicit
performance (e.g. the metaphors of pankration) or in a sublime performative act
(sportive connotations and denotations), and what a fighter actively does with
his body, that is, performing martial arts practice as a civilized sport.[xxiv]
So, academically, the performance and the performative concept are used to
describe the cultural interactions between social actors (fighters) or between
a cultural/social actor (a fighter and the audience) and his or her surrounding
environment. A milieu that is often read as punitive and constructed on the
seemingly binary split of physical conduct deployed in the battle cage.
From this perspective then, the perceived
outcome of how to interpret a mixed martial art fight is determined and
understood. In this case, the performative aspects of physical actions function
and operate as a subtle description of how mixed martial athletes become
pankration’s warrior legacy in full-contact fighting. As they embody the
foundations of pankration in mixed martial arts combat (martial arts techniques
are based on pankration), the practitioners convert a reinstatement of the
performativity bequest of this embodied practice. It thereby enhances the
posthuman aspect in bringing consolidated practices back to life in a new form
of bodily performative shows through MMA fighting. Interesting and adequate
that these bodily powers cemented in front of our eyes in the 21st
century, founded nearly 2500 years ago, in a posthuman corporal way, exists and
are being brought back in recognition, made essential legitimate and
validated.
A
Combat Turn of Performativity
In spite of being considered a phenomenon
of the 1990s, the performative turn has its roots in the 1940s and 1950s, where
it stems from two strands of theory, an anthropological/ sociological strand
connected with names such as Kenneth Burke,[xxv]
ritual theoretician Victor Turner,[xxvi]
and Erwin Goffman,[xxvii]
and a second strand from the philosophy of language theory, connected with
names such as John Austin[xxviii]
and John Searle.[xxix] However, from the 1970s
onwards, the concept of performance has been integrated into a variety of
theories in the social sciences[xxx]
and humanities, such as poststructuralist thought, phenomenology, critical
theory, semiotics, Lacanian psychoanalysis, deconstruction, feminism, and
recently, posthumanism and new materialism.[xxxi] New-materialism and MMA here cuts an
important yak, an edge, on the verge of imploding backwards as violent fighting
implements abhorrent reaction in postmodern society, integrating the cosmology
of an ambivalent cultural stand.
Consequently, the noteworthy thing about
all these different theoretical frameworks that have integrated the concepts
offered by the performative turn is that they are far from compatible most of
the time, one being a critique of another, and so on. Yet they all seem to be
compatible with the ideas and the terminology of the performative turn. Why is
this so? What is it about the bodily element which turns the art of fighting
and wrestling into a mixed martial arts performance that can strike such an awe
in so many different types of thought about culture, society, violence, the
human being, the world, and subjectivity, and so forth? My point here is that
if the concepts alone can bridge new scientific knowledge to this extent about
bodily performances, what couldn’t we learn from turning to the phenomenon of
mixed martial arts fighting, where these concepts come from, that is, the art
of pankration and combat cultures? That is to say, people, the human being has
fought bloody wars throughout history, which one cannot deny or at least not
disagree to? Pankration and MMA of today detectably bear the marks of battle
war, the conflict of a non-technological order utilized to hold up a clear
arbitration that in a postmodern society not is supposed to be crossed.
Pankration/ MMA and fighting practice now
has the potential to offer even more understanding of corporeal practices. It
is this potential that I explore in this study by uniting the past with the
ideas of the present: connecting pankration with a deeper knowledge in mixed
martial art training to gain performative knowledge of how bodily actions
functions and operates. To mention one example, Dale C. Spencer, the
sociologist, PhD scholar and instigator of ethnographic studies in a
phenomenological turn, who understands fighting culture and mixed martial arts,
successfully applied the notion of phenomenology to the human bodily performing
arts of fighting cultures.[xxxii]
According to Spencer, outside the performing arts, phenomenology[xxxiii]
is an expressive embodied behavior more than an imaginative one. To emphasize
the coded aspects of fighting culture, Spencer defines fighting performances as
“restored practices,” which also underlines the connections to pankration’s
rebirth in our modern, postmodern, and posthuman society. Pankration severs as
the remedying insight that provides the means and the genuine answers to
questions any criticizing towards mixed martial arts culture receives. So, the
performance of violence is in birthright, placed and fixated as a platform seen
in a sportive context, were fighters compete.
Furthermore, they (fighters of mixed
martial arts) should be seen as a continuum, considering that not everything is
meant to be a performance at the same time and that everything ranging from a
fighting performance to a political rally, court procedures and sports events
such as an MMA gala is performativity contradicted. MMA when bodily studied as
such and consequently be seen to be close in contemporary terms to a popular,
cultural re-imagination of a either a gladiator game or an Olympic event of pankration
battle reconstructed over and over again: this turns the fighting performances
of MMA in to a “hyper simulacra” of pankration. These hyper-simulacra operate
as an actor, a discourse, and an agency connecting, the ideology of violent
bodies to a meta-violence, then bodies to pankration, to MMA and eventually
bodies to a posthuman society, where there are no rules. Like UFC in the
beginning, in 1993 claimed, there are no rules to follow, that the event were
called ultimate fighting, no holds barred sports. Insinuating this unarmed
battle of warfare, thus infers that fighting in MMA contests are balancing on
the edge of a new combat era/turn.
Following on this track, for the purpose
of analysis, Spencer distinguishes between two senses of bodily performances
and phenomenological body practice. Referring to a framed event, he argues that
performance is in one sense an enactment of cultural conventions and
traditions, something that he calls a “bodily-experience of performance.”
Performance also refers to the informal happenings of daily life, which implies
that everyday practices are performed, something that, in the other sense, he
calls “bodies in time and space of performance”.[xxxiv]
What Spencer alludes to here, in short, is the materiality of bodies in such
approaches to the “body,” and he sets the key parameters to the overarching
external environment in which social and cultural actions of extreme performances
take place.[xxxv] Moreover, in extracting
this line into MMA logics of perception, as it is viewed in media, by the
researcher, by its critics and by its fans, it is obvious that combat sports
cannot exists without the body, its material and its organic composition, which
is the central mechanism to ultimate fighting culture. This guides us to follow
in the legacy of pankration violent body order. The combat of bodies, the
sacrifices that are made via the body is per see, instantly a materiality in
and/ out of what a human being can do and are allowed to do, namely, destroy
and at its peak kill another human being in battle.
My study, then, relates to the legacy of pankration’s
cosmology in combat culture and Spencer’s corporeal theory, as he exemplifies
the offering of just the kind of knowledge that bridges the range of critical
theory present today, including posthumanism, phenomenology, and the new
materiality of bodily performance, which are all used in the bulk of my own
ethnographical fieldwork as they serve as an umbrella for my auto embodied
thinking in general. Since the early 1990s this “new” postmodern combat sport
has emerged that challenges this conception. MMA competitions feature
competitors in a ring or a caged-in area who inflict pain on their opponents by
punching, kicking, elbowing, and kneeing their opponents into submission.[xxxvi]
Its features are undeniably similar to the structural basis of pankration’s
combat system and in juxtaposing both of them serves its logical substances on
the performance in martial arts locus.[xxxvii]
A martial arts locus that must have a degree of corporal bias, to such
extension that bodies and the embodiment of fighter’s battles are encompassing
contesters, serving them in vicious surroundings. Yet, be that violence becomes an immersion of
sportive means and a sociality of accepted violent norms to follow.
Pankration
Performativity and Phenomenology
It is important to mention that within the
arts (in practical corporal research) there has also been a performative turn
that has taken place on the border between practice (as a way of studying
phenomena such as the example above relating to embodied knowledge) and art
proper as the1960s performance art culture came into existence (which the
performance scholar Richard Schechner came out of).[xxxviii]
The German theater theorist and historian Erika Fischer-Lichte describes this
development both from a historical and a theoretical perspective.[xxxix]
From a historical perspective, Fischer-Lichte argues that
the first attempt to theorize performance was when Theatre Studies was founded
as an academic discipline at the beginning of the last century. In Germany,
Theatre Studies was founded by Max Herrmann, who claimed in his simular work
that the bodily copresence of actors and spectators during an event is what
constitutes the performative aspects—not the dramatic action going on, as was
earlier claimed when the study of theatre was a branch of Literary Studies.
One of Fischer-Lichte’s
historical points is that Theatre Studies and Ritual Studies (which today for
the most part are parts of anthropology) share a similar historical development in refocusing on performance and eventness
instead of focusing on drama. This happened around the same time as the
founding of theatre studies and therefore is at the base of a close allegiance
between these two disciplines: displaying how MMA is made up of violent,
dramatic acts transgressed through rules in a staged performance of eventness.
As modern martial arts combat like MMA is
staged at extreme cultural events, in huge arenas, which highlights the
similarity of these combat wars to Olympic pankration events, a theatrical
approach is in lieu of the terms that Fischer-Lichte (2008) proffers that
theorize the performative turn within the performative arts. A new,
performative aesthetics that entirely rethinks how bodily meaning, mind, and
dualism are communicated between the stage and the auditorium is based on the
facts that MMA is a form of theatrical platform and performance arts are not
objects of arts but are taking place as events.[xl]
Instead of a semiotic communication model, Fischer-Lichte proposes the idea of
an autoflowing feedback loop. She bases this on the phenomenology of Maurice
Merleau-Ponty, as does Spencer, who claims that mixed martial arts is to be
seen from an embodied and sensorial experienced phenomenological angle.[xli]
Fisher-Lichte is very much in line with
Herrmann, who focuses on the embodied and experientially, based copresence of
performers and bodily involvement that, in a collaborative spirit, negotiate
the meaning of the performance together (e.g. on a micro level, two fighters
sharing their bodily knowledge or, on a macro level, pankration and MMA sharing
the same practicalities).
The meaning of embodied performance,
disembodied from performativity of knowledge, however, as the performance art
culture of the 1960s and onward helps Fischer-Lichte to illustrate, is
negotiated on two different perceptual levels. Thus, the perceiving subject in
the octagon, its audience/ auditorium and the performing subject, the fighters
on stage/ in the ring, oscillate between “the order of presence,” which
emphasizes the lived, phenomenological, autotelic, violent body, and “the order
of representation,” which emphasizes the semiotic body of pankration.[xlii]
Experiential meaning is first attained while oscillating between these two
perceptual orders. Consistently with Merleau-Ponty’s account, the lived
experience in fighting is what allows for reflection to occur in the first
place, upon which reflective meaning, e.g. how violent perception can be
attained in mixed martial arts practice, is gained.[xliii]
Looking at the form of violence in MMA in this sense is an aesthetic approach
to violence that seeks to uncover the intrinsic features of the semi staged
mimetic violence.[xliv]
Drawing on Fischer-Lichte’s theoretical
description (in arguing for the personal, embodied, ethnographical, field-site
value of grasping and placing the juxtaposed knowledge in between MMA and pankration,
I will refer back to her historical description), it is vital to pay attention
to the fact that whereas there is a lot of knowledge about the contemplative
meaning-making in the performativity of perceived inhumane MMA fighting.
There is still much to learn about the
experiential meaning-making process that is first and foremost lived and
therefore is not communicated as long as combat cultures are not examined on
the level of bodily experience. The reason for this is that the embodied
experiential level for the most part remains tacit in the relationship between
MMA and pankration, and obviously, in relationship to pankration, that is
difficult to study. However, the distinctness of MMA as a drama form puts both
performers and the audience in contact with the experiential level of its
violent exposure. Even better, something that Fischer-Lichte is adamant to
point out, the experiential level is not experienced as “ordinary” but
experienced as “extraordinary”. When experienced as extraordinary, the ring,
the octagon, and the fighters in particular can cut through the scrutiny of the
experiential level to get at lived knowledge through their bodies’
representation.
In studying mixed martial arts and pankraton
in relation to performative meaning-making quandaries like these categories
(brute force, semi staged and event), there is much more understanding to be
gained, pertaining not only to performance and phenomenological theory but also
to cultural theory, for instance as it taps into the idea of the posthuman and
new materialism[xlv] evaluation on bodily
actions and agency. Seen in this perspective, autotelic violence can be thought
of as complementary to explanations that focus on the performativity of
violence in itself. Through a phenomenology of violence, we can then elucidate
the autotelic aspects of the performance acts themselves.[xlvi]
They are on the border and the limits of being meticulous acts of brute force.
Hence, a power that is human and instigated to destroy and defeat another
person’s embodied being. Keeping this in mind doesn’t solve the bearings of how
to analyze the performativity’s rightful legacy in conducting full contact
actions, as restrictions, rules and taboos adjusts to the normality of the
sport development. Such symmetries in MMA and combat sports as a whole, affects
the fluctuations over time in how to view violence appearing on stage and
performed in safety.
Ethnographical
Combat Ontology
Before explaining the pankration
connection to MMA that I have envisioned, I will describe a brief idea of the posthuman
stance. In critical theory the posthuman is a reconception of the human being
(in this case MMA fighting), that is, an applied ontological being (a combat
warrior) that is not a singular defined individual, but one who can
"become" or embody different characteristics and understand the world
from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives. The list of words explaining key
concepts within the various posthumanistic theories that is included in the
book Posthuman Key Concepts explains
posthumanism like this: “Theories, commenting on the
changing conditions of human being,
a body in the wake of modern
transformations related to technology, health, democracy and environment”.[xlvii]
In
the process of writing my doctoral thesis, Full
Contact: An Ethnographic Encounter With Mixed Martial Arts,
I developed a model for an ethnographic phenomenological ontology that
contrasts with something that I define as a postmodern performative ontology:
the conjecture means that the researcher needs to be embodied and inaugurated
to curb certain knowledge in the practical field. What the posthuman
phenomenological ontology helped me to explain was the different ways in which
a fighter can become and embody MMA on the semistaged and metatheatrical level,
as a metawarrior, adapting the features of pankration and thereby cognizing the
violence associated with the sport. Since the main focus of my doctorate
project is not on posthuman scenic ontology, but on getting an ethnographic encounter
for contemporary bodily understanding in mixed martial arts combat violence by
studying how one becomes a fighter in the training center and on stage, I would
like to emphasize the focus on the “autophenomenological ethnography of
ontology” more thoroughly and in much greater detail in connecting it to pankration.
In addition, there is also great potential in such a project to move the model
outside of the performing arts, sliding MMA in to sportive terms in a similar
way to what Spencer did with his theories of performance and phenomenology of
the bodily experiences in full-contact fighting.
In
one article, entitled “Ontologies Politics: one word and some questions,” that
is included in Posthuman Key Concepts,
the Dutch anthropologist of science and technology Annemarie Mol argues
that reality is multiple and not a singular object that can be described from
different positions or situations in terms of aspects of one singular reality.[xlviii]
To perceive how this multiplicity of realities is played out, Mol relies on the
performance metaphor showing how the reality is created in several coexisting versions.[xlix]
Between these versions of reality, ongoing negotiations take place that Mol
defines as a political ontology—the body is doing MMA fighting—and in a phenomenological
approach that is employed here, Mol emphasizes the sensory experience of
embodied singularities.[l]
I contend that the body in the singular must be analyzed continually in
relation to other bodies and be seen as a legacy of those other bodies and
asked why it is seen in a particular way and why it is looked at from a
perspective that also includes the pankration inheritance. In the case of MMA,
where rules are instituted to encourage certain forms of “reasonably” us of
performative violence, there is sublimation between violent practices and the
violent body, and a distinction between whether or not the fighter’s body
becomes a violent weapon, as in the combat fighting of pankration applied.
Building
on Mol’s notion of a political ontology, I have created a model for posthuman
phenomenological ontology. I claim that in relation to the politics of
practical ontology going on during a staged event in mixed martial arts
fighting as part of the performative feedback loop of pankration heritage, an
epistemological level must also be seriously considered, with bodies taking
primacy over cultural and social experience. Hence it is, in Fischer-Lichte’s
terms, extraordinary rather than ordinary bodily performances that take place
during a full-contact fight in MMA combat culture. Consistent with ontological
reasoning in general, I not only discuss the reality of the staged fights in
relation to performative ontology, but I also discuss the fighters being on
stage in a metalevel of performance. Importantly, modern phenomenological
ontology has considered public space (e.g. an octagon in MMA) to exist along a
vertical axis between a high level and a lower level, conscious and
unconscious, abject, subjectivity and objective reality, and so on.[li]
Spencer shows how these conscious acts of performance transgress fighting
bodies to determine the status of the body and therefore define what the MMA
body is, turn to how bodies move and experience in manifold ways, and what
bodies are capable of doing.[lii]
Mol shows us that there is also a horizontal axis suggesting coexisting
versions of a staged reality rather than a singular objective reality, which
also relates to the performative aspect in active bodies that are inflicting
physical brutality and/or viciousness such as in MMA fighting. The ontology of
being/becoming a fighter in MMA refers to the relationship between the human
being and the world, where the ontology of being on stage in a ring or an
octagon would refer to the relationship between the fighter and the world
outside of him or her derived from pankration warfare, which in this case is
imaginative and set to reassemble that particular legacy. It thereby
legitimizes the coexistence of a version of MMA and features of pankration in a
postmodern contemporary world of today.
From the time when pankration and theories
of performance history began until postmodern performativity was developed, the
fighter has always been perceived as in the
world in the ring/octagon, just as the human being is assumed to be in the real world. What I evoke in my
model is that the fighters’ being (and the audience seeing, e.g. MMA being
violent or not) on stage oscillates between at least three coexisting versions
of being in relation to the world.[liii]
The fighter, as well as the human being, is oscillating between being in, of,
and with the world. Being of the world is an understanding derived
from Merleau-Ponty and being with the
world is an understanding derived from Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari.[liv]
Whereas Fischer-Lichte builds her idea of the ordinary as extraordinary on the
oscillation between perceptual orders as framed by the feedback loop and
founded on the lived body’s experiential capacity, she cannot fully get at the
multiplicity of this process.
Fig 1 and 2. Professional MMA-Fighters in the mixed
martial arts club at the fieldwork location in northern part of Sweden.
In shifting from perceptual orders to a
phenomenological ontology, we can internment the multiple participation that is
happening during a staged fighting event, at its semitheatrical core. I call
this multiple competing the overdrive of the politics of practical ontology.
The overdrive in this case also stems from the fact that in the performative
corporeal act there is an additional line of fighting in MMA that is going on:
beside between versions of reality/ autenticity and versions of fighting-being,
there is a play between facticity/fictitiously, the materiality of bodies that
exists in between physical reality, and the fictive states of an MMA fight as staged.[lv]
When the oscillations between all these levels of fighting come together, how
can one not talk about a spectacular overdrive in the MMA event-taking place?
Studying this overdrive closely in its extraordinary state of “brute” force,
can explain important things outside the performing arts about, at the very
least, the experience of becoming a fighter, that is, a human being in, of,
and with the world originating from pankration. This is the legacy of
a posthuman bodily stance on embodied performance, which transports transhumant
Pankration of wargame into a postmodern reality of mixed martial arts combat
sport.
Conclusions
I want to stress that my take on
practical combat ontology, as it can be translated into a discussion on ontology,
pankration, and MMA combat within cultural criticism in general, offers a
compatible fresh conceptual understanding of embodied, situated knowledge,
since I show that the point is not that the various theoretical frameworks that
explain the human fighter as a being in,
of, and with the world are compatible. They are not. Making a mishmash of
them as a scholar is neither convincing nor consistent. However, the point of
coexisting versions of MMA and Pankration is not compatibility, but the fact
that they all exist at the same time (or at least are brought back in a
simulacra) and that there is a constant political negotiation going on in mixed
martial arts fighting, e.g. whether it should be brutal or not. Thus, this new
conceptual understanding needs to be theorized properly and communicated to a
wider audience outside of academia performance and phenomenological theory.
This is why I stress that a researcher studying combat arts from an
ethnographic perspective should practice combat arts to gain valuable knowledge
of its performance of representativeness.
A posthuman understanding of pankration’s
influence on modern combat sports, exemplified through MMA, shows us that this
phenomenon of fighting culture is a performative action, bodily, and highly
post factum event which have a dyadic and integral violent relationship.
Violent exposure, through our very bodies themselves, disperses to break down
the proximity between combatants in MMA fighting, and is in lieu of posthuman
ontological tendencies of being more than just a self-destructive activity,
reduced to self-serving singularities. MMA fighting and MMA bodies show us that
this postmodern sport, reinvented as a legacy of pankration, does indeed rest
on a performative turn and as such is a phenomenon of much more than outer
objectives in homosociality/homoeroticism or brute aggressiveness in their
appearances. Rather, MMA rests on the dyadic participation of two combatants or
a covenanter in a two-party interaction of physical and autotelic violent
friction.
The basis of MMA, similar to that of pankration,
involves a greater level of bodily intimacy and reciprocal exchange in the
force of action in integral combat. This conception may be sui generis in the
cultural and social relationship between fighters, its motivation (fighters
using intentional violence in MMA) and forms of consent in fighting being (Pankraton
related to MMA) in order to be able to describe and understand mixed martial
arts. When put together, in post-factum, out of two tendencies, one monistic,
and the other antagonistic, the link between Pankraton and MMA becomes visible.
As noted, MMA’s bodily performance, transgressed by the use of inflicted
violence, is a performative action in its irreversible dyadic legacy of Pankration
genuineness in posthuman and postmodern case of human bodies undertaking
forceful acts. To sum up, MMA, closely related to pankration, is a dyadic
performativity of violent actions, performed in a strategic and tactical
framework of rules that allow force in between the inside and the outside of
the corporeal activities that determine the level of veracity in fighting. With
regards to a posthuman tendency, in that MMA fighters seek a lived, action
experienced culture instead of the culture affecting them as actors, combat
sport is first and foremost a legacy of pankration that needs to be explored
further. The UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) and MMA is a measurement of
violent exposure allowed and MMA here becomes an indicator for how to perceive
sports violence.
References
[1] Buse, G. J.
2006. No Holds Barred Sport Fighting: A 10-Year Review of Mixed Martial Arts
Competition. British Journal of Sports
Medicine: 40(2).
[1] Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial
Art. Colorado: Paladin Press.
[1] Poliakoff, Michael. 1995. Combat Sports in the Ancient World: Competition, Violence and Culture.
Connecticut: Yale University Press; 54-59.
[1]
Gentry, Clyde. 2011. No Holds
Barred: The Complete History of Mixed Martial Arts in America. Chicago:
Triumph Books.
[1]
Buse, G. J. 2006. No Holds Barred Sport Fighting: A 10-Year Review of
Mixed Martial Arts Competition. British
Journal of Sports Medicine: 40(2); 169.
[1]
Buse, G. J. 2006. No Holds Barred Sport Fighting: A 10-Year Review of
Mixed Martial Arts Competition. British
Journal of Sports Medicine: 40(2).
[1]
Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The
Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial Art. Colorado:
Paladin Press; 1-2.
[1]
Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The
Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial Art. Colorado:
Paladin Press; 3-6.
[1] Halberstam, Judith and Livingstone, Ira. 1995. Posthuman Bodies: Unnatural Acts: Theorizing
the Performative. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
[1]
Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The
Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial Art. Colorado:
Paladin Press; 5-10.
[1]
Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The
Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial Art. Colorado:
Paladin Press; 10-11.
[1]
Gentry, Clyde. 2011. No Holds
Barred: The Complete History of Mixed Martial Arts in America. Chicago:
Triumph Books.
[1]
Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The
Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New York: Routledge.
[1] Enström, Ann. 2012. Towards a Phenomenological Woman:
Presenting Mia Skärringer in her Play: Horny and Holy as Hell. Nordic Theatre Studies: 24(1).
Stockholm: Nordic Theatre Scholars.
[1] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 2-3.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 120.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting
and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York: Routledge;
116.
[1]
Halberstam, Judith and Livingstone, Ira. 1995. Posthuman Bodies: Unnatural Acts: Theorizing the Performative.
Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
[1] Denzin, Norman, K. 2003. Performance Ethnography: Critical Pedagogy and the Politics of Culture.
Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 3.
[1] Stenius, Magnus. 2011. Actors of Violence. Staging the
Arena in Mixed Martial Arts. Nordic
Theatre Studies 23(1): 86-97. Stockholm: Nordic Theatre Scholars.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 129.
[1] Woodward, Kath. 2008. Hanging Out and Hanging About:
Insider/Outsider Research in the Sport of Boxing. Ethnography 9: 536-560; 555.
[1]
Gentry, Clyde. 2011. No Holds
Barred: The Complete History of Mixed Martial Arts in America. Chicago:
Triumph Books; 23-9.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 117.
[1] Burke, Kenneth. 1973. The Philosophy of Literary Form: Studies in Symbolic Action. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
[1] Turner, Victor. 1969. The Ritual Process:Structure and Anti-Structure. Chicago: Aldine.
[1] Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in
Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.
[1] Austin, John. 1975. How to Do Things with Words.
Cambridge: Clarendon Press.
[1]
Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The
Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New York: Routledge.
[1] Searl, John.
1971. The Philosophy of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[1]
Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The
Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New York: Routledge;
41-6.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge.
[1] Bullington, Jennifer. 2007. Psykosomatik: Om Kropp, Själ och Meningsskapande. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 3.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 2.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 3.
[1]
Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The
Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial Art. Colorado:
Paladin Press; 19-22.
[1] Schechner, Richard. 2006. Performance Studies. An
Introduction. New York: Routledge.
[1]
Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The
Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New York: Routledge.
[1]
Stenius, Magnus. 2011. Actors of
Violence. Staging the Arena in Mixed Martial Arts. Nordic Theatre Studies 23(1): 86-97. Stockholm: Nordic Theatre
Scholars.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 1-3.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge.
[1] Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1997. Kroppens Fenomenologi. Göteborg: Daidalos.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 117.
[1] Coole, Diana and Frost, Samantha. (eds.). 2010. Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics.
Durham: Duke University Press.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 116.
[1] Åsberg, Cecilia, Martin Hultman and Francis Lee.
(eds.). 2012. Posthuman Key Concepts. Posthumanistiska nyckeltexter. Lund:
Studentlitteratur; 211. (Swedish subtitle).
[1]
Åsberg, Cecilia, Martin Hultman and Francis Lee. (eds.). 2012. Posthuman
Key Concepts. Posthumanistiska nyckeltexter. Lund: Studentlitteratur. (Swedish
subtitle).
[1] Mol, AnneMarie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham and London:
Duke University Press.
[1] Mol, AnneMarie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham and London:
Duke University Press; 25-7.
[1]
Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The
Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New York: Routledge.
[1]
Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate
Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York:
Routledge; 2-4.
[1]
Enström, Ann. 2012. Towards a Phenomenological Woman: Presenting Mia
Skärringer in her Play: Horny and Holy as Hell. Nordic Theatre Studies: 24(1). Stockholm: Nordic Theatre Scholars.
[1]Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Felix. 2002. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and
Schizophrenia. London: Continuum.
[1] Garner, Stanton B. 1994. Bodied Spaces: Phenomenology and Performance in Contemporary Drama.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press. States, Bert O. 1985. Great Reckonings in Little Rooms: On the Phenomenology of Theater. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
PUTTING
YOUR BEST FOOT FORWARD
Donald
Miskel
Before I embark on this one sided
discussion let me do a disclaimer. I am not trying to send you into
communication overload with these articles and messages. Having dedicated well
over half a century into the study and teaching at the martial arts two things
have occurred that have caused this prolific outpouring. I have been elevated
to the rarified position of Grandmaster by my peers and I have suffered the
backlash effect of all of my years of training. Consequently I spend more time
contemplating various aspects of the martial arts than teaching and training.
Please don’t get me wrong. Like many of you I am a martial art fanatic and
literally breathe martial arts. I still train and to a lesser degree I still
teach. I just spend more time pontificating. I probably think too much. Too
much time on my hands. I have one more article in the hole so I beg your
patience. Please bear with the rambling of an old man and I promise to (try to)
put myself on article restriction.
What I would like to discuss
today is the effect wing chun and jeet kune do has had on the martial arts and
its pros and cons for the Japanese and Okinawa inspired martial artist.
In the two afore mentioned
arts a strong hand forward approach is advocated. This is what a right handed
practitioner would call a south paw or unorthodox stance. This type of approach
advocates defending with the rear hand and countering or attacking with the
forward weapons. This would include kicks as well as strikes. Karate and its
associated arts along with European boxing advocate the strong hand back
approach. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.
Wing chun and jeet kune do
tend to lean toward blitzing attacks. Karate in its purest form is a power
system and adapts the one hit one kill philosophy. This isn’t as common an
approach as in the past. Most karateka these days aren’t able to generate the
power to affect that one strike capability but that is more because of the way
karate is taught and practiced today than it does the capability of the art.
Back in the day a karate
fighter was generally unarmed. His only defense was the natural weapons of the
human body. He honed these weapons to a lethal state by conditioning the
striking surfaces and bone structure and by applying physically sound
principles into their methodology. Karate and its resultant power is a marvel
of physics. No hocus pocus; no prestidigitation. Just sound physics. With the
proper training it’s possible to garner the kind of stopping power that old
world karate was capable of. One must take into consideration that because they
were often confronted by armed and skilled opponents in life and death struggles
the karateka’s weapons had to be as deadly as the weapons they were confronted
with. They seldom had more than one chance to affect a telling blow that incapacitated
or destroyed the opposition. Imagine facing a skilled and battle tested samurai
warrior in a life or death struggle. You wouldn’t want to get in a give and
take jousting match. Every move had to count. More often than not you didn’t
get more than one chance. Hence the one strike one kill philosophy.
Boxing and kick boxing have
changed what we know as karate today but karate wasn’t always as benign as it
is now. It was practiced and executed with total commitment. There were no
combinations or in between techniques. Every single technique was designed to
maim or kill.
Wing chun and the arts that
were derived from it take the blitz Krieg approach. The idea is to overwhelm
the opponent’s defenses and to overload his central nervous system with a
strategic combination of strikes. I may be over simplifying but that is
basically the approach taken. The forward hand offers the fastest access to the
target. Since a one strike kill isn’t attempted the initial strike doesn’t have
to have the power of karate’s gyaku zuki or reverse punch.
The karate practitioner
often had to face an opponent who was outfitted with armor and had to have
weapons that would breach the barrier that it presented. His hands had to be
able to crash through such obstructions. This required conditioned hands and
the power that the reverse punch offered.
Wing chung because of its
necessity for speed uses high stances. Karate on the other hand is (or was) a
counter punching system. A karat fighter would redirect the force of the
opponents attack with a devastating and often incapacitating block and position
himself into an advantageous position that allowed him access to the opponent’s
most vulnerable targets while offering the least access to his own. This is
called tai sabaki. From that position a finishing technique was implemented,
hopefully to the opponent’s detriment. Usually only one step was taken in the
process. No bouncing on the toes. No stick and move. No shuffling in and out.
Just one devastating technique that more often not ended the fight.
Various martial arts
developed to address the needs of a particular person or group of people. It
addressed the challenges that he or they would be met with. There was nothing
esoteric or artistic about fighting. It was as direct and deadly as possible.
How cute you looked during the process didn’t enter into the equation. The
effectiveness of a particular art determined its efficiency. It either worked
or it didn’t. If it didn’t most combatants didn’t have opportunity to go back
and correct their technique. Not unless it was in their next incarnation. Okay,
no theological backlash on that statement. I’m trying to use a bad sense of
humor to illustrate a point. In real combat your system and your personal
ability either worked or you were sent to meet your maker. In other words you
were rendered stone cold dead.
I believe that the martial
art that one studies should not only be based on availability and body type
(though they weigh in heavily in the equation) but on what the art will be used
for. I have nothing against the various arts that are represented by the
martial art community. Each is beautiful in its own right. I believe that an
art should be chosen and practiced in its pure form. If it isn’t broke don’t
fix it and if it is broke find another art. What I am saying is that by trying
to incorporate the principles of another art into your own you often come up
with a system that hasn’t the effectiveness of either art. One is oil. The
other is water. Just because both are effective alone doesn’t mean that a
compilation of the two will be better. On the other hand if one is lacking
mixing them often causes more problems than it solves.
I like wing chun and I
admire the thought that has gone into the creation of jeet kune do but I
realize that they aren’t karate and they don’t particularly mix well with
karate. I have had opportunity to delve into the study of both wing chun and
jeet kune do and I admire both. I just recognize myself as basically a karate
ka and I don’t try to mix the oil and water aspects of those arts. I’m not
proclaiming one art better than the other though I have full confidence in my
karate. It has proved itself in some rather serious situations and I believe in
it’s effectiveness. In effect I’ve learned to put my best foot forward and to
stay in my lane. Mixed metaphors, yes, but you get my meaning. Train in the art
that is best for you and that best serve your purpose. If it works stay with
it. If it doesn’t work for you you would probably do better finding another art
than trying to recreate the wheel by mixing arts that don’t complement each
other.
Train hard, my brethren and
go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel
STILLNESS
IN COMBAT
Donald
Miskel
Okay, many of you are
probably looking at me funny at this point. What the heck is he talking about
now? Has he finally lost it?
Not really, my brothers. You
probably think that stillness in combat is a recipe for disaster. It’s
according to what one means by stillness.
Have you ever seen a
seasoned martial artist in a tournament? Too often all of those techniques that
looked so beautiful during kata and are so sharp and powerful in the dojo
degenerate to ineffectual flailing in a tournament. Worse yet have you ever
seen that black belt technician freeze up in the face of an attack and get his
hat knocked around backwards in a fight? I’ve seen black belt fighters look
like grammar school girls in a playground brawl. Embarrassing to see.
The Black Lotus Martial Art
Association came about because a lot of the black belts being turned out in
some of the dojo(s) in Chicago were being trounced in the streets. Commercial
schools were vying for students and many schools had a contract that promised a
student a black belt in a year. I remember when it took from six to eight years
to earn a black belt. That is if you were capable of attaining a black belt.
Many trained for years and never were able to attain a black belt. I also
remember when there was no black belt rewarded to a student under eighteen
years old. There were no poon belts or junior black belts. Let me reveal my age
here. I remember when there were only three belts. White, brown and black and
there were no degrees in those belts. Okay I realize I’m going back a ways.
Animal skin gis and loin cloths.
The collaboration of instructors
that eventually became the BLMAA joined together to help those inept, would be,
black belts and in the process save the reputation of the art in Chicago. In
those days people would sometimes come into karate schools and challenge the
students or the instructors. Some were practitioners from other schools or
systems and some were hooligans from the neighborhood who for whatever reason
took exception to the school. That was karate in the sixties and seventies in
the big windy.
Unfortunately, too often,
even good karate practitioners were being embarrassed in the streets. They knew
the techniques but lost it under the stress of combat. Believe me, fighting
isn’t the same as sparring.
Many combat oriented systems
have done away with the more complex techniques all together. One reason is
because they take too much time to perfect but also because most people can’t
use them in the heat of combat. When adrenalin charges the blood and heart rate
goes up eye hand coordination goes out the window. For the most part only gross
motor skills are there for the average person under those circumstances. Yet
many of those classical techniques were combat effective when these arts were
actually combat systems. What happened? Why don’t those tried and true techniques
work for today’s fighter? They seem to work in the dojo.
It isn’t the techniques that
fall short it’s the practitioners of today. Even many of the highest degree
black belts are only partially trained in this modern age. In a day when karate
and its sister arts are practiced for competition or for physical exercise or
even for spiritual reasons the ingredients that made them most effective have
been lost or simply aren’t being taught.
In the BLMAA we have given
in to the trend of many of the modern combat systems. Most of our techniques
are basic and based on natural reactions. We concentrate primarily on
techniques that incorporate gross motor movement. With my private students
however I teach many of the more advanced and complex techniques. In the more basic
combat system our pressure point techniques attack balance, vision and
breathing. We leave the more advanced pressure point techniques for the most
advanced student and our inside or closed door students.
Those more advanced
techniques are sound in theory and given the proper training can be effective.
The necessary training involve endless repetition, strategy, what we call tai sabaki
or advantageous positioning, footwork, breathing and mushin.
Statagy, footwork, body
positioning and repetition are technical aspects of the art but breathing and mushin,
which I’ll explain in a minute are more esoteric. Too often many karateka will
only step backwards or forward in a fight. A few are taught to sidestep but
lateral motion is too often completely missing. To a large extent lateral
movement makes tai sabaki possible.
Many fighters have no
strategy in a fight. They just wade in punching and kicking. Perfecting those
technical skills will go a long way toward making a better fighter. Stratagy is
learned in the dojo not in the heat of combat.
Constant repetition
translates into muscle memory. Without muscle memory it’s impossible to be an
effective fighter. If you have to think about it it won’t work. In a fight you
have time to only act and react. You don’t have time for planning.
Okay we’ve got that out of
the way now let’s address the real meat of this essay. I’m a Christian minister
so I’m a little suspect about the spiritual implications of the zazen and
transcendental meditation that sometimes accompany the practice of the Eastern
martial art disciplines. This isn’t a theological essay so I’ll leave that
argument for another time and place. Come to my Wednesday evening bible class
at my church and I’ll address that for you. Still, even without the religious
or spiritual implications that Eastern meditation would involve some kind of
meditation is necessary if you hope to be able to implement some of the more
challenging karate, kempo or kung fu techniques in combat. Meditation not only
calms and focuses the spirit it also helps a practitioner learn to control his
breathing. Breathing controls heart rate and we’ve already touched on the
effect of erratic breathing and a wild heart rate. What we are trying to do is
implement a state of mushin into combat. Okay oh great grand pooba of
everything ryu karate. What the heck is mushin? I’m glad you asked, Hoppa
Grass.
Picture in your mind a calm
lake. I mean really calm. Not a ripple on the water. In such still water you
can see your reflection like in a mirror but let there be even the slightest
agitation to the surface of the water and all you see are erratic flashes of
light. A calm lake reflects. Troubled water refracts. You get plenty of light
but no focus of vision or perception. We liken that calm lake to mushin. Mushin
is the calm almost detached stillness that the ancient martial artist
incorporated into effective combat. In that state he could use the most complex
skill effectively.
Let something startle the sh…
I mean scare the heck out of you and see how much control you have over your
motor skill. You can’t even get your key into your car door until you calm
down. If you don’t have a remote you’ll have to stand in the cold until you get
yourself together. If the unexpected scare was nothing but the backfire of a
passing newspaper truck you’re okay but what if that sudden sound was the
scream of a deranged assailant? Can we talk about buying the farm? That’s where
mushin comes in. If you can keep your center and control breathing and heart
rate and you’ve developed your defensive skills into muscle memory you have a
good chance of surviving the experience. It is imperative to have a still mind
in the face of impending danger. Without it you become a spectator and worse a
victim.
If you are going to be effective
in the face of combat you have to be able to remain calm enough to fight back.
If you’re struggling to breath and trying not to soil your undies you’re toast.
If you want to be able to give a good account of yourself in a confrontation
you will have to learn the art of stillness.
Mushin will serve you in
every area of your life. You’ll be less challenged by life’s daily stress.
You’ll be able to perform better in whatever opposition you are faced with.
Finishing that brief. Passing that midterm exam. And yes winning that life and
death struggle. You’ll be able to control your temper and deal with those pesky
unsolicited sales calls that punctuate your evenings. You’ll be able to live
your life more effectively unaffected by the little irritants that seek to
knock you off your square.
Before and after your
training and whenever possible during your work day find a time and a technique
that allow you that moment of stillness and calm. Control your breathing.
Breathe from the belly and not from the top of your lungs. Slow deep breathing
promotes calm. If you find yourself in a threatening situation breathe don’t
pant. You’ll find that if you are able to control your breathing you’ll
maintain your calm. In many instances the calm demeanor you display in the face
of the threat will be enough to make a miscreant think in terms of another
target. Assailants want soft targets. They depend on your fear to take away
your resolve and give them the advantage. They aren’t looking for that calm and
confident individual. Predators are looking for easy prey. He is looking for an
easy conquest not a hard fight.
In the end whether you have
to discourage a would be predator or combat an attacker mushin, that calm in
the face of opposition, that stillness in the storm, will serve you to greater
affect and help you implement the tools that you have honed in the dojo for
just such an occasion.
Fighting is more than
defense and offense. It’s more than a block, punch and kick. It’s an attitude;
all of it is a package deal. No one part will work by itself but if all
elements are there and you are calm and confident you stand a more than better
chance of coming out of the experience the victor. Knowing that should make you
breathe easier.
God bless you, my brother.
Train hard and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel
STRENGTH
IN UNITY
Donald
Miskel
My brethren; this is not a
religious dissertation though you’ll find some quotes the bible used to
illustrate a point or two. I admonish those of my brothers who are not Christian
to bear with me and not turn away from the truth that I’m trying to expound. As
much as I would like to see the conversion of every one of my brothers and
friends to Christianity this isn’t an effort to accomplish that.
The psalmist said in Ps. 133:1,
“How good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity.”
Unity certainly makes human interaction smoother and less confrontation. But
more than that there is power in unity.
When I was in boot camp the
various companies indulged in competition in different areas. Coming out first
in those competitions awarded a flag to recognize those accomplishments. The
flags awarded to each company would be displayed while marching in the
graduation ceremony.
For public relations
purposes the Chicago Cubs financed the training of one of the companies in boot
camp. All of the members of the said company hailed from in and around the
Chicago area. Because I had four years of R.O.T.C. I became the first platoon
leader of that company.
We had been successful in
drill competition and had won the D flag. We had also excelled in academics and
had won the I (Intelligence) flag. We coveted but had yet to win the A flag for
athletics. We had won the track competition and only needed to win the strength
competition to take the A flag.
Our company was company 444,
The Cubs Company. Our sister company, company 442 was offering stiff
competition for the acquisition of the A flag. They had won the swim
competition and the strength competition would determine the final winner.
There was a serious problem challenging our success in strength against our
sister company. They had some big robust farm boys in their midst. We had
no-one of comparable strength to contest them. They were obviously bigger and
stronger. We couldn’t out strength them. We needed a strategy to nullify the
difference in strength and size. The last competition was a tug of war where
strength, size and weight mattered heavily. Our only hope was in teamwork. We
figured that if we worked together we could overcome the obstacle represented
by their size.
At the offset of the
competition we were being overwhelmed by their superior size and strength. They
were pulling us dangerously close to the mud pit that separated the two teams.
I was at the front of the rope. Weighing all of 190# I was staring into the
determined eyes of a 250# corn fed ox of a fellow. He grinned wickedly as I was
tottering at the edge of the pit. Our second platoon leader was a big guy and
was our anchor. He yelled from the rear to remember our plan. Somehow we
regained our focus and began to pull and release in perfect unity. The results
were instantaneous. Our competitors were bigger and stronger but they didn’t
work together. They depended on their obvious advantage to garner victory but
in the end our unified effort won the day. We won the coveted A flag against
all apparent odds. In the end our unified effort made the difference.
There is power in unity that
goes beyond size, strength and numbers. Christ said the “Where two or three are
gathered together in my name, I will be in the midst thereof. And if any two of
you agree touching on anything it shall be done unto them.” God recognizes the
power of unity and honors unity and harmony. That type of oneness is close to
his nature.
I belong to two
international martial art organizations. I am the chairman and Grandmaster of
the one (the BLMAA) and a patriarch and ‘Head of Family’ of the other (the IFAA
BDFS). The two organizations are sister organizations in that, in a sense, they
sprang from the same roots. The serve different purposes and have different
visions but they have one thing in common; to propagate and encourage the
growth and unity of the martial arts. The BLMAA is a Christian martial art
organization and focus on the mentoring of its students. We concentrate as much
on moral and spiritual growth as the physical aspects of the martial arts and
our rank structure reflects that. The IFAA BDFS is a secular organization and
focus on the self defense and combat aspects of the martial arts. We concern
ourselves with the moral and spiritual growth of student and teacher but that
is secondary to our purpose. As the name implies we are a ‘fighting society’
and martial in out purposes. What both organizations have in common is a desire
to see unity within the martial arts and especially in the body of the
organizations.
Any organization bands
together to propagate some common purpose but all seek the strength of numbers.
Hopefully those numbers will work together in the strength, power and, yes,
beauty of unity. In a harmonious atmosphere the whole will be greater than the
sum of its parts.
In authority I can only
speak for myself and the organizations that I represent but in spirit I speak
to all of my brethren in the arts. We have different ideas and we practice
various martial disciplines but we also have something in common that should
unify us. We are all brothers in the arts. Whether we practice a do (or ascetic
art) or a jitsu (or fighting art) we are all martial artists. Strikers or
grapplers. Sport or combat oriented. Internal or external stylists. It really
doesn’t matter. We are involved in the same endeavor, to improve ourselves
through the martial arts. In the end our strength is in our common visions. Not
where we differ but where we come together. We can agree or we can agree to
disagree but if the arts are to grow and strive we must stand and work
together.
In a forced march soldiers
found that they had to stagger their steps while marching across a bridge. If
they marched in step they could cause a resonance that could collapse even a
strong stone bridge. There is that much power in unity and harmonious effort.
We are like a column of
soldiers. If we are to march together we are no faster than our slowest man but
working together we can achieve our goals. If we arrive at all we will all
arrive together or we’ll fall short together. We will all win or we will all
lose. If we want the martial arts to grow and flourish we have to unify our
efforts and strive together. Like that tug of war team we can win against
insurmountable odds if we work together.
My brethren, this is a call
to unity. Let’s find a common ground and agree where we can and agree to
disagree where we can’t but let’s dwell together in unity.
God bless you my brethren.
Train hard and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel, ThD, DCC, MDiv.
Judan Shodai Soke, BLMAA Patriarch, Head of Family,
IFAA BDFS, Traditional Historian, Worldwide Dojo
STUDENTS
OF THE HEART
Donald
Miskel
In my fifty five plus years
of studying, researching and teaching the martial arts I have had only a few
personal, closed door students. In years past in Japan and Okinawa an uchi
deshi was a live-in student. Since it’s hard to find a wife who will allow you
to move a private student into the home and few dojo(s) have the amenities to
second as an apartment for a personal student the term has taken on a different
meaning. The ushi deshi is the chosen student(s) that a master chooses to pour
the essence of his accumulative knowledge and wisdom into. While my wisdom has
often been in doubt my knowledge has seldom been questioned. For many years of
my life I ate slept and dreamt martial arts. I was one of the nineteen sixties
proponents of the ‘karate is my life’ philosophy. Fortunately I have grown
beyond that phase in my old age. Family, ministry and marriage take a front
seat to the martial arts at this late date but the martial arts is still a
priority even in my old age. In this phase of my martial art career I spend
more time in researching and writing about different aspects of the arts along
with trying to manage a couple of martial art organizations rather than actual
hands on teaching. Even so I do have a couple of closed door students. I guess
old habits are hard to break.
In all honesty training with
me is more than a notion. I’m old school enough to make the process difficult
and often painful. I don’t attract the classical martial art student or the
sport orientated individual. Instead I teach the hard core combat oriented
practitioner and those in high risk professions. I’ll still teach the
occasional children’s class but that has to do more with mentoring and ministry
than turning out hard core martial artists. For the most part I prefer to train
advanced black belt students my core system and self defense to law enforcement
and security personnel. I grew up in a harsh environment in one of the nations
more dangerous cities and you know how it is with old dogs and new tricks. My
primary focus is on practical and realistic combat.
Getting a black belt from me
has always been like pulling teeth. I haven’t turned out a huge number of black
belt students in my career. Most students these days are into instant
gratification and would rather take the fast track. I don’t give out dan rank
in one or two years. If you want high rank from me you have to be in it for the
endurance because yours will be a long road.
With all of that being said,
the system that I teach appears basic on the surface but is complex in its
application and takes years to even begin to perfect. The techniques tend to be
direct to the point and often brutal but that’s the true nature of combat. Life
and death combat isn’t a game. It isn’t a sport. As fore stated it’s just that;
life and death. What I teach isn’t for the squeamish or faint of heart but what
I teach I teach with spiritual content. After all, my brutal system to the
contrary, I’m a minister, pastor and Christian. I teach war craft but I don’t
advocate violence.
I have a number of students,
sempai, masters and grandmasters who align themselves after me and swear by
what I teach. All of them aren’t my private students and most of them didn’t
get their initial training from me but they are still my students. In my belief
the martial arts is like an iceberg. What you see, the techniques and training
principles, are but the tip of that iceberg. Most of the iceberg exists out of
sight beneath the surface.
In a sense all martial arts
are basically the same though all aren’t created equal. Martial art systems
consist of either striking or grappling or various combinations of the two.
There are only so many realistic ways to defend against and attack another
human being. The various philosophies of how these techniques are used make up
the various martial art systems. In the end any realistically trained martial
artist will be similarly outfitted.
When a well trained martial
artist comes under my tutelage I don’t try to discard his foundation and
rebuild him. He should already be efficient in what he does. I may do a bit of
fine tuning to bring him to what I consider an acceptable level but I don’t try
to recreate the wheel. If they aren’t competent martial artists I’ll consign
their training to one of my students or send them back to their instructor. If
I find his level complimentary to his rank I’ll on occasion take him on as a
student. Some of these individuals live across the nation or even in different
countries. The rare or occasional face to face contact that I have with them doesn’t
qualify me to be their actual instructor even though I sometime guide the
direction of their training by offering new ideas and concepts or different
directions in their training. These people are my students though my
relationship with them has little to do with gyms, dojos, dojangs or kwoons.
These are my students of the heart. Aside for the afore mentioned verbal
instruction and advice my relationship with them is more philosophical and
spiritual. They grow under the guidance that I can offer as an older and
supposedly wiser individual.
In the rarified world of the
martial art master and grandmaster the difference between the two is often only
time in grade and growth in the spiritual arena. If a grandmaster pours
knowledge into an established master he will offer more than technique and
training. If the said student has reached master level he has that already. As
the ‘Head of Family’ in the IFAA Black Dragon Fighting Society I don’t have a
lot to do with giving of rank. That’s primarily handled by the masters and
grandmasters of the individual systems or by the ‘Grandmasters Council’ of the
organization. In the Black Lotus Martial Arts Association however I do have
that authority. Because the BLMAA is primarily a Christian organization I look
upon rank differently. Below godan (5TH degree black belt) rank is given like
in any other system. Master rank however is awarded differently. I figure by
godan a master has the knowledge and ability that he’ll carry throughout the
remainder of his martial art career. Beyond that I am looking beyond the
physical aspects of the arts. Along with time in grade I am looking at moral
and spiritual growth. For the average sensei the arts is more about mentoring
and creating better human beings than turning out trained killers. That ability
and focus is what I strive to instill into my senior students. I’ve turned out
my quota of trained killers. I’m more concerned with training those who will be
molders of men and mentors to those who come under their tutelage. These are
the students of my heart.
God bless you, my brethren.
Train hard and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel
Judan Shodai Soke, (IFAA) BLMAA. Patriarch, Head of
Family, IFAA BDFS. Traditional Historian, World Wide Dojo
WHITE
BELT KARATE FOR THE BLACK BELT FIGHTER
Donald
Miskel
There has always been a
marked difference between karate do and karate jitsu. Actually at one time
there was no karate do. There was only karate or as it was called in its
earlier incarnation, tode. First and foremost karate was a tool. It was a
fighting system; a tool for survival in an often hostile world. The idea of
karate for competition or self improvement had yet to become popular or even be
conceived of. Its techniques were designed to disable and even maim or kill.
For this reason its techniques were simple and direct. All of the rather
esoteric techniques that we see these days were nonexistent. If it didn’t work
in combat it wasn’t practiced or taught.
In the late sixties Black
Belt Magazine did an article on a trend that had become popular amongst young
martial artists in Japan. Its techniques were similar to what some young people
would call ‘tricking’ today. Its techniques were acrobatic and it required its
practitioners to indulge in the most difficult and impractical techniques
possible. Obviously it had no value as a combat system. It would impress the
heck out of an opponent before he knocked your hat around backwards but it
posed little threat to an assailant. Contrary to the once popular Saturday
morning kung fu flicks summersaults, cart wheels and such were never meant for
combat.
In combat simplicity is the
key. Basics work. A good example of this combat reality is shotokan karate.
Shotokan is a lean system based heavily on basics. Three kicks, two punches and
a hand full of strikes make up the major offensive arsenal of the system. Its
bread and butter techniques consist of a gyaku zuki (reverse punch) and a mae
geri (front kick). Despite the lack of complex and fancy techniques shotokan is
the most popular and arguably one of the most practical systems practiced
today. It’s easy to learn but takes a lifetime to perfect.
Karate as its practiced
today is inefficient as a fighting system. Perhaps we should get back to
karate’s combative roots. Seeing the art as what it was intended for will help
to keep us honest. I have nothing against competition as long as it doesn’t
change the practical aspects of the art. When competition begins to shape the
art you are no longer practicing a fighting system.
Let’s break it down to
basics. Techniques should be direct and to the point. Stances should be rooted.
Use the closest weapon to the target. Hands for high targets. Kicks for low
targets. The shortest distance between two points is a straight line. The occasional
mawashi geri (roundhouse kick) is okay but for the most part karate is a
straight line system.
Bobbing and weaving and
ducking and dodging are boxing techniques. Karate blocks not only injure and
even occasionally destroy the offending limb it also allows a skilled
practitioner to open his opponent’s defense and position him for an attack. Tai
sabaki (body positioning) serve the same purpose as boxing’s bobbing and
weaving. Bobbing and weaving tends to compromise the integrity of the karateka’s
stance. Karate for combat requires slightly higher stances than the groin
dragging stances of some systems. Stances should be high enough to allow
mobility and low enough to give a foundation for strong techniques.
Basically karate is a
counter punching system. There is no first attack in true karate. Allowing your
opponent to commit himself gives you an opportunity to take advantage of your
opponent’s body positioning. That approach is the essence of karate.
Aerial techniques (flying
kicks) were designed to deal with an opponent on horseback, not to kick a
standing opponent. Rear kicks were designed to deal with an opponent attacking
from the rear. No real fighter will intentionally turn his back on an opponent.
In my way of thinking that puts rear spinning or turning techniques in
question.
Hopping up and down isn’t
karate. No serious combatant will choose to fight on the ground. Ground
techniques should be designed to allow you to get back to your feet as quickly
as possible. A fighter is at a disadvantage on the ground. If we are going to
practice real karate we have to be honest with ourselves. We have to be
realistic and practical.
Karate techniques shouldn’t
be changed or discarded to accommodate competition. Neither should they be
changed to allow children to change. The practitioner should change to
accommodate the system; the system shouldn’t change to accommodate the student.
Again, basics are the rule
of thumb. A front kick, a reverse punch, a knife hand strike, a rising block.
Err on the side of simplicity. Sounds like white belt karate doesn’t it? Don’t
let the simplicity fool you. In the end,
less is more. Basics work. White belt karate perfected to black belt level is
karate at its efficient best. Let’s get back to real karate. Leave the esoteric
stuff for the kids who practice tricking. They don’t claim to be fighters.
Train hard my martial art
brethren and go with God.
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel. Judan shodai Soke, BLMAA.
Patriarch, Head of Family, IFAA BDFS
ZEN
AND MAKIWARI TRAINING
Donald
Miskel
No, my Christian brothers, you’ll find little Zen
included here but it’s a pretty nifty title, don’t you think? It’s no secret.
I’m a big proponent of ‘back in the day’. Things are changing so fast that today’s
innovations are obsolete the day after tomorrow. I’m amused by the commercials
that have children telling slightly younger children how hard they had it back
in the day. Pretty funny stuff but not so far from the truth. Not so much that
these kids ‘earned their bread in the sweat of their brow’ but things are
changing that fast.
As a kid I was burdened with listening to how hard my
father had it as opposed to the easy road I got to trod. I’m still trying to
figure how my father had to trudge to school barefooted in the snow (in
Mississippi yet) uphill both ways. Okay, my Christian brothers. I have to
repent behind that one. That may have been a slight exaggeration but I believe
you get my drift.
Well, let me tell you ‘ youngons’. You don’t know how good
you have it. Back in the day karate classes easily ran for four hours or more.
I usually worked my students until they could no longer function. That
indicated when class ended. In the old World Karate federation under Doug Dwyer
(my sensei) and John Keehan (aka Count Dante) we had a saying. ‘Class wasn’t
over until there was blood on the floor’. Sounds crazy but too often that was
the case. We literally trained until we dropped.
I look at how martial arts classes are taught today and
how they were taught when I was a young kyu ranked student. Many of the
instructors had honed their skills in the military. Marines and airmen did
tours of duty in Okinawa and army and navy personnel did the same in
Japan. When they came back to the States
to teach they brought their military attitudes and methods with them. Actually
it went back further than that. During World War II martial arts was taught for
combat. That militaristic attitude influenced both the Eastern and Western
arts. Martial arts classes took on the characteristics of boot camp. Today
martial arts have become commercial and like any other business it caters to
its customers. Consequently the needs and sensitivities of the customer too
often determine the content and methodology of the classes taught. Work them
too hard and you lose students.
Modern teaching methods have made the teaching of the
arts more efficient and less painful but I wonder what has been lost with this
trade off. The martial arts are, after all, about combat and if they aren’t taught
with the necessary intensity one has to wonder how realistic the end results
are. Soldiers aren’t pampered in basic training because they won’t be pampered
on the battle field. Hardship is part of war. You will receive no polite
consideration on the field of battle. In the end how you train will determine
how you fight.
I realize that the ‘do’ concept of the martial arts
means that it isn’t all about combat and physical confrontation. We’re trying
to build better human beings, not trained killers but in the end a martial art
that isn’t affective in combat isn’t a martial art. It takes on more of the
characteristics of American football, combative in nature but not in intent.
Following too much of that approach will have us (like children) playing at combat.
When I was training we spent a lot of time in
conditioning the weapons. We worked on the makiwari for hours, often until our
hands were bleeding. We conditioned the hands and feet until they calloused and
the bones thickened. Karateka sported large knuckles and calloused knife hands.
Some of us even went so far as to shove our hands into buckets of sand, gravel
and iron filings. That’s crazy but we were fanatical about conditioning our
hands. The toughening of the weapons was
originally practiced because combatants often wore some kind of body armor and
the hands had to be like stone to be affective against them. Also, because
their opponents were often armed, a one hit kill had to be developed. When
facing a trained samurai with a katana one hit was probably all an unarmed
combatant got. It was an all or nothing proposition.
Please, don’t get me wrong. I’m not advocating beating
the hands into those types of weapons. That was thin. This is now. Many of us
suffer arthritis today because of those practices but if we insist on hitting
with the fist some conditioning is necessary. Believe me, for the most part,
the head is harder than the hand. Hit someone on the tip of the chin to achieve
that picture perfect knock out and you’ll do your hand more damage than you
will your opponent. I’ve been knocked unconscious and I’ve broken my hand. I
got over the former quicker than the latter.
Aside from a little brain damage (according to family and friends) I was
little the worse for wear from the knock out but I still feel the effects of
the numerous breaks to my hand. If we are going to use the fist as a primary
weapon some conditioning will be necessary, otherwise we’ll be developing
techniques that we can’t really use. There’s a reason why boxers wrap their hands
and wear gloves.
We have become more innovative in our teaching methods.
We’re actually able to accomplish more in (slightly) less time. We have shied
away from many of the more brutal and less affective teaching methods but we
don’t want to ‘throw the baby out with the bath water’ as they used to say.
Some of the training methods from ‘back in the day’ had merit and were tried
and true. There is no easy way to learn a combative art. It’s going to stress
the human body and it’s going to hurt. The adage, ‘no pain no gain’, definitely
applies in the martial arts. This essay hasn’t been only about hand
conditioning though I use it to illustrate a point. Everything new isn’t
superior and everything old isn’t obsolete. Some of the old methods are still
around because they achieve a purpose. As we teach and train we should evaluate
the methods and tools that we use to increase the ability of our students and
ourselves. We have to develop a balance of effectiveness and safety. Learning
to defend yourself and ruining your health in the process is counterproductive
but learning techniques that your body can’t accomplish safely is a waste of
time. We have to be realistic and effective in our approach to combat.
Everything doesn’t have to be done the way it’s always been done just for
tradition’s sake. Effectiveness in combat should always be the martial artist’s
first concern. There are other ways of doing things. A palm heel to the chin is
as effective as an uppercut (if not more so) and offers less chance to injury
to the hand for instance.
I believe that as instructors we have to understand,
our arts, combat and what we teach well enough to balance the old with the new;
tradition with modernism. Though we embrace much of their philosophy or like to
think we do, we aren’t samurai. Our needs and objectives are different. If we
want to train in a traditional samurai art I can see no harm in it. It can be a
great character builder while giving one a good physical and mental presence
that it’s difficult to garner through modern sports. Still, in my opinion a
combative art has to serve the needs of the people who practice it.
I was there’ back in the day’ but my predecessors were
there ‘way back in the day, walking to school barefoot in the snow. Both
ways. I’m still trying to learn what
they know.
Train hard and train realistically, my brethren and go
with God.
Dr. Donald Miskel
BUILDING
ON A PREEXISTING FOUNDATION
Donald
Miskel
Archeologists often find older cities beneath cities
that rose up later. I’m not sure why that is but maybe it is because they use
the strength of the foundations of the previous structures to build on. I could
be wrong in that assessment but the principle seems pretty sound to me. If it’s
usable why lay a new foundation?
I have studied several traditional martial arts in my
many years of study. Several I’ve received advanced rank in. For years I taught
classical systems of karate, kempo and jiu-jitsu but these days I lean toward a
more eclectic approach. I’m the type of person that hates to discard of
anything that I can find a use for. If
it’s useful I’ll find a way to use it. That has become my approach to the arts
that I teach. I’ll use whatever is usable.
In my many years of teaching I’ve only had a hand full
of uchi deshis (close door students). They are the ones that I hope will carry
on my system after I’m gone. While developing the system that I now teach the
art went through a number of incarnations. What I taught in the eighties bares
only a passing resemblance to what I teach now. Each of my private students was
taught according to what I was doing at the time. If you brought them together
it would be hard to believe that they were trained by the same person. It may
even be hard to tell that the individual students I teach studied the same
system. There’s a good reason for this. I didn’t necessarily teach them the
same thing. The basics are the same but the art that I teach is plastic and is
molded to the individual student.
Several things determine what I’ll teach a student.
Age, personal ability and athleticism figures into the equation. I also take
into consideration individual body types, strength, flexibility and attitude. I
also consider who I’m teaching and what they require from the martial arts.
Different people study for different reasons. I’m not interested in teaching
for competition but if I were I wouldn’t teach a sport based system the same
way I do a fighting system. The needs of the student varies and I will teach
each according to his individual needs. Another thing that I take into
consideration is former training. If a person has a good foundation in whatever
art he studied previously I’m not going to raze that foundation and build another.
Not if the old foundation is useful.
I’ve studied several striking arts as well as a number
of grappling arts in my career. I’ve also had opportunity to study fighting
arts, self defense and military unarmed combat. With that pool of information
I’m not so limited in what I can teach a student. This gives me the knowledge
and flexibility necessary to consolidate their former training into what I
teach them. I’ll expand their knowledge into other areas but if at all possible
I prefer to build on their existing foundation.
I believe in a well rounded approach to the martial
arts. I think a striker should be able to grapple well enough to enable him to
deal with a grappler long enough to implement his game plan. He should also be
able to challenge another striker by introducing some grappling into the mix.
In so doing he can take a better or equally skilled striker out of his element.
Unless you’re better in that particular area it isn’t a good idea to fight
another opponent’s fight. You have to be able to flip the script on him and
confront him with a challenge that he can’t meet.
I can teach a lot of different techniques but I believe
that a personal system shouldn’t be too top heavy. For example I know a lot of
joint techniques but I don’t teach them all. For one reason I feel that some
are more effective and easier to apply than others. By the same token some can
be used in a wide variety of situations. Those kind of techniques will be the
kind that I’ll lean toward. For this reason I don’t teach aikijitsu or jiu
jitsu as separate arts. I teach what I feel blends well with the other
grappling and striking techniques that I teach. I feel that every element of
the system should compliment all of the other areas. That way different
approaches can blend together into a cohesive system.
The method that I teach has a lot of possible
combinations so the system has hundreds of techniques and combination of
techniques but I only teach the bulk of the system to those that I hope will
carry the system on after I’m gone. The rest of my students manage to learn a
rather simple system custom made for them and tailored to their own needs.
Consequently I believe that I’m teaching a practical system that anyone can
learn and excel in. For the same reason it tends to be efficient and effective
in its application.
One of my uchi deshi (s) in Tucson studied judo in his
youth. His background was pretty comprehensive and his ability was better than
acceptable. I accepted him as a student and we spent almost eight years studying
together. I taught him a blend of karate, kempo aind aikijitsu but because of
his judo background I placed more emphasis on aikijitsu and jiu jitsu. He
turned out to be a good striker with decent kicks but he excelled in the
grappling techniques I concentrated on. He didn’t particularly like it. He
moaned and groaned on the evenings that I announced jiu jitsu night. I’m
probably not the most gentle teacher in the world and to his credit he kept
coming back in spite of the constant whining and complaining. He now has black
belts in both the jiu jitsu/aikijitsu and the kempo systems that I teach and he
is currently teaching in Tucson. He was recently reacquainted with his judo
sensei and they plan to stay in touch. I look forward to seeing what that
relationship will develop into. His judo sensei is proud of him as am I. You
will find his articles on World Wide Dojo. I like to think that I develop minds
as well as bodies. Through his articles as well as his teaching and training he
continues to grow and show his grasp of the arts with their underlying
principles. Hopefully I played a role in his development in all of those areas
but he came to me with a pretty good preexisting foundation. I just built on
it.
God bless you my martial art brethren. Study hard and
go with God
Rev. Dr. Donald Miskel
[i] Buse, G. J. 2006. No Holds
Barred Sport Fighting: A 10-Year Review of Mixed Martial Arts Competition. British Journal of Sports Medicine:
40(2).
[ii]
Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The Traditional
Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial Art. Colorado: Paladin Press.
[iii]
Poliakoff, Michael. 1995. Combat Sports
in the Ancient World: Competition, Violence and Culture. Connecticut: Yale
University Press; 54-59.
[iv] Gentry, Clyde. 2011. No Holds Barred: The Complete History of Mixed Martial Arts in America.
Chicago: Triumph Books.
[v] Buse, G. J. 2006. No Holds Barred Sport Fighting: A
10-Year Review of Mixed Martial Arts Competition. British Journal of Sports Medicine: 40(2); 169.
[vi] Buse, G. J. 2006. No Holds Barred Sport Fighting: A
10-Year Review of Mixed Martial Arts Competition. British Journal of Sports Medicine: 40(2).
[vii] Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial
Art. Colorado: Paladin Press; 1-2.
[viii] Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial
Art. Colorado: Paladin Press; 3-6.
[ix]Halberstam, Judith and
Livingstone, Ira. 1995. Posthuman Bodies:
Unnatural Acts: Theorizing the Performative. Bloomington and Indianapolis:
Indiana University Press.
[x] Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial
Art. Colorado: Paladin Press; 5-10.
[xi] Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial
Art. Colorado: Paladin Press; 10-11.
[xii] Gentry, Clyde. 2011. No Holds Barred: The Complete History of Mixed Martial Arts in America.
Chicago: Triumph Books.
[xiii] Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New
York: Routledge.
[xiv] Enström, Ann. 2012. Towards a
Phenomenological Woman: Presenting Mia Skärringer in her Play: Horny and Holy
as Hell. Nordic Theatre Studies:
24(1). Stockholm: Nordic Theatre Scholars.
[xv] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence,
Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. New York: Routledge; 2-3.
[xvi] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 120.
[xvii] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 116.
[xviii] Halberstam, Judith and Livingstone, Ira. 1995. Posthuman Bodies: Unnatural Acts: Theorizing
the Performative. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
[xix] Denzin, Norman, K. 2003. Performance Ethnography: Critical Pedagogy
and the Politics of Culture. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications;
3.
[xx] Stenius, Magnus. 2011. Actors
of Violence. Staging the Arena in Mixed Martial Arts. Nordic Theatre Studies 23(1): 86-97. Stockholm: Nordic Theatre
Scholars.
[xxi] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 129.
[xxii] Woodward, Kath. 2008. Hanging Out
and Hanging About: Insider/Outsider Research in the Sport of Boxing. Ethnography 9: 536-560; 555.
[xxiii] Gentry, Clyde. 2011. No Holds Barred: The Complete History of Mixed Martial Arts in America.
Chicago: Triumph Books; 23-9.
[xxiv] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 117.
[xxv] Burke, Kenneth. 1973. The Philosophy of Literary Form: Studies in
Symbolic Action. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[xxvi] Turner, Victor. 1969. The Ritual Process:Structure and
Anti-Structure. Chicago: Aldine.
[xxvii] Goffman, Erving. 1959. The
Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.
[xxviii] Austin, John. 1975. How to
Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Clarendon Press.
[xxix] Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New
York: Routledge.
[xxx] Searl, John. 1971. The Philosophy of Language. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
[xxxi] Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New
York: Routledge; 41-6.
[xxxii] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge.
[xxxiii] Bullington, Jennifer. 2007. Psykosomatik: Om Kropp, Själ och
Meningsskapande. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
[xxxiv] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 3.
[xxxv] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 2.
[xxxvi] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 3.
[xxxvii] Arvanitis, Jim. 2003. Pankration:The Traditional Greek Combat Sport and Modern Mixed Martial
Art. Colorado: Paladin Press; 19-22.
[xxxviii] Schechner, Richard. 2006. Performance
Studies. An Introduction. New York: Routledge.
[xxxix] Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New
York: Routledge.
[xl] Stenius,
Magnus. 2011. Actors of Violence. Staging the Arena in Mixed Martial Arts. Nordic Theatre Studies 23(1): 86-97.
Stockholm: Nordic Theatre Scholars.
[xli] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 1-3.
[xlii] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge.
[xliii] Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1997. Kroppens Fenomenologi. Göteborg:
Daidalos.
[xliv] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 117.
[xlv] Coole, Diana and Frost,
Samantha. (eds.). 2010. Materialisms:
Ontology, Agency, and Politics. Durham: Duke University Press.
[xlvi] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 116.
[xlvii] Åsberg, Cecilia, Martin Hultman
and Francis Lee. (eds.). 2012. Posthuman Key Concepts. Posthumanistiska
nyckeltexter. Lund: Studentlitteratur; 211. (Swedish subtitle).
[xlviii] Åsberg, Cecilia, Martin Hultman and Francis Lee.
(eds.). 2012. Posthuman Key Concepts. Posthumanistiska nyckeltexter. Lund:
Studentlitteratur. (Swedish subtitle).
[xlix] Mol, AnneMarie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical
Practice. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
[l] Mol, AnneMarie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical
Practice. Durham and London: Duke University Press; 25-7.
[li] Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. New
York: Routledge.
[lii] Spencer, Dale C. 2012. Ultimate Fighting and Embodiment: Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial
Arts. New York: Routledge; 2-4.
[liii] Enström, Ann. 2012. Towards a Phenomenological Woman:
Presenting Mia Skärringer in her Play: Horny and Holy as Hell. Nordic Theatre Studies: 24(1). Stockholm:
Nordic Theatre Scholars.
[liv]Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari,
Felix. 2002. A Thousand Plateaus:
Capitalism and Schizophrenia. London: Continuum.
[lv] Garner, Stanton B. 1994. Bodied Spaces: Phenomenology and Performance
in Contemporary Drama. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. States, Bert O.
1985. Great Reckonings in Little Rooms:
On the Phenomenology of Theater. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Fig
1 and 2. Professional MMA-Fighters in the mixed martial arts club at the
fieldwork location in northern part of Sweden.