Aikido

[Carleas]

Not sure if this is the right forum for this (!), but I figure they don’t call them “martial arts” for nothing

I recently started Aikido, and it’s largely what I expected. If you’ve seen any Steven Seagal movies, you’ve seen some Aikido. It has a distinctive look, with practitioners flowing smoothly through opponents who flip and roll seamlessly back to a ready stance. The flow results from two facts that I can tell so far:

1. Aikido is a grappling art. I’m still a beginner, but even observing high ranked students, I haven’t seen any emphasis on striking (punching, kicking, etc). Instead, the focus is on grabs, locks, arm bars, and throws. A result of this is that there are few natural stopping points: techniques they can turned into a pin, but they are often left as throws or take-downs that leave the practitioner in a stance to keep moving.

2. Though I’ve been incorrectly referring to the person doing the throw as the “practitioner,” both the thrower and the person being thrown are practicing Aikido. A big part of the early education is learning to fall and roll. This adds to the flowiness, because demonstrations will involve people who are practiced in turning a throw into a roll and returning quickly to a ready position.

This second point can be problematic. The rationale behind it is solid: the twists and locks that Aikido employs can seriously damage a person’s joints, so the person being locked needs to be equipped to respond to them safely. But it can, and often does, lead to your partner either 1) rolling out before the technique has been applied correctly, or 2) expecting you to roll out when you know that what they’re doing is ineffective (when either of these happen, I think to myself, “Aikido: the way of the wilting flower”). The techniques do work, and when a black-belt demonstrates them on you, you can feel how vulnerable you would be if they wanted to hurt you. Still, Aikido is particularly vulnerable to “fantasy fighting,” i.e. techniques that look or feel cool and involve some sort of ‘magic’ aspect that makes them work, when in the real world they wouldn’t be very effective.

I’ve taken a few other martial arts, and it’s been interesting to see how Aikido compares. As I said, Aikido is a grappling art, and my other experience has been predominantly with striking arts, so that has been a big change. But many other aspects are common to other arts. In particular, much of the footwork is taken wholesale from Shotokan Karate, which makes sense because the founder of Aikido was a black belt in Shotokan. Both Shotokan and Aikido are very linear, with most movements happening on a straight line.

However, Aikido uses many more circular movements than Shotokan. Though the engagement is linear, many of the techniques involve spinning the opponent and corkscrewing them into a lock or pin. In this respect, it has elements common to Ba Gua Zhang (a style of kung fu), which is entirely circular (one of its core teaching is that you should never, ever move in a line). Aikido and Ba Gua also share their emphasis on forward motion, moving into and around an attack, rather than blocking or backing up.

These similarities are intriguing because Shotokan and Ba Gua are very different, the former being an “external” art, and the latter being an “internal” art (these terms are usually only applied to Chinese martial arts, and Aikido and Shotokan are Japanese, but the distinction is still there: Shotokan focuses more on strength, on explosion, on putting the whole body into throwing a punch, whereas Ba Gua focuses on pushing fists, stretching through a target, ideas like tensegrity and the famous “one-inch punch”). Aikido combines both into a useful package, and that’s interesting. Ultimately, I’d say it’s more internal, because using an opponent’s energy is emphasized over strength. But the mapping is difficult without any strikes to compare.

Probably my favorite part of Aikido is its focus on practice and improvisation. Where other arts have used mostly solitary shadow-boxing and forms, Aikido is all partner work, applying techniques in turns. We’re also encouraged to improvise: if we screw up the start of a technique, we should look for another option that flows out of it. This is good practice for a real fight, and tends to train avoiding the rigid application of a set technique. Plus, getting thrown around for an hour is a surprisingly good workout.

[Nah]

To understand Aikido, I think it’s important to practice bokutou (wooden sword for practice).
How you use your hands, arms, and body in Aikido is pretty similar to the way you would be using Japanese sword.
The foot work (at least some of them) seems to be similar to Kenjutu, too.
I guess the body movements in these martial arts are based on basic way we (monkey type mammals) use our limbs. It’s efficient in some ways, yielding better reaction/response.

There are punches (atemi) in Aikido, although it’s not emphasized and it’s often used as a part of tactics and not to give any real damage.

One of the key in Aikido is synchronizing your move with that of the attacker (partner), and then guiding your partner in the way you want.
Sometime, you will move into the side of the partner and then make exactly the same movement for a short while, and then twisting the motion, together.
Even in the technique in which you stay face to face with the attacker, you would be swinging your hands up as the partner’s hand is going up before to attack you from above.
It’s a bit like imitating the attacker to get synchronized, and then use the synergy to guide her/him out of harm (for both of you).

Training session in Aikido is almost always designed in the way that the attacker would be ending up in loosing position.
In other words, Aikido training don’t prepare you to attack others, unlike many other martial arts.
This may have the effect of imprinting mental and physical view that the attacking isn’t a clever thing to do.
People who learn other martial arts are often tempted to use them (in the street fight, etc), while it happens less in Aikido. The lack of competition in Aikido can be another factor in the reduction of aggressiveness among Aikido students (compared to other martial Arts).

When the technique works flawlessly, you may feel weightlessness, motionlessness, timelessness, while you are throwing or being thrown.
It’s easier to experience this with a very well trained person throwing you (more than 3rd or 4th dan, for example) , at first.

There is nothing wrong with the attacker rolling away, as you are not trying to harm them.
But it’s very easy to misuse Aikido and harm others, too.
Basically, I think it’s more difficult to guide the opponent in the precise manner so that the attack ends up in the way no one gets hurt. It’s much much easier to hurt or to get hurt. With the slightest deviation, you can break joints and bones of others with the Aikido movement.

I think martial arts are for scared cowards. I mean, if you are not scared of being attacked and injured/killed, why should you train and prepare?
And when you get scared of hurting not just you but the attackers, you get interested in things like Aikido.
In resolving conflict, simple gut would try to kill/harm opponent.
It’s like Jews and Americans becoming trigger happy and getting ready for bloody “Preemptive strike”. (Many martial arts are like this)
Complicated person would try use precise/moderate force to cause no harm, and it’s like building up some military force with lots of diplomacy. (Aikido, etc)
Some may even abandon the weapon and try to avoid physical conflict, and there are some martial artist went into this direction and created new school.
There are other ways, too, (like not preparing for potentially scary events).

[Carleas]

Aikido definitely has elements of sword-fighting, both in the applications (lots of movements are very sword-like), and in dojo etiquette (lots of bowing, walking around on your knees, etc.). Even the guard looks like . I probably won’t do any weapons work, but my school teaches it and I’ve seen people training. It actually doesn’t look too effective against anyone other than a samurai. The sword techniques may inform the empty-hand techniques, but they are impractical in a modern context.

As for being a “scared coward,” you’re right to a degree, though it doesn’t have to be put so negatively. Martial arts are empowering, even when what’s learned isn’t used to physically harm others. There is a psychological power to physical dominance; knowing that we could take someone in a fight is empowering in a business setting as well. Just as taller people and more physically fit people are perceived as smarter, more capable, and better leaders, so too can confidence in our own physical ability positively influence our self-perception.

Beyond their martial aspects, martial arts have other benefits that might lead a person to practice. They’re good exercise, they improve balance, flexibility, strength, and coordination. They improve concentration and attention span, and they reduce stress (in this respect, in particular, they are similar to other forms of “art”. Even if we’re not planning or preparing for violence, martial arts are useful.

The comparison between an individual practicing martial arts and a national defense is weak, and not very useful. It’s like comparing taking vitamins to socialized medicine: there are similarities, but the comparison is more confusing than enlightening.

[Nah]

Bo-ken training is really very effective in understanding Aikido. But it’s only so if you are sensitive enough and/or if your teacher explicitly show how to use bokuto.
I once asked a Japanese guy (8e dan, a direct student of Aikido creator) about the relation between Aikido and kenjusu, and he confirmed what I thought.
However, I know that not many think of this (nor talk about this), somehow.
It’s easier to understand if you move your sword with your “hara” (stomach), keeping your hands as if they were just a string attached to the sword.

As for being a “scared coward,” you’re right to a degree, though it doesn’t have to be put so negatively.

Well, I wasn’t talking very negatively. I mean, humans, as monkey type relatively weak animal, are more or less normal to be scared of other stronger animal like tigers, bears, and even dogs.
I think being a scared coward is in our animal nature (or in our monkey blood).
So, there is nothing very negative about it (at least in this perspective).

I know that many people hate to see ourselves as “weak”, “scared”, “coward”, but
I think it’s because they are too scared of even admitting that they are scared.

Martial arts are empowering, even when what’s learned isn’t used to physically harm others.

And you don’t need to be “empowered” unless you feel powerless.

There is a psychological power to physical dominance;

I’m not sure, at all.
If you think about physical dominance, you might be feeling that you are physically dominated by others or you are/were afraid of such event.

knowing that we could take someone in a fight is empowering in a business setting as well. Just as taller people and more physically fit people are perceived as smarter, more capable, and better leaders, so too can confidence in our own physical ability positively influence our self-perception.

I think knowing the utter insanity and stupidity of oneself and mankind can be more empowering (for people who feel powerless).
Once you are pretty clear about this, it’s obvious that almost all others pretending this and that are even more insane and stupid than you are.

As for the martial art and physical strength, there are usually better and stronger fighters than you, often many of them.
And this may become clearer as you advance in your training.
So, it is usually more humbling than “empowering”, in many way. if you are aware.

Also, you usually learn the consequences of the power, as you go.
And you would become more reluctant about the use of power and more responsible. It may trigger lots of thinking/questioning about one’s own deeper motive for learning martial arts.
This is when you start to go into things like Aikido, which uses the strength for not harming anyone, rather than harming someone more.
In a way, it’s not for a beginner of the martial arts, but near the end of martial arts.

Beyond their martial aspects, martial arts have other benefits that might lead a person to practice. They’re good exercise, they improve balance, flexibility, strength, and coordination.

I agree.

They improve concentration and attention span, and they reduce stress (in this respect, in particular, they are similar to other forms of “art”. Even if we’re not planning or preparing for violence, martial arts are useful.

I’m not sure about stress. I know someone who became more stressful learning Takewendo. So, he moved away and switched into Aikido, and he found it far less stressful (although he practiced pretty tough/aggressive for Aikido).
It depends.

The comparison between an individual practicing martial arts and a national defense is weak, and not very useful. It’s like comparing taking vitamins to socialized medicine: there are similarities, but the comparison is more confusing than enlightening.

Sure. It can be confusing for those who don’t see the similarity between mental mechanics of individual and that of mass. In certain perspective, they are very similar.

Anyway, I guess it’s easy to see that Aikido isn’t in the spirit of “I’m gonna kill you because you might hurt me”, which is very American, modern Jewish, etc.
Aikido is more like “With your move (attack), I’ll move along and guide you to the harmless position. (But it may hurt a lot if you insist/resist)”