Very informative discussion about what JKD is and isn't

Discussion in 'Jeet Kune Do' started by Cain, Jan 22, 2003.

  1. february

    february Valued Member

    I know where you're coming from, but I'd add that a differential is required in influence and someting becoming a basis for your art. The form you often see Bruce doing at demo's is the mantis form. He used that alot I think because it looked suitably flashy, and showed off his high kicking ability - remember this is the kind of stuff that wasn't mainstream at the time. I've also heard that Mantis also influenced the on guard position a little, in terms of the bend of the torso, although any argument could be made for that (most logically the boxers crouch). I think Bruce learned a little Tai Chi from his dad, but I don't think anyone would argue that Tai Chi really influenced JKD to any degree.

    With regards to Shotokan, from Bruce's notes, he wrote that he liked the "spirit", masterful basics and directness of it. Having done Shotokan myslef for many years, I can vouch for these attributes, but beyond those principles, I don't think any physical techniques really bear any resemblance (both the kicking and puching are based on a completely different mechanic) - another example of an influence not being core to an art.

    On that basis, I would agree that it is the 3 or 4 basic arts that form the foundation of what Bruce Lee created at that time, but many more arts may have influenced it. You can see this clearly from any of his notes or writings, and from what his peers and students are saying now. Attributing any more than that is like a recent thread I saw here at MAP, where Vitor Belfort throwing a barrage of straight punches to KO someone, was used as a basis for an argument for the effectiveness of the WC straight blast. Just because something is similar, doesn't make it the same, I guess.

    Alot of these discussions always boil down to what Bruce Lee "did", whether or not a practicioner follows that "doctrine" is up to them.
     
  2. Emil

    Emil Valued Member

    I guess its all down to a time scale. From when do we decide the core arts? From the beginning, the aforementioned four are pretty much it, but later on, there are other influences. How strong these influences are comes into question, and it is safe to say that that number is nowhere near 27.

    Em
     
  3. Diamond Dave

    Diamond Dave Valued Member

    The idea of all these styles that make up jkd comes from Bruce's early days of study.The forms that he learned and demonstrated back then were Praying mantis, southern mantis wing chun's sil lim tao, jeet kune ,fu jow and crain.He held an interest in Tai chi, northen praying mantis,eagle claw, pa-kua, monkey, jeet kune, and choy lay fut.He had books on southern mantis, eagle claw, dragon fist, tai chi, choy lay fut, hsing -I, sil lum tao, pa-kua, hung gar, chin-nar and dim mak.
    At this early stage in his development Bruce had the idea of creating a superior Gung Fu system.
     
  4. Emil

    Emil Valued Member

    True enough, but these styles are not present in JKD or his non-classical Kung Fu.

    Em
     
  5. Diamond Dave

    Diamond Dave Valued Member

    I'm not saying that these styles are in jkd, just that these are the arts he looked at while in Seatle.Some elements of some of the styles can be found in his non-classical gung fu.
    In a letter to William Chueng around 1969 Bruce said, "Ive lost faith in the Chinese classical arts."
     
  6. windtalker

    windtalker Pleased to return to MAP

    Still I agree with the context of your posts on the subject. There were just a few arts that probably had a significant bearing on the structure of JKD and certainly not a number like 27 styles.

    Yet my view on the "core arts" would be that Wing Chun and Boxing along with Taekwondo (not Kickboxing) and maybe Ju-Jitsu would have fit your basic formula. Forgot to mention Fencing there. Maybe the Savate related to fencing?

    There are numerous references/drawings to Muay Thai and Judo. Also to Wrestling. It has always seemed to me there were a number of minor influences yet more than just 4 that shaped JKD structure.

    On an entirely different subject of long-term curiosity even back when Bruce was using/teaching the Non-Classical Gung-Fu there was an obvious change from palm on knife-hand type strikes found in Wing Chun to straight punches and notably the backfist. Any theories about how and why Bruce made such changes? The process Bruce used to eliminate the forementioned technique has always interested me.
     
  7. february

    february Valued Member

    Personally I'd omit Taekwondo from that list, I did a little many years ago, and the kicking method in JKD is pretty different. I think the kicking owes more to Savate. With regards to Kickboxing, AFAIK it wasn't really mainstream during that time, as people weren't generally cross-training (it was more full contact Karate). I could be wrong, but I always thought that Bruce and his group were relatively pioneering in bringing about a cross-training Kickboxing type format about, before anyone else did.

    Again as far as I know, the fencing aspect comes from an attribute level. The powerside forward, straight lead, on-guard position, principle of interception etc. Although it's not technically fencing, the attributes are strongly enough derived to make it pretty central to the JKD methodology.

    I always liken JKD to Boxing. Boxing is a self-encompassed art, but rarely do 2 boxers look exactly the same in the way that say, 2 Shotokan people would. Look at the differences, Ali, Foreman, Liston, Marciano, Tyson, Hamed, Khan, Mayweather, Hatton - All pretty different stylistically, yet all have the same foundation. The basic footwork, stance, jabs, crosses, hooks, bobbing, weaving etc. The same foundation, all boxers, but appropriating methods that work better for them. It's the same with JKD, the foundation is the same, you need to understand it before trying to appropriate your own methods, otherwise what you're doing will deviate from the core principles of directness, economy, power generation etc.

    These are just my opinions and insight, people are bound to differ. TBH I think that there's way too much theorising in JKD and not enough doing, getting on the mat and working what you do is what's going to make you a better fighter, not reading a ton of books and theorising on why or how Bruce would have done it, or not done it.
     
  8. windtalker

    windtalker Pleased to return to MAP

    Hey February,
    Were you suggesting that I try using the open hand strikes from Wing Chun then using the modifications that Bruce made to his Non-Classical Gung-Fu for possible insight as to why the change was made?
     
  9. JeetKuneDero

    JeetKuneDero Valued Member

    Despite the constant focus on whether Bruce Lee may have studied 4 arts or 27 - I have to wonder how much that would weigh for someone trained in physics alone observing Lee in motion? For it seems to me that despite his early process of experimentation, borrowing, blend, “or whatsoever,” he also hacked away at so much that, in the end, all that remained were a few simple techniques not based on any particular style - and thus no longer his source - but on nothing else other than physics in motion.

    He is not alone in that – those he greatly admired had arrived at that plane as well – Takuan, Suzuki, Krishnamurti, et al. One would do well to read them.

    "A few simple techniques well presented, an aim clearly seen, are better than a tangled maze of data whirling in disorganized educational chaos." - Bruce Lee
     
  10. senseisifu

    senseisifu New Member

  11. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    Nicely said.

    One of the big problems with some approaches to JKD, in my opinion, is the "checklist." That running tally of how many different influences you've wracked up in your JKD. Or, worse yet, the "shopping list" of things you still need to wrack up.

    Seems to me that cross-training of any sort requires judgment enough to determine when you're just collecting for collection's sake versus actually addressing a concrete need.


    Stuart
     
  12. Jjf88

    Jjf88 Valued Member

    It depends.

    JKD Concepts is Mixed Martial Arts.

    OJKD or Jun Fan JKD is Bruce's art, based on the science of movement
     
  13. DaeHanL

    DaeHanL FortuneCracker

    jkd is the process of forming your own art. Not just plain ol' MMA.

    jun fan JKD is bruce's expression of himself/his truths and no one else.
     
  14. pmosiun

    pmosiun Valued Member

    Wow, i always thought jeet kune do is a concept, mixing martial art such as mma. after rereading jeet kune do vol 3 by john little and the bruce lee fighting method, i felt really bad, i discovered in the jeet kune do vol 3 book, the importants of footwork which is the foundation from fencing and boxing, the upper body tools which are basically boxing tools, vertical lead punch, hook punch, cross, backfist, uppercut, and the lower body tools which are your basically similar to kickboxing kicks, only 3 most commonly use kick, side, shin/knee and hook kick. i notice the bruce lee fighting method, jeet kune do is basically western boxing with influence from western fencing.
     
  15. Mr. JKD

    Mr. JKD New Member

    Trying to say what JKD is or isn't is like trying to catch the wind in many ways,and by all means keep trying. Ill say this once, if you are training in JKD or any martial art for that matter and you have to think on what you are doing is or isn't what someone else says or thinks, then you should probably change the way you train and even think about martial arts. Seems like everyone is trying ( maybe not wanting to but still) to choke the idea of having a free and formless attitude on martial arts out. Here's something to chew on :The enlightenment idea in older martial arts (EX: Karate and all Japanese arts for that matter) is what I think this free attitude I speak about is. Once you can look at martial arts and the earth you walk on in the same way then you are on your way to greatness so to speak, maybe you wont win many controlled fights and competitions, but as a human you will succeed. In my opinion this is what Bruce and lots of the masters of olden times were trying to get across. The modern way of thinking is really killing all ideas of martial arts, new or old. I'm not argueing/agreeing/disagreeing with anyone, I'm just putting this out for you to wrap your brain around it and really think on what martial art is. Read the Tao of Jeet Kune Do and really read the beginning chapter on Zen, and the part about seeking the truth, forgetting it and reposing in the nothing( the nothing being what you yourself has experienced,learned,etc). Its best to try to look at JKD as a set of stepping stones to get on the road of your own journey in martial arts and in life.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2008
  16. JKDwolf#1

    JKDwolf#1 New Member

    totaly agree
     
  17. Like Water

    Like Water Valued Member

    Well said :cool:
     
  18. Morra

    Morra Valued Member

    I can't follow what you're trying to say here. If I'm training in an MA, and I come across someone with a different opinion, and I think about it, I'm somehow on the wrong path? What do you mean?

    The most popular martial arts right now are MMA and BJJ (OK, there's TKD, but that's baby-sitting). They seem pretty free and formless to me. New techniques and positions are invented every few months, so there's another thing I don't get what you mean. Maybe if you cited some examples?

    Really? Those traditional teachers are the most close-minded "my art is the best, all sprang from my art" people in MA! They are the dogmatists Bruce Lee was against.


    I simply don't agree. Bruce Lee's philosophy is fine, nothing new there, certainly, but he never wanted philosophy to overhwhelm the fighting--which some can argue happened with Aikido.
     
  19. DaeHanL

    DaeHanL FortuneCracker

    i think what was being said is, if you have to think "what would Bruce Lee, Dan Inosanto, Ted Wong, or whoever do in this situation? Would he approve?" then you are on the wrong path.
     
  20. JKDwolf#1

    JKDwolf#1 New Member

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. JKD View Post
    Ill say this once, if you are training in JKD or any martial art for that matter and you have to think on what you are doing is or isn't what someone else says or thinks, then you should probably change the way you train and even think about martial arts. Seems like everyone is trying ( maybe not wanting to but still) to choke the idea of having a free and formless attitude on martial arts out.

     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2008

Share This Page