JKD vs MMA
We at the BLF wanted to take a moment to have a discussion about jeet kune do and whether or not it is the same thing as MMA. It is important to discuss this here because jeet kune do is often described as a mixture of several different arts, much like the contemporary MMA. It is the belief at the Bruce Lee Foundation that Jeet Kune Do is NOT MMA. However, we also believe that while JKD is not MMA, Bruce Lee IS the catalyst for MMA. Bruce Lee has often been described as the godfather of MMA. We support this opinion as it was Bruce Lee’s departure from the classical and traditional arts and his promotion of the complete fighter more than 35 years ago that was the impetus for movements such as MMA.
So why then is JKD not MMA? When someone speaks about an MMA fighter, they refer to what arts he/she has in his arsenal, such as kickboxing, jiu jitsu, muy thai, etc. But to us, JKD is its own art. Therefore, one could conceivably be an MMA fighter whose arsenal includes JKD training.
Further, although JKD is often described as an amalgamation of several different arts, this is also untrue. There is a lot of confusion about what JKD is because Bruce Lee was himself a student of the arts. He looked at, studied and exchanged information about various arts. His library contained volumes of books on many different arts and he had a great appreciation for many martial arts generally and historically. But JKD is not made up of the best ingredients from 26 different arts. In fact, JKD as an art consists of a very small arsenal of weapons and prides itself on simplicity and economy of motion. If we look at the most direct influences on JKD, we see the influence of boxing, fencing, and wing chun. But JKD certainly cannot be called boxing. And it most definitely cannot be called fencing. Nor can it be called wing chun. So at what point does a thing become different enough that it becomes it’s own thing? If we put flour, water and eggs into a bowl while making a cake, can we also call the finished product pasta? Simply, no. JKD has its own core techniques and its own philosophical base that is different from any other art out there.
Further confusion comes in because the philosophy can be applied very liberally - to many different arts or to life in general. This has lead to the notion that JKD is really just a philosophy that if applied properly can enhance any action you may choose to undertake, whether it is tae kwan do or fishing. But, this line of thinking discards entirely the core physical techniques that Bruce Lee himself developed and tested.
There is also a belief that Bruce Lee would have changed his JKD if he had lived to see movements such as the UFC and that he himself promoted exploration and evaluation and throwing out what is useless and adding/keeping what is useful. There is some truth in these statements but they must be properly evaluated.
Bruce Lee was brilliant and relentless and the master of his domain. He was passionate about the arts and about teaching. He definitely died in the midst of his process (but that can be said of anyone I suppose). He most definitely might have made changes to JKD had he lived but it is our belief that only he could have made those changes. Too often, people make assumptions and make changes to JKD without really having a true and real understanding of the art or its founder. This has lead to the ongoing debates about JKD and what it is by those who have decided that they know best what Bruce Lee wanted. We don’t take this position at the BLF, which is why we provide a historical snapshot of JKD, which also includes guide posts to follow as you mature to a level where you can begin to make JKD your own. But, too often, people diverge from Bruce Lee’s JKD but continue to call it “Bruce Lee’s JKD” which only adds to the confusion. So, yes, there was a certain amount of individuality and personal exploration promoted by Bruce Lee in JKD but it was within the framework of the foundation he had already himself laid down. Anything that diverges too abruptly from that path (such as, teaching other arts and labeling it JKD, or altering the basic stance and front lead, or adding weapons training into JKD, etc) should be classified as someone else’s take on JKD and not ascribed to Bruce Lee. To think we know best what Bruce Lee wanted or who Bruce Lee is is pure hubris. Rather if we come up with our own innovations, we should stand proudly by those and label them with our own name, but keep Bruce Lee’s JKD pure.
The Manual that the BLF is putting together will further delve into these issues so keep an eye out for that publication but we hope that this discussion has been helpful in your understanding of JKD and how to choose an instructor.
In the spirit of jeet kune do
© Bruce Lee Foundation 2009
So why then is JKD not MMA? When someone speaks about an MMA fighter, they refer to what arts he/she has in his arsenal, such as kickboxing, jiu jitsu, muy thai, etc. But to us, JKD is its own art. Therefore, one could conceivably be an MMA fighter whose arsenal includes JKD training.
Further, although JKD is often described as an amalgamation of several different arts, this is also untrue. There is a lot of confusion about what JKD is because Bruce Lee was himself a student of the arts. He looked at, studied and exchanged information about various arts. His library contained volumes of books on many different arts and he had a great appreciation for many martial arts generally and historically. But JKD is not made up of the best ingredients from 26 different arts. In fact, JKD as an art consists of a very small arsenal of weapons and prides itself on simplicity and economy of motion. If we look at the most direct influences on JKD, we see the influence of boxing, fencing, and wing chun. But JKD certainly cannot be called boxing. And it most definitely cannot be called fencing. Nor can it be called wing chun. So at what point does a thing become different enough that it becomes it’s own thing? If we put flour, water and eggs into a bowl while making a cake, can we also call the finished product pasta? Simply, no. JKD has its own core techniques and its own philosophical base that is different from any other art out there.
Further confusion comes in because the philosophy can be applied very liberally - to many different arts or to life in general. This has lead to the notion that JKD is really just a philosophy that if applied properly can enhance any action you may choose to undertake, whether it is tae kwan do or fishing. But, this line of thinking discards entirely the core physical techniques that Bruce Lee himself developed and tested.
There is also a belief that Bruce Lee would have changed his JKD if he had lived to see movements such as the UFC and that he himself promoted exploration and evaluation and throwing out what is useless and adding/keeping what is useful. There is some truth in these statements but they must be properly evaluated.
Bruce Lee was brilliant and relentless and the master of his domain. He was passionate about the arts and about teaching. He definitely died in the midst of his process (but that can be said of anyone I suppose). He most definitely might have made changes to JKD had he lived but it is our belief that only he could have made those changes. Too often, people make assumptions and make changes to JKD without really having a true and real understanding of the art or its founder. This has lead to the ongoing debates about JKD and what it is by those who have decided that they know best what Bruce Lee wanted. We don’t take this position at the BLF, which is why we provide a historical snapshot of JKD, which also includes guide posts to follow as you mature to a level where you can begin to make JKD your own. But, too often, people diverge from Bruce Lee’s JKD but continue to call it “Bruce Lee’s JKD” which only adds to the confusion. So, yes, there was a certain amount of individuality and personal exploration promoted by Bruce Lee in JKD but it was within the framework of the foundation he had already himself laid down. Anything that diverges too abruptly from that path (such as, teaching other arts and labeling it JKD, or altering the basic stance and front lead, or adding weapons training into JKD, etc) should be classified as someone else’s take on JKD and not ascribed to Bruce Lee. To think we know best what Bruce Lee wanted or who Bruce Lee is is pure hubris. Rather if we come up with our own innovations, we should stand proudly by those and label them with our own name, but keep Bruce Lee’s JKD pure.
The Manual that the BLF is putting together will further delve into these issues so keep an eye out for that publication but we hope that this discussion has been helpful in your understanding of JKD and how to choose an instructor.
In the spirit of jeet kune do
© Bruce Lee Foundation 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment