Martial and the Art

Art is the intentional expression of the human spirit and of creativity. This is my definition of the term, if anyone disagrees, please feel free to post a different one.

I've never really heard debate about whether or not the martial arts are indeed arts. It seems that for many practioners of the martial arts, there is not "art" in their training whatsoever. Let me explain.

I have no problem with training for the love of the system, to keep in physical shape, to be more ready to defend myself, etc. In fact, as of right now, that is precisely what I'm doing.

It seems to me that the art has disappeared. Where is the expression of my spirit and creativity? I would be so bold as to say that most practitioners follow the rules of the system and never really have an opportunity to assert anything that resembles an art form.

For me, the development of my skill and my body is my art; I see myself as a work in progress. But is this really creative in any way? Can this be considered an art?

Do you consider your style to be an art? Do you consider yourself to be expressing something? Should it even be called a martial art? Is your bodie's development your art, or the development of your technique?

I believe the central question of this issue is whether you see your style as a performance art (i.e. the art lies within kata and active demonstration), or a art where your own body is the canvas and you are continually painting, fine-tuning, adjusting. Or is your training not an art at all?

 

It's an art if you want it to be. I personally follow Bruce Lee's philosophy. Try everything and see what works for you. I don't want to be a blackbelt, I want to be as good as I can be at the way I choose to be.

That's an art to me.

 

The art in Martial Art is the sdame as in, say, the "art" of blacksmithing.

Using google define the first hit is this:

• the products of human creativity; works of art collectively; "an art exhibition"; "a fine collection of art"
• the creation of beautiful or significant things; "art does not need to be innovative to be good"; "I was never any good at art"; "he said that architecture is the art of wasting space beautifully"
• a superior skill that you can learn by study and practice and observation; "the art of conversation"; "it's quite an art"
• artwork: photographs or other visual representations in a printed publication; "the publisher was responsible for all the artwork in the book"

The third point down is the one that reffers to MA, it's just a skill related to war.

 

In my opinion, we undoubtedly practise an art,
well, at least i know i do. The perfection of the mind, the unreachable goal. the developement of body, and spirit. Have'nt you ever seen a kata executed with such precision, poise, and exact beutey that it was 'a work of art'?
I'll give you an example, i think many basketball players just play ball, but watching some players, like Michael Jordan, shawn kemp in years past. watching the skill, and grace of their movement.....it just seemed like art executed through body movement.
Thats how i see martial arts. When i have performed a kata, that has had people almost ejected from their seats with riotous applause, seeing the look of awe n their faces. I was confident then that i had developed my own execution to not just an art, but a fine one.
Inspiring people, and being inspired by people through M.A's is what i see as the true art. there are so many ways e can interpret M.A's as an art, that i wonder how you cant see it? and if you dont......i hope you some day soon do

 

Nice responses. I am really pleased to see that everyone that has posted so far sees his/her system or ryu as an art form.

So, if art is the action of cultivating technique and striving for perfection in a certain task, is teaching different? Is teaching different from the art, since you're not longer aspiring to skill but helping others to do the same? Or is teaching a different art?

Also, even though it seems that martial arts fit under the definition of art as the mastery of a certain skill, is there room in martial arts for creativity and expression? Do you think that someone's own personal style in sparring/kumite/competition makes that an art form of creativity?

Personally, I think that people's own way of moving, their timing, flow, technique, and dedication can comprise a creative art form. There is so much variation even within one style of how people look when they do kata. They are all performing the techniques right, (right now I'm not considering those karateka who don't have proper technique), but due to several elements like the ones mentioned above, they all look different.

Anyone noticed similar things, or have any comments on this?

 

I think that teaching is a different art within the art itself, not all great martial artists are great teachers. But when you're a teacher you still aspire to become more skillfull then you already are, or at least you should IMO.

 

Shu 術 in Chinese means much more as "Method" or "Skill" or "Technique" than figure skating. Having Martial "Shu" means Techniques for Combat, or something similar.
藝術 "Yi shu" means 'art' like you're thinking. Yi itself has much more to do with the English conception of what an art is, but the "shu" component a bit less so.
It's hard to translate it directly into English, but martial arts is itself a loose translation of the Chinese/Japanese

 

Okay so I have another question to pose on the same subject.

Given that "art" can be the development of superior skill in some activity,

can anything be an art? I mean, if anything can be an art then where does life stop and art begin? They would be inseperable. Don't we try to do our best at everything we do (or at least some of us)?

Is the act of living an art? This is getting a little philosophical, but seriously, if the definition of art is so broad how do we differentiate it from simple effort?

 

The Art in "Martial Art" is definitely intended to refer to "Skill/Craft, the older definition of "Art."

Here you have its history from the Oxford English Dictionary:

[< MARTIAL a. + ART n., after either Japanese bu-gei (1603 as buguey in Vocabulario da Lingoa de Iapam; < bu military affairs + gei art, craft, accomplishment) or Japanese bu-jutsu < bu + jutsu art, technique, skill, craft: cf. JU-JITSU n.
The elements forming the Japanese compounds bu-gei and bu-jutsu are all < Middle Chinese; the compounds are < the Middle Chinese forms of Chinese w{uhacek}yì skill in martial arts and Chinese w{uhacek}shù WUSHU n. respectively.]

- Matt

 

If you watch an advanced and skilled practitioner of Tae Kwon Do, you will realize traditional TKD is an art. If all you cared about were self defense or winning medals, you would practice within a very narrow set of parameters to make certin number of techniques effective. Your objective would be making a certain number of kicks, blocks, and strikes able to get you out of certain scenarios or score points. That is not art. That is the equivalent of being able to paint something accurately. You know what it is but it has no soul or inspiration.
The Art in Tae Kwon Do is being able to take things like forms, free fighting, basics, basic kicking, and philosophy and make them transcend mere physical practice for exercise and self defense. Most of us will never have to use martial arts in self defense or to defend our nation. So we practice balance, flow, gracefulness, power, speed, accuracy, and all the other intangible aspects of martial arts in a way that makes it definitely our own.
I practice the techniques as my Instructor showed me, but I will never do them as he did them because I am not him. The act of me practicing my own form and style in a way that makes my Tae Kwon Do unique to me is the Art. You can watch an advanced student and realize that nobody else practices the way they do. They are unique. This is part of the Art.

 

I think that art can apply to most activites, and what seperates the artist from the layman is not the activity, but the attitude that the participant approaches it with. In masonry, there are those who slap rocks on wet cement and call it a day, and there are those who perfectly cut and fit each stone, meticulously mix and apply just the right amount of cement, place each rock and wipe away the excess to produce aesthetically appealing, structurally sound creations. The prior is a layman. The latter is an artist.

In painting, there are those who roll paint on ceilings or spray sloppy tags on trains. On the other hand, there are those who spend years learning about theory and application, who study works of great masters and perfecting their skills, and spraypaint great murals, or create beautiful paintings. The prior is layman. The latter is an artist.

In fighting, there are those who stand outside of the clubs on the weekend with a backwards hat and a bad attitude, goading people into attacking them so they can drag have a bit of fun pounding their faces in. There are those who learn stuff through instruction or experience, then spend time perfecting what they have learned, honing their skills to a fine precise edge. The prior is a thick-necked knuckle dragger. The latter is a martial artist.

Of course there is creative expression. Anyone who is a good martial artist, and practices sometthing to proficiency, and "makes the art their own," will have to be creative to make each individual technique/principle work for them. What you are discussing is the difference between somebody who repeats katas and drills without any intent or thought behind them and someone who thinks about and does their best to incorporate what they are learning from martial arts.

 

I don't believe things have changed much at all in this regard. Most have always stuck to a certain method or system as taught to them, modified only to make things work better for themselves.

There is nothing wrong with this, IMO. When learning something new, if one provides too much creativity to it, then there is a good chance that things will start to go down a tangent. What you end up with is something like a jack of all trades but master of none.

In the martial sense, it is a science/craft. The primary focus of technique is to develop the tools and learn to use those tools. It is in the mastery of these tools that there is craft.

Creativity can be a distraction when technique is modified too early before the actual understanding of principles and the hands on real world experience is there to back it up and keep things real.

Where the art comes in, IMHO, is after years of study. The art is indeed creativity because it is not just learning the tools and how to use them, but learning beyond that, the why and when to use those tools and in the creation of practical application for self-defense, sport, fitness... well being... self-development... etc.

If one allows him/herself to become complacent with only what they see in martial arts, that is the biggest danger. Complacent martial artists strive to perfection but only at a visible level, so techniques look perfect, they appear perfect in training... however, combat and martial arts is very complex with many factors. Complacent martial artist, after years of training are not necessarily good fighters, they tend to be predictable and mechanical in the way they do things. Good basics but that is only the tip of the iceberg.

To not allow one to be complacent is where the creativity comes in... always looking at things in different ways and exploring new ways to do things, even if the new way is an old way just looked at from a different view point. In the development of things that cannot be seen... timing, perception, awareness... experience.

 

complacency is an art...not a very glamorous one, but it is an art, nonetheless.

it takes effort and patience to be complacent.

if any skillful endeavor is an art, is everything we do an art?

 

I see your point. I'm not talking about being complacent as in having patience, however, but as in feeling that there is no reason to keep learning. To not have a motivation to continue to learn and instead feel that you "know it all".

Basically, being a sheep and never thinking outside the box is what can happen if one is too complacent.

One can have patience, one can accept things the way they are and not strive to change them, one can be sensitive to the needs of others and society, one can be hard working, one can be happy with who they are and etc. However, to be complacent is over and beyond that to a point that you allow yourself to be satisfied to a fault.

From dictionary.com (if this helps):

com·pla·cent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (km-plsnt) adj. -- Contented to a fault; self-satisfied and unconcerned: He had become complacent after years of success.