Classical FMA

Discussion in 'Filipino Martial Arts' started by Pat OMalley, Sep 19, 2008.

  1. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    Ok here's one for you all to ponder over:

    There is always discussion within the FMA community as to what is and what is not considerd Classical and Modern and how to define which is which. So I thought I would open this here to see what you consider to be 'Classical FMA' and what do you not condsider to be 'Classical FMA' e.g. Modern FMA (for want of a better word).

    Is it to do with the way it is taught?

    What is taught?

    Is it the use of certain weapons?

    Footwork?

    Sayaw/Forms?

    Contact or non contact?

    Or a combination of many things?

    How would you be able to tell the difference between the more 'Classical Styles' and the more 'Modern Styles'.

    And what are the benefits and drawbacks of each?

    Do you consider what you do to be Classical or Modern or a combination of both?

    What is your prefferance and why?

    Does it have influences from other MA Styles or would it have to be pure FMA? What ever that is?

    Best regards

    Pat
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2008
  2. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    Good question.

    Not sure I have a good answer. I suppose the best I could come up with is this series of potentially unrelated observations:

    1) I'm not nearly as interested in training with the type of group that trains in tactical gear, wears baseball caps from one gun manufacturer or another, and comes up with terms like "zone of neutralization" and "silent sentry removal." That's not a judgment against people who are looking for that. I think there's room for that. But it's not where my head is at.

    2) I like that our class is conducted largely in Tagalog. Even if I don't know Tagalog.

    3) I'm less concerned about whether the weapons I'm learning are street legal, easily concealable, etc. I'm learning to use them because it interests me. Not because I anticipate using them. (I might use a stick. I'm unlikely to use a machete.)

    4) I like learning about the Filipino culture(s).

    5) Not interested in practicing anyos, sayaw, or forms in any other guise. Interested in learning about cultural dances. But don't feel any great need to do the tininkling myself.

    6) Am interested in learning about the kalasag (shield), kadena (chain), kris, etc. Things that really don't have much bearing on "modern self defense."

    7) Don't really believe in "pure FMA" or "pure any-other MA" for that matter. We're all mutts. All of us. And even if we weren't, FMA seems to have a strong tradition of absorption, adaptation, and amalgamation. I actually consider that practice to be classical FMA.


    Stuart
     
  3. shootodog

    shootodog restless native

    pure fma is a mix of everything that passed through the islands.

    classical fma are styles prior to 1972. martial law and government intervention.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2008
  4. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    So what would you see as being the main differences to post 1972 FMA and pre 1972 FMA?

    And what about those FMA styles that where formed before 1972 but have been influenced by post 1972? Are they still considered classical? Or are they something else?

    Best regards

    Pat

     
  5. Taliesin

    Taliesin Valued Member

    1972

    Incidently 1972 was also the year of "Game of Death" with the famous arnis scene with Bruce Lee vs Dan Inosanto :cool:
     
  6. lhommedieu

    lhommedieu Valued Member

    "Classical" FMA's

    Following is my reply to a thread on MartialTalk regarding Cebuano Eskrima: Beyond the Myth. While slightly tangential to the current discussion it may provide a partial answer to the question of whether an art is "classical" or not:

    One would therefore not have to accept that an FMA has been influenced by European sword arts to be a "classical" art; a southern Moro art influenced by Arab sword arts might be considered "ancient" or "classical" depending upon the extent to which that influence can be determined.

    There are many arts that have "ancient" roots, "classical" influences, and "modern" perspectives; the admixture of each is generally determined by the ways in which the practitionersof the art wish to define themselves. Any FMA can be an "ancient" art given its clan and family roots, "classical" given that it emerges from a distinct era (late 19th to early 20th century), and "modern" art due to the way that it is currently taught and marketed.

    Wiley's scheme doesn't always fit perfectly and doesn't contain all the answers, but it is a good way to begin to define some of the FMA's.

    Best,

    Steve
     
  7. jorvik

    jorvik Valued Member

    I think that a lot of FMA is taken from anything that they see and modified into their traditional arts. and I don't mean this in a negative light. Most knife collecters believe that the Balisong originated in France or Spain.and was then exported when the Spaniards invaded the Phillipines............now there are lots of European stick fighting styles like La Canne
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTS2xhTZUD8&feature=related"]Bâton français - YouTube[/ame]

    and
    Jogo do Pau
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze1SpAUk1zI&feature=related"]Portuguese Combat Stick Jogo do Pau, bastão curto - YouTube[/ame]

    Whose to say that FMA didn't copy that.....just a thought that I had lately
    and whatever, I still think FMA are great
     
  8. shootodog

    shootodog restless native

    la canne & jogo du pau doubtful. maybe more classical italian and spanish fencing. chinese kun tao definitely. silat of course. native filipino fighting arts yes.
     
  9. jorvik

    jorvik Valued Member

    Yeah but when you say that what you have is a mix or a stew of martial arts techniques deriving from many places...I used to do Aikido and I've found that in FMA there are a great many wrist locks employed, and flow drills useing these locks.
    Now I know a lot of the FMA masters have either dabbled in these arts or even devoted quite a lot of time to them .and I would think that that is how they found there way into FMA ( look how many arts Danny inosanto has studied).....I mean even today a favourite weapon amongst escrimadors is a La Griffe bear claw knife .......or a derivative.................so:) that's a new addition ....it's just a thought really.....to be honest I don't really care where the arts originated, I like them fine ..it's just well............ interesting to speculate
     
  10. CatWise

    CatWise Valued Member

    Hi everyone!

    I am not sure how to add clips on to the post, but here is a link http://fcskali.tripod.com
    If you follow the website right at the bottom are several uTube clips of Kali and my Guro Ray Dionaldo. Check it out and let me know what you think.

    My thought on the Classical VS. Modern - FMA is basically heavily influence by the Spanish, Middle Eastern and other cultures, so it is a "bland" and assimilation of what works for them. Not only that, but every Island had its own variation of the technique. Different swords, slightly different approaches etc. As Guro Ray says, FMA is a constant state of evolution.

    I do study Modern Arnis - so I guess that would be "modern" but I have no idea why it is. We still do forms, we still have the old fashion drill, and from what I see of other master that practice "Classical Arnis” I don't see much difference. We don't use baseball bats, tactical gear or anything modern like that.
     
  11. Late for dinner

    Late for dinner Valued Member

    one thought

    I have an extremely limited exposure to the FMA but one thing that was brought home to me in a seminar by a guro was the difference in using a technique that was classically practiced with an edged weapon and how that these same techniques were not nearly as effiicient/effective when applied with a stick. Perhaps part of the answer as to what is classical and what is modern is in the emphasis of the pure combat applications of the art as opposed to a 'watered down' version that is used either for sport/competition or where the subtlties of difference between blades and sticks are not considered so important.

    As I said, I have little FMA knowledge but that was just the impression I got.

    Cheers, powchoy
     
  12. jorvik

    jorvik Valued Member

    Hey Catwise you can post directly from U-Tube and there are lots of clips of Ray on that.and IMHO he is vert good indeed

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O6MchAeAkc"]FCS-King of Karambit - YouTube[/ame]

    but I alwasy think of the Karambit/Kerambit as an Indonesian weapon....not FMA.....so that is in keeping with my last post..lots of sources for this stuff
     
  13. lhommedieu

    lhommedieu Valued Member

    I think that it is safer to say that in cases where the stick qua impact weapon is the primary weapon then the targeting is different than it would be with a blade. Getting hit across the temple with a tire iron is just as effective a technique than getting cut across the upper arm with a light sword, if not more so.

    "Pure combat applications" are implicit in arts that practice with a stick but make it clear that the stick is just a surrogate for a bladed weapon. In these cases the art is not "watered down" nor is the difference between blades and sticks "not considered so important" but rather, the art is practiced with a stick for training purposes.

    ***

    Re. the karambit: there are Filipino versions used by some FMA's; my limited impression is that the Filipino version is smaller and the curve of the blade is more acute - but I could be mistaken about this.

    Best,

    Steve
     
  14. jo biggs

    jo biggs Valued Member

    well here` y two pennyworth


    Q. Is it to do with the way it is taught?, No as most teachers will teach there way or the high way, Martial arts does not lead to team players!!!

    Q.What is taught? Having stuidied Classical and modern Japanese arts, this really defines what is classical and whats not!!, Within a classical Art, you are able to trace a unbroken linage of headmasters within the school or line bcak over 500 years or not, The techniques are defined by the taching licsenes awarded, although this does not mean they will be taught the same way by same teachers

    Is it the use of certain weapons?( a classial art will have an original curriculum, which may have additions through time, but this will have been noted and passed down verbally through the line with the reasosns for this.)

    Footwork?( well as what works works and what doesnt, I see the answer here being teachers will place emphasiis through there linage, this will be displayed by the `` clasical line`` for the keen observer, they are able to note the diiferences

    Sayaw/Forms?( If taught then they may or may not be complete and have more depth.

    Contact or non contact?( originally maybe, but down to inidvduals preference when handing down a classical line, also teachers as they mature tend to place more empahsis on substance and form, rather than bang crash wallop, in my humble opinion.

    Or a combination of many things?( its howver many years of history in a funnell through the current coaching team)

    How would you be able to tell the difference between the more 'Classical Styles' and the more 'Modern Styles'.( depnds on how well the modern stlyes can or choose to imitate whats been before or if they are refined to the 21st Century.

    And what are the benefits and drawbacks of each?( will a 10,000 word essay gain me mebership to the british council, Lol,Lol,)

    Do you consider what you do to be Classical or Modern or a combination of both?( modern, there is no acknnolged direct lineage past my teacher that is verifbale, ie I need to be able at least to name 5 gererations of teachers.

    What is your prefferance and why?( both calssical and modern, if you dont know your history, how can you plan your future)

    Does it have influences from other MA Styles or would it have to be pure FMA? What ever that is?
    ( classical arts in japan tens to say pure, with my sword training, I am not allowed to change movements or train with other teachers outside the stlye, as its not my right to do so!!, there ball there rules!!!

    In my humble opiion having seen demos on T.V of Modrn Escrima, they have adopted bits and piecies of M.A. from other arts at soem point and added to the melting pot!!!,

    thtas my two penny worth.

    Kindest
    Jo Biggs
     
  15. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    No not at all, time and dedication in learning the system/style you represent in order that you can represent it to its full potentual with no politcal outlook will do that:) It's all a time thing regardless if it is Modern, Classical or a combination of both.

    Nice response though and a good insight.

    Best regards

    Pat
     
  16. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    I dont know of a single system/style of FMA that can trace it's line back 500 years. so does that mean all FMA are modern???

    And why 500 years, why not 1000 or 100 or 200? Who defined that the figure of 500 years was what described 'Classical'?



    Why 5, why not 3 or 2? Again who placed the figure of 5???


    But within all FMA you are encouraged to change the movements to suit you, and what if the movements are not effective are you doing it just to go through the motions simply because you are told this is the way you have to do it.

    That may be accepted in JMA but FMA is all about adapting to each situation as it arises. For instance the late great GM Ilustrisimo could use a number one strike against everything, now even if you attacked him with the same strike 10 times, his number one strike would be applied in 10 different ways. His ball, his rules. But who makes the rules and why?

    best regards

    Pat
     
  17. Peter Lewis

    Peter Lewis Matira Matibay

    Hi All

    What is being highlighted here is a vast difference between Japanese and Filipino culture, in particular the unquestioned Sensei - Kohai (Teacher - student) relationship wherein there is obedience for life from the student towards his / her teacher. This cultural trait can easily be traced back several hundred years to the Samurai era and is well documented in ancient texts, such as the Hagakure or the Bushido. The student is trained to obey without ever questioning, the instructors (or orders) of the instructor.

    By distinct contrast, students within the FMA are encouraged to question, analyse, synthesise and evaluate all the time. This is simply a matter of survival and it can often involve learning a number of teachers. Ultimately, the art becomes part of the individual, with adjustments and innovations accepted as the norm. This has allowed the FMA to survive and evolve for centuries, constantly adapting to the needs of new generations of practitioners.

    Gumagalang

    Peter
     
  18. jo biggs

    jo biggs Valued Member

    Only Kidding Pat, Havent got time to write 10,000 words, lol and you know me I have no poltics, but have been reported For Tax Evaison re FMA!

    I was only drawing an anolgy with JMA as to what defines a classical martial art, a bit like a classical piece of music, it remains unchanged, but the tones may be more subtle to the experienced eye and ear?,,

    Are you both saying that a clasical FMA or a modern FMA can evlove and be adjusted by the practioner?,

    would you give an example of a Classical F.M.A?

    Best Wishes
    Jo
     
  19. ptkali778

    ptkali778 Valued Member

    considered classical FMA, or the antique form.
    at 3:20 rizal arnisadores

    [ame]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=L6ClswOLFMg[/ame]
     
  20. CatWise

    CatWise Valued Member

    When you actually look at the word “classical” in the dictionary (and it does have a lot of meaning and descriptions from science, art, music etc.) In essence the word 'classical' is applied to any mode of thought prevalent up to the time of some radical new innovation, or any area of study that has well established roots, typically pre-nineteenth century. It’s also anything that lasted a “long time”. In music, classical music is still being composed; we also have “classical” rock etc.

    So, based on that idea, FMA is“classical” martial arts, because is does meat the "classical meaning criteria". No, you may not be able to trace lineage of masters for 500 years back or more, but the actual philosophy of FMA and its application is “classical”. What I mean by that is that if you look the FMA, and the history of the country, you will find that for years it has been forced to evolve and adapted. It had a lot of Spanish influence, it has Japanese influence and several others. But just because you can see some of the Japanese sword work in it, or you see the spanish fancing steps in it, doesn’t mean it is not classical. It has been around for hundreds of years, and during all the occupations it has always had the tradition of adapting, learning and evolving. Personally, I find that fascinating and incredibly beautiful. Don’t get me wrong, I love the long standing traditions and the amount of effort and training that is put into the Japanese study and practice of anything, not just the martial arts. FMA has in its own way the same traditions, but, there is an advantage in studying a technique that teaching you think and make it your own. As one of the examples, one of my instructors does a unique step in with his leg when he “enters” into the center of the other person. I have never seen anyone else doing that. He told us that he does that because his master used to kick him in the you know what during the sparring sessions, so he just automatically does this step, thus protecting himself. Now, everyone that studies under him does the same thing.

    Just my two cents on it.
     

Share This Page