|
Navigation
|
 |
Article Navigation:
Want to write?
We're always looking for new writers and people willing to help out with the magazine and site. If you're interested, [Click here for more info]. |
|
Stay Updated!
If you'd like to stay updated and recieve a notice when the next issue of is released, just sign up at our forums by [Clicking here]. We will send out a mass e-mail to all our members when the next issue is released. |
|
Your Comments
Let us know how you feel about this issue. We will read e-mail sent and would appreciate any comments and/or suggestions that you may have. [Click here]. |
|
|
|
 |
MMA - Growing Pains of a Rebel Child
by Justin Hardjowirogo
The build-up to the recent 10th Anniversary Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) show yielded repeated proclamations of a “Mixed-Martial Arts evolution”. The show itself, with all of its “street-style” antics and extra-curricular aggression, demonstrated that if anything, Mixed-Martial Arts (MMA) had not so much evolved but was in the process of growing up, a bit awkwardly at that. Don’t agree? That’s perfectly fine. Say what you will about the “evolution” of techniques in MMA; from the guard to the armbar to the elbow strike. Essentially, as a whole, MMA in America is a cranky adolescent at best, still trying to prove itself and figure out whom exactly it is. In order to understand this idea of “growing up” with respect to MMA, we must look at what is in essence the linear parent of MMA: Traditional Martial Arts (TMA).
For centuries, the Martial Arts and their masters have claimed to turn ordinary men into disciplined and capable fighting machines. Practitioners in Arts from Kung Fu to Tae Kwon Do all stuck to the singularity of their respective styles, espousing a fierce belief in its efficacy. Then, with the  thunderous emergence of the UFC in 1993, something happened ... A child was born!
With the arrival of the UFC and its initial thesis, to prove which style was the best, seemed to rock the entire world of the Martial Arts. Many learned observers, in anticipation of the first UFC event in November of 1993, had imagined that the culturally and stereotypically set figure of a Bruce Lee or Chuck Norris hero, with flying kicks and spinning backfists, would emerge a clear victor. This was not to be, as a quiet, even slight, Gi-clad man and his snake-like (and arguably un-exciting) Brazilian Jiu Jitsu style would easily vanquish all comers. Royce Gracie had almost singularly destroyed the psychological notion of what North America had envisioned as a master Martial Arts fighter; and the rest is history. We all know that after that brisk November evening, we would not hear the end of the grappling, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and MMA “takeover” of the Martial Arts establishment. After that, the world would know what “true Martial Arts” were all about. What worked in a fight would be separated from what did not. It is not, however, that simple.
Royce Gracie, by virtue of his victories in the UFC, surely was in many eyes a Martial Arts revolutionary. But in effect, Gracie was what popular TMA myth had sworn that we’d all be: a little person who could defeat big people. Say what you want about that myth, whether you believe it was oversold by the Gracie family or helped along by big and incompetent fighters losing to Royce. What was illustrated by Royce’s victories was at the least the possibility of arguably the most propagated myth in Martial Arts history: the "little man beating big man" myth. That is essentially the shadow that parent, TMA, cast over child, MMA. The concept is really not so difficult. TMA have spawned other children. Try to remember that Sport Karate (point fighting and all), Kickboxing, and now MMA were once, and are all, rebel children of the Traditional Martial Arts establishment. Does that mean that they are bound by their parent’s shadow? Yes and no. MMA can forge its own path. With the right choices it can grow well into its own self. Having said that, we must acknowledge that the child will always resemble the parent in some way. “Martial Arts” is what both “parent” TMA and “child” MMA share. What does that mean? What, then, defines a Martial Artist? Doing kata, after all, does not make one a Martial Artist more than arm-barring an opponent does. So where do we go?
Despite the cries of “evolution”, the UFC and MMA in America are still just growing up. MMA may yearn for an identity free of any TMA shadow, but in order to make it, MMA has to acknowledge and embrace rather than fight its roots. Did MMA show which fighting techniques really work? Perhaps. But those techniques are part of the larger picture of TMA. Don’t forget that a Mixed-Martial Artist is still a Martial Artist. And that, despite what an MMA image of what a Martial Artist may be, means much more than just being able to kick someone’s ass in a ring.
 Being a Martial Artist to many means discipline, respect and honor. Respect for what, you may ask? I’m not talking about a Bushido code of honor, but what TMA practitioners have almost always had are discipline in the practice of their arts, the respect to those that taught them, and the honor of representing themselves. Does that exist in MMA? Sure, to a point. Call it what you want, but Royce Gracie displayed it in his first MMA appearances. He demonstrated respect for his art and its creators by carrying himself with humility. After all, what is tradition if not the respect for something that is passed down? It’s simply the mixture of highly competitive, professional sport, and Traditional Martial Arts tenets that seems to clash. Sport and Martial Arts have never been an easy marriage. Yes, the mixture of actual techniques in practice (for example, striking and grappling) has shown what can truly be useful in fights. Still, we must not forget that being a Martial Artist, even a Mixed-Martial artist, should not preclude certain values.
TMA is no doubt very different than MMA. That does not mean that certain important things can’t be shared. The guidance is there. Humility, discipline and respect. Focus solely on fighting and you lose the bond. Forget how to fight and the same rift will emerge. TMA and MMA should not be at war. If they are, they both lose as one will only try to distinguish itself from the other in extreme fashion and wind up destroying their own respective images. As a parent, it is not as though TMA is casting a negative shadow on MMA. It is more that the child, with displays like UFC 45, is reflecting badly on the parent. We do not need images of Gi-clad men breaking bricks any more than we need images of Phil Baroni punching a referee. I’m not suggesting that either image is the norm for either TMA or MMA. Either image sours what the public views as Martial Arts. If MMA is to grow into itself and find its place in North American sports culture, let alone find its own identity, then MMA cannot continue to fight so hard out of the shadow of TMA. If the sport of MMA wishes to distinguish itself from boxing, to grow in America, it needs to be done in a way that capitalizes on what the Martial Arts are truly about. And yes, that means more than just fighting. Even MMA legend Frank Shamrock, on his “Shootbox” website, laments the differences between TMA and MMA communities: 'One is based on discipline, respect, and control. And the other one is based on extreme violence, image, and sex appeal.'
* Article by Justin Hardjowirogo.
* Back to Issue #5 Frontpage
|
|
|
