17 posts / 0 new
Last post
OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture
LARPing and martial arts, where is the line?

One night me and my wife were watching a classical ju jutsu demonstration and my wife turns to me and says.

"This is like LARPing."

If you don't know what LARPing is, it's Live Action Role Playing. Basically people dress up like fantasy characters or even historical figures and beat each other with foam weapons. Think orcs and elves as well as knights and vikings.

My knee jerk reaction was just to say "it's tradition and respect for a cultural heritage." Though both practitioners were caucasion and not in asia.

It made me start thinking about the lines between things like tradition and respect versus things like infatuation and fetish.

Where do you think the line is? When does respecting tradition or culture become fantasy or fetish type behavior?

Katz
Katz's picture

There's isn't much difference, really, to me. But I did spend a lot of time role-playing (not live-action, though) when I was younger.

In both case, I think it all depends how far you go into fantasy, and there's potential for going there in both disciplines.

Technically speaking, role-playing doesn't have to be fantasy. If you pretend you're being attacked in a martial arts demo, you are playing a role. Some LARPers will go pretty far into technical stuff when fighting, studying medieval weapons fighting. And martial arts demos are pretty much like a game really. It all depends on your approach to things. :)

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

I guess I just think it's funny how seriously people take clothing.

The other day I was sparring with an MMA guy at my house and when I walked out onto the mat with shoes on he said "I thought you didn't wear shoes with karate."

I said "I guess, but if someone attacks me I'm most likely going to be wearing shoes."

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:
It made me start thinking about the lines between things like tradition and respect versus things like infatuation and fetish.

Where do you think the line is? When does respecting tradition or culture become fantasy or fetish type behavior?

I think the line is pretty easy to mark:

Skills only directly applicable within the bounties defined by participants = LARP, Historical Re-enactment, Sport, etc.

Skills directly applicable to the world as it is = Self-protection, military conflict, law enforcement, etc.

Both categories have value and both can be very demanding. Kobudo training, for example, has no direct use in the modern world because the worldhas moved on. A tonfa vs bo conflict isn’t going to happen unless practitioners of Kobudo make it happen. That does not mean it does not have its own inherent value; nor does it mean that there are not indirect benefits to other areas. I would however say that justification via indirect value to the modern world is not a strong argument from the value of Kobudo i.e. what if I have a pool cue, etc. It’s better to point to its own inherent value on its own terms.

Learning to use old weapons is cool! It’s culturally and historical interesting. It’s also fun and rewarding to keep alive an ancestral skill.

None of this is “fantasy” so long as we don’t think of ourselves as “historically displaced samurai”. If we are objective about what we do, why we do it, and why we deem it to have value then I see no problem at all.

I practiced Iai-do for a long time for the enjoyment of it. It’s a totally valueless skill to the modern world, but I found it enjoyable, interesting, and even somewhat relaxing when compared to other more physical areas of marital study.

I never once considered myself a “samurai”, but I did come across some who did. It was hard to be around these “warriors” when they talked so authoritatively about their skill set. As someone with experience of more demanding and functional martial practise, I was very aware that the training did not make them the equals of the past samurai who were preparing for actual battle. Those who thought they it did were defiantly “fantasists”, but they were thin on the ground.

OnlySeisan wrote:
My knee jerk reaction was just to say "it's tradition and respect for a cultural heritage." Though both practitioners were Caucasian and not in asia.

I don’t see how that matters. We can have an interest in the cultures of all branches of the human family tree. I’m not Japanese, but it was the Japanese sword that interested me at the time I studied it. I don’t feel the need to limit myself to the weaponry of northern Europe simply because that is my most immediate ancestry. If I Japanese gent was interested in learning to use an English long bow out of an interest in the history and culture of my part of the world, I would fully understand that.

And while it’s not my thing, I’d also understand if Lord of the Rings got him interested in LARP based on European mythology and past culture. All parts of the world have cool stuff to share.

All the best,

Iain

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

Could someone explain how wearing a gi or colored belt is applicable to the world as it is?

I've never worn my gi around town, though I don't wear a gi anymore anyway.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:
Could someone explain how wearing a gi or colored belt is applicable to the world as it is?

I've never worn my gi around town, though I don't wear a gi anymore anyway.

I think that’s missing the point of a gi. I don’t think anyone has ever said it’s a replication of “real life”.

Yesterday I trained in MMA shorts, boxing gloves and shin guards for a sparring session. I don’t walk around the street in MMA shorts, boxing gloves and shin guards either. But that attire was appropriate for how I was training. The clothing I arrived to training in would not be practical as it would present a safety risk (I need my attacking tools padded) and may well not withstand the rigours of the session (i.e. will tear as I kick).

Wirth regards to a gi, it is hardwearing and well suited to general martial practise; so it’s a good choice of clothing. It’s not meant to be a replication of real life.

I do training in “normal clothing” too, but a gi withstands the rigours of training better than every day clothing does. My everyday jacket is not designed to be violently pulled so it will give way after a while … and that would get expensive. So I wear a gi for practical purposes when needed.

All the best,

Iain

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

Military battle dress uniforms are cheaper than a gi by hundrands of dollars or pounds and they are designed to stand up to warfare, not a dojo.

It's what I use for students that don't have a gi.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:
Military battle dress uniforms are cheaper than a gi by hundreds of dollars or pounds and they are designed to stand up to warfare, not a dojo.

It's what I use for students that don't have a gi.

That will work too :-) Good idea! Most gis are not “hundreds of dollars” though and for most people a £20 gi will suffice. That’s typically what most of my guys wear. Not all military clothing will withstand the violent pulling you see in martial arts either (although it may keep you at a comfortable temperature or camouflaged within a given environment).

OnlySeisan wrote:
Could someone explain how wearing a gi or colored belt is applicable to the world as it is?

I've never worn my gi around town, though I don't wear a gi anymore anyway.

Neither military battle dress uniforms or Gi’s are worn in public by civilians. The key issue is that whatever we wear needs to be fit for purpose; not necessarily a 100% faithful replica what we would always wear in everyday life.

All the best,

Iain

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

In the United States, civilians dress in military fatigues fairly often. All you have to do is run down to Wal-Mart. Maybe more so in the Sounthern states, but it happens.

20 pounds is about $32 American. I've never seen a gi that could stand up to the abuse you're talking about for that amount of money.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:
20 pounds is about $32 American. I've never seen a gi that could stand up to the abuse you're talking about for that amount of money

That surprises me as it’s rare things are cheaper over here. You can get a judo gi for around £30, and a hard wearing karate gi for £20 (with instructor discounts). That’s what my guys wear and we’ve never had a problem with either costs or durability of the clothing. Regardless, the key thing is that the clothing is fit for purpose.

All the best,

Iain

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

Here $32 gets you a starter gi made out of 5-8 oz weight cotton.

I'd still disagree that the gi has any sort of purpose other than as an official uniform for a sports format, like a football uniform.

There are only a few drills I do that need sturdy clothing, because one can't rely on their attacker having sturdy clothing to get a hold on. I think it was 2006 or 2007 where the Gracies were accused of using their gi as a tool in the UFC because it provided purchase and absorbed sweat to allow for techniques that can't be applied to a sweaty shirtless guy.

Merely pointing this out as a difference between techniques that can be applied due to clothing, not as an argument for UFC style training.

I figured I might as well teach as close to the environment me and my students will be in instead of introducing artificial elements that could cause problems.

Shoes for example. Practicing kata on a smooth floor shoeless is different than practicing while shod on pavement or grass. Even the type of shoes can make a difference, so I try and encourage practice in what one normally wears everyday. Plus it's a big surprise the first time you get raked by a shoe while grappling. It tosses a whole different element into the mix.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:
I'd still disagree that the gi has any sort of purpose other than as an official uniform for a sports format, like a football uniform.

I’d say that’s a very hard position to justify. It’s definitely a practical form of clothing designed to facilitate the practice of combat arts. As an example, the extra piece of cloth in the crotch to allow kicking without ripping is obviously there for practical purposes. We can see many examples of how gis are designed to be fit for purpose i.e. strong fabric, double stitching, reinforced collars, etc.

And, as we have previously discussed, we also see that with the aforementioned military uniforms and the uniforms for sports. They all are designed with function in mind.

Military clothing is a uniform (by the very definition of the word), but it also definitely has a functional component such that it facilitates duties within a given environment. A gi is no different. Same with sports uniforms generally. Rugby tops are tight so they are harder to grip. Whereas American Football tops are lose to permit the required padding to go underneath. It’s self-evident they have a practical purpose and that’s why they are the “official uniform” for those pursuits. A gi is likewise the official uniform because of it practicality.

Back to your original point, it’s not meant to be representative of everyday clothing. It does however have a practical purpose within training. It’s not something that needs to be worn all the time, and there are definite advantages is changing things up now an again.

You also don’t need to wear one if you chose not to; but to say a gi has no practical purpose is difficult to justify because their very nature makes clear they are designed with a specific task in mind.

OnlySeisan wrote:
There are only a few drills I do that need sturdy clothing, because one can't rely on their attacker having sturdy clothing to get a hold on.

There’s the other side of that through which should not be ignored: the enemy can grab your clothing too and that’s something we need to practise dealing with. Just as we can’t rely on the strength of the enemy’s clothing; we can’t rely on the weakness of our own either.

Unless you live in a consistently warm area (and I don’t) then at some point during the year – or on travels – you will be wearing thick clothing. So if we never do clothing drills we will be vulnerable there. We will also miss opportunities too.

As always, I feel it’s best to avoid the extremes in training. We should not use clothing all the time, and we should not always disregard clothing.

For us, we dill using the “natural handles of the body” and with clothing too. It sounds like you do the same and there is definitely a role for both; from both an offensive and defensive perspective.

OnlySeisan wrote:
I figured I might as well teach as close to the environment me and my students will be in instead of introducing artificial elements that could cause problems.

Not adding in artificial elements can also cause problems. The use of gloves, mats, gum shields, safety rules, replica weapons, etc. are all artificial. I’d also suggest that they will have a way bigger impact than a gi. However, if we chose not to use all of the above we will be engaged in training that is dangerous and inefficient. You can’t get around that.

I wrote about this a few years ago in this article:

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/how-spar-street-part-1-iain-abern...

Iain Abernethy Sparring for the Street Part 1 wrote:
Be aware of the flaws of any given sparring exercise

No matter how realistic sparring is, it is never real. We are always making compromises in the name of safety. If we didn't, every training session would result in the majority of students going to the hospital! We need to introduce necessary flaws into training in order to ensure we can train safely. Without these flaws, training would be just as dangerous as the street; which kind of defeats the whole point of training. It won't make our lives any safer; it will just expose us to many more life-threatening encounters!

If you do any of the following you've introduced a flaw into your sparring: train on mats, wear sparring gloves, wear body armour, use a gum shield, limit contact levels, omit techniques such as biting, eye gouges and groin attacks, allow you or your partner to end the fight by tapping out or submitting, etc. Changes such as these will make training safer and more productive, but they also move it further away from a real fight. The trick to ensuring this drift from reality is minimized is to be acutely aware of the flaws and their effects …

To be clear, I’m fully behind you when you say you’d rather not use a gi and instead use what you find to be cheaper and equally effective clothing. That sounds perfectly fine to me. Where we differ is that I don’t think others are doing anything wrong is choosing to wear a gi. It does not move them away from reality in any hugely significant way (certainly a lot less than gloves, pads, control, replica weapons, etc. do) and no one, to my knowledge, wears a gi because they think its replica of normal clothing (it’s obviously not).

A gi is simply an appropriate piece of clothing for training that is commonly worn for that reason.

All the best,

Iain

JWT
JWT's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:

Military battle dress uniforms are cheaper than a gi by hundrands of dollars or pounds and they are designed to stand up to warfare, not a dojo.

It's what I use for students that don't have a gi.

Gi and uniform prices must be pretty different in the US.

Looking online in Britain, buting a cheap set of (no longer used) new DPM trousers and shirt will set you back £40 quid (via SOF military as an example). A good quality heavyweight Gi (eg Blitz) will cost £50 retail but as an instructor getting them discounted I can supply themto my students for £35. 

Now you could argue that at least the military kit is more versatile than a Gi in that I can wear it outside of training, but that's not 'fashionable' here, makes you look a complete WALT,  and in any event is against service dress regulations so I'd never wear or mix my uniform with civilian dress. As a class uniform however if it is serviceable and you prefer it to a Gi then it could be a sensible choice.

I taught my Karate classes for 8 years without Gi because it didn't combine well with the body armour I wanted to use. Over time as club dynamics changed I used more impact pads and less armour in regular classes and saved the armour for specialist training sessions. At the same time I noticed that we had started to do less pushing, shoving, grabbing and pulling because our tracksuits/t shirts did not make it feasible. As a result in 2014 I switched back to utilising Gi (albeit with trainers in one of the systems I teach). One factor in my swapping my DART Karate classes back to Gi in the UK was that the cost of buying a 'sports uniform' for clubs of set t shirts and tracksuits was higher than getting a good quality Gi and less versatile or hard wearing (and the younger students grew out of them quicker).  

In my personal training I don't wear a Gi (and in one to one or small group cross training) and I stick to sports kit (to save on Gi ironing and washing) UNLESS there is going to be some replication of heavy duty grabbing and pulling, in which case the movement dynamic of an untied Gi in a belt mimics a t shirt ripping, a tied Gi in a belt mimics a closed jacket and a loose untied Gi mimics the effect of an ipen jacket - all of which without clothing damage.  

All the best  

John  

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

You definitely don't want to buy the uniforms new. A used uniform top will set you back $5 maybe $10. Also buy American. At the start of 2003 the U.S. Marine Corps changed its uniform and shortly there after all our armed services changed uniforms so there is a giant used market for really cheap stuff.

I should have mentioned the used part. I'm incredibly frugal. laugh

I still say that the gi only has sporting applications and only marginal practical applications.

Marc
Marc's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

The key issue is that whatever we wear needs to be fit for purpose; not necessarily a 100% faithful replica what we would always wear in everyday life.

Of course everybody wears whatever fits their training goals.

In terms of choosing the training outfit as close as possible to everyday reality the following images come to my mind:

- Training in big thick winter clothing with huge jackets and thermo underware for those who live in cold countries. (Too hot for a 90min session in a dojo.)

- Working on heavy grappling in your everyday Wallstreet suit. (Too expensive when ripping your clothes on a regular basis.)

- Practicing your escape agenda (i.e. running) in a tight long dress and high heels. Or swimming/diving in jeans and jumper when training to rescue a drowning person. (Impractical.)

It certainly makes total sense to try any of these now and then to raise your awareness of the problems of everyday clothing. I guess that practicing running in high heels or getting them off your feet swiftly might be a skill that needs to be worked on if that's your everyday uniform. But on a regular training day I would prefer clothes that

- allow for a comfortable working temperature,

- withstand the wear and tear from the exercises and training environment,

- make it easy to practice the drills/exercises required to learn the desired skills.

- minimise the risk of injury during training (ranging from major health risks like blows to the head to small annoyances like scraping seams).

Therefore, in my opinion, a Gi is well suited for everyday training. A military uniform might be as well. Both are not well suited for everyday life (at least where I live) - Gi pants do not have pockets or a zip fly for example.

Side note: De-escalation can be practiced in almost any clothes (except maybe clown costumes because they provoke insults ;-).

Take care everybody

Marc

Tau
Tau's picture

Marc, you raise a good point.

One criticism that Iain makes of many clubs is that they mention escaping but never actually train it. Well that struck a chord with me and I do teach escape drills e.g. set objective, through obstacles, through other people and so on. Furthermore I talk about targets in an attack situation. I keep my hair short for several reasons (the main being I'm lazy) but the advantage is that it can't be grabbed. This is one reason I've long since given up on piercings and I highlight this to students.

But I've never consider having students attired as they would be in potential violent situations. Sure, we've dispensed with dogi from time to time, wore shoes etc. But I've never asked students to attend as they would socially. Consider the issues of ties for men, heels for ladies (or for men, this is the 21 century, after all.) There is a safety aspect to this. Running in heels often causes ankle injuries (trust me, ladies with ankle injuries and men with hand injuries take up much of my Saturday mornings!) but still there should be a degree of replication in the pragmatically-focussed dojo.

Kevin73
Kevin73's picture

If we wanted original karate training clothing, we would be in our underwear without a shirt like the okinawans did.  The japanese instituted the gi based on their clothing of the time (the kimono) and adapted it for the hard use of martial practice.

Some moves in kata reflect the culture of the time.  For example, some moves were to grab the top knot and chin to throw a person (obviously easily adapted to a hair grab or other human hand hold).  Others aren't so obvious or useful, such as, certain moves in Kusanku that have your hand palm up behind your head.  I have seen applications that have value, that have you defending against a hair grab and are trapping the hand to your head and the other hand is hyperextending the arm, or you are chambering for a shuto strike.  The actual usage was that men of the time had a hair pin in their top knot and this move was using the hair pin (jiffe) to stab your attacker.

Clothes should be worn for comfort reasons in training and usage.  But, we must never forget how what we wear can be used as a weapon either if we want to remain true to karate's roots.