Rory Miller's Blog, page 41
May 16, 2011
Combative Poetry
Lots of things coming together that feel important. Some from the book, some from talking to E, some old mysteries.
I think more and more that 'art' in combative or martial arts is probably the right word. It is and must be a creative, spontaneous process. The logical part of the brain, the one that tries to remember what you were taught or what you 'should' do is too slow. But so is the creative part, if it is bounded. If you come up with an idea but reject it because the idea isn't good enough, that is also too slow to work. Probably slower than relying on memory and certainly closer to a freeze.
With my family I sometimes do extemporaneous rhyme. Usually at the Fessic level (Princess Bride reference), just trying to think up every word that rhymes with one that catches my attention and maybe keep them in a sentence. It's not a sonnet by any means, but it is poetry-without-thought. Reciting poetry takes a hesitation, and you must have the right poetry memorized for the occasion. Spontaneously composing good poetry is hard... and it rarely is or sounds spontaneous. It takes time.
You can get better at it, but the key is practicing spontaneity, not studying poetry.Am I the only one that sees the correlation here with survival fighting?
Kids do poetry naturally. Show them rhyme and alliteration and rhythm and they will have fun. They will play with words and make up songs. (When my daughter was five years old and very angry at the entire adult world she made up a lovely and disturbing ballad called, "I Ran Away From Home and Got Raised by Some Cougars." No adults survived the whole song.) They don't start losing talent until someone tells them there is such a thing and that there are good and bad rhymes and that (and this is subtle but it is always there) they will be judged. That's when kids quit making up their own songs. That's when they tell themselves that they aren't fill-in-the-blank. Talented. Smart. Creative.
This ties in so hugely with the 'Permission' aspect of self-defense.
Some, a very few, don't care what other people think. It's very hard to truly fall into that camp without being an ass. (Damn, I went judgmental.) A slightly larger number realize that no one can judge us unless we let them. You can tell me that you think something I did was incorrect, but if it worked your judgment doesn't mean a lot to me.
Training for spontaneity isn't hard. And you will come up with things that are better than anything you were taught, since they will come from who you are. And it can be faster than responding from any other complex part of your brain.
We go around and around about what can really be taught. Appropriate and graded ruthlessness. The instinct to attack when under attack. Unfreezing. The will to recover and fight when you are pretty much finished. Taking pain and even injury as a data point, ignoring the emotional element... and spontaneity.
Realistically, I know that most high-end operators are identified in selection, not forged in training. Some of these abilities I have seen trained and most grow to some extent over time, but always by being in the company of a group who showed the traits.
But, in martial arts, there may be a problem with the student population. Kids lose their creativity when they realize they will be judged. It's a defense mechanism. But it is one of many possible defense mechanisms.
Another is to memorize well and seek out a group where the standards are clear. To work hard at conforming to what the teacher wants. To be an obedient student.I think that will work better at a recital than playing the dozens.
A contrast- where these kinds of thinking lead:In "Meditations on Violence" I wrote: "... if you are scheduled to fight a world champion heavyweight boxer on Thursday, you shoot him on Tuesday."
As opposed to, "If I had a fight to the death next week I would practice my forms every day."
I think more and more that 'art' in combative or martial arts is probably the right word. It is and must be a creative, spontaneous process. The logical part of the brain, the one that tries to remember what you were taught or what you 'should' do is too slow. But so is the creative part, if it is bounded. If you come up with an idea but reject it because the idea isn't good enough, that is also too slow to work. Probably slower than relying on memory and certainly closer to a freeze.
With my family I sometimes do extemporaneous rhyme. Usually at the Fessic level (Princess Bride reference), just trying to think up every word that rhymes with one that catches my attention and maybe keep them in a sentence. It's not a sonnet by any means, but it is poetry-without-thought. Reciting poetry takes a hesitation, and you must have the right poetry memorized for the occasion. Spontaneously composing good poetry is hard... and it rarely is or sounds spontaneous. It takes time.
You can get better at it, but the key is practicing spontaneity, not studying poetry.Am I the only one that sees the correlation here with survival fighting?
Kids do poetry naturally. Show them rhyme and alliteration and rhythm and they will have fun. They will play with words and make up songs. (When my daughter was five years old and very angry at the entire adult world she made up a lovely and disturbing ballad called, "I Ran Away From Home and Got Raised by Some Cougars." No adults survived the whole song.) They don't start losing talent until someone tells them there is such a thing and that there are good and bad rhymes and that (and this is subtle but it is always there) they will be judged. That's when kids quit making up their own songs. That's when they tell themselves that they aren't fill-in-the-blank. Talented. Smart. Creative.
This ties in so hugely with the 'Permission' aspect of self-defense.
Some, a very few, don't care what other people think. It's very hard to truly fall into that camp without being an ass. (Damn, I went judgmental.) A slightly larger number realize that no one can judge us unless we let them. You can tell me that you think something I did was incorrect, but if it worked your judgment doesn't mean a lot to me.
Training for spontaneity isn't hard. And you will come up with things that are better than anything you were taught, since they will come from who you are. And it can be faster than responding from any other complex part of your brain.
We go around and around about what can really be taught. Appropriate and graded ruthlessness. The instinct to attack when under attack. Unfreezing. The will to recover and fight when you are pretty much finished. Taking pain and even injury as a data point, ignoring the emotional element... and spontaneity.
Realistically, I know that most high-end operators are identified in selection, not forged in training. Some of these abilities I have seen trained and most grow to some extent over time, but always by being in the company of a group who showed the traits.
But, in martial arts, there may be a problem with the student population. Kids lose their creativity when they realize they will be judged. It's a defense mechanism. But it is one of many possible defense mechanisms.
Another is to memorize well and seek out a group where the standards are clear. To work hard at conforming to what the teacher wants. To be an obedient student.I think that will work better at a recital than playing the dozens.
A contrast- where these kinds of thinking lead:In "Meditations on Violence" I wrote: "... if you are scheduled to fight a world champion heavyweight boxer on Thursday, you shoot him on Tuesday."
As opposed to, "If I had a fight to the death next week I would practice my forms every day."
May 15, 2011
Yes and No People
I'm in the middle of reading a fascinating book. Full review when I finish.
In one section, the author states that there are 'Yes' people and there are 'No" people, and that 'Yes' people are rewarded by the adventures they have and 'No' people are rewarded by the security they bring into their lives.
So much in that little statement. He writes that there are many more 'No' people, and you see this soooo much: people who have always wanted to write a book but never got around to it, people who go to the same vacation spot every year, people who hate a job and stick with it. It's natural, organisms tend toward homeostasis. "The over-grazed pasture here is my ancestral homeland, we will not leave for those green hills..."
There are always a few who take challenges, a few 'Yes' people, and they drag civilization along behind them, otherwise our species would have died an embarrassing, boring, entropy death long ago. And there are always 'No' people who specialize in trying to rein in and control the 'Yes' people.
Looking at my writing and things I sound, martially, like a 'No' person. Everything is presented as a tool to come home safe, to keep my homeostasis. But it is a big element of the 'Yes' part of my life as well. I intend to go into unsafe places. That's not "No' person behavior. I need the tools to come home.
So here's the thing we maybe all need to think about with our martial arts training.Why do we do it?Do we do it so we can then take risks with better chances?Or do we train so that we get that feeling, but then never actually take the risks. Does MA help us (me, you) become a more effective 'Yes' person? Or just give us a beard we can hide behind and pretend to be explorers while never actually taking the risks?
And that's just in application. In training, do we give over our agency to someone with a title so we don't have to think for ourselves? Avoid training with strangers or new ideas to maintain our level of comfort? Accept that our instructor's superior years of training in some way requires us to act and think like dutiful children instead of men and women?
Or do we brawl and challenge and play? Look for things so different that they will shift everything we thought we knew? Try to find those edges of fear and exhaustion where the world changes?
In the end, is your training about being comfortable? Or being incredible?
In one section, the author states that there are 'Yes' people and there are 'No" people, and that 'Yes' people are rewarded by the adventures they have and 'No' people are rewarded by the security they bring into their lives.
So much in that little statement. He writes that there are many more 'No' people, and you see this soooo much: people who have always wanted to write a book but never got around to it, people who go to the same vacation spot every year, people who hate a job and stick with it. It's natural, organisms tend toward homeostasis. "The over-grazed pasture here is my ancestral homeland, we will not leave for those green hills..."
There are always a few who take challenges, a few 'Yes' people, and they drag civilization along behind them, otherwise our species would have died an embarrassing, boring, entropy death long ago. And there are always 'No' people who specialize in trying to rein in and control the 'Yes' people.
Looking at my writing and things I sound, martially, like a 'No' person. Everything is presented as a tool to come home safe, to keep my homeostasis. But it is a big element of the 'Yes' part of my life as well. I intend to go into unsafe places. That's not "No' person behavior. I need the tools to come home.
So here's the thing we maybe all need to think about with our martial arts training.Why do we do it?Do we do it so we can then take risks with better chances?Or do we train so that we get that feeling, but then never actually take the risks. Does MA help us (me, you) become a more effective 'Yes' person? Or just give us a beard we can hide behind and pretend to be explorers while never actually taking the risks?
And that's just in application. In training, do we give over our agency to someone with a title so we don't have to think for ourselves? Avoid training with strangers or new ideas to maintain our level of comfort? Accept that our instructor's superior years of training in some way requires us to act and think like dutiful children instead of men and women?
Or do we brawl and challenge and play? Look for things so different that they will shift everything we thought we knew? Try to find those edges of fear and exhaustion where the world changes?
In the end, is your training about being comfortable? Or being incredible?
May 12, 2011
Bone and Muscle
Deep water and shallow water as well. The Beaverton seminar was small, but went well. A really wide mix of skills and, as always, there are a number of things I consider basic that we didn't touch.
A lot of my purpose in teaching the way I do is to, as Joe Lewis says, "Lead them to the deep water." Until you complicate it, the physical stuff is easy. Striking two people while doing a back flip is probably hard and somewhat complex...but knocking someone on his ass isn't complex. Not unless your internal "what if monkey" gets involved. There are few things more natural and intuitive to an organism than delivering kinetic energy.
I consider that shallow water stuff, and people do need some training in it. But spending years in the wading pool doesn't prepare you for the deep end...and, to stretch the metaphor too far, many people work really hard to convince themselves that their little wading pool is the ocean. Power generation is easy. Power generation with compromised structure and injured (which, unless you are the bad guy, is the normal starting place in an assault) is a different skill.
Fighting well when you have psyched yourself up for a match is different than fighting well surprised and scared...and that is different than fighting after you have been crushed and humiliated and all you have left is a life that may or may not be worth living. I spend a lot of time on context and a little time on emotion. Partially because they are important but even more because so few people really look at them and they affect everything else.
One of the rank beginners asked a question. There is simply no way to move or stand where you are safe. Multiple targets are always exposed and every motion exposes more. If the threat has the power or a weapon, the human body is all target. He wanted to know how to defend his vulnerabilities.
I paused for a second because the question was so backward... and then we played with it. It's not about your vulnerabilities (much) it's about the threat's capabilities. He is composed of bone and meat. Any way that he stands, each motion creates and eliminates specific vectors. His weight is on his right foot? He can't kick right without shifting. Leaning away? His lead hand is weak but his rear, especially if his spine is twisted, is loaded.
Once you read the opponent, you know how he can hurt you. His options are limited. You don't need to defend everything, only what he can hurt. It's one of the reasons I prefer infighting is that people are easier and faster to read by touch than by sight, but the principle really doesn't change.
Things change by history. This isn't deep-water stuff for me. I don't think I learned it my first day of martial arts, but certainly in the first year and probably the first month. It's a basic. Getting the question from a beginner was okay... but I also got a 'thanks' e-mail from someone else at the seminar who considered this the big take-away. Not sure how I feel about that.
A lot of my purpose in teaching the way I do is to, as Joe Lewis says, "Lead them to the deep water." Until you complicate it, the physical stuff is easy. Striking two people while doing a back flip is probably hard and somewhat complex...but knocking someone on his ass isn't complex. Not unless your internal "what if monkey" gets involved. There are few things more natural and intuitive to an organism than delivering kinetic energy.
I consider that shallow water stuff, and people do need some training in it. But spending years in the wading pool doesn't prepare you for the deep end...and, to stretch the metaphor too far, many people work really hard to convince themselves that their little wading pool is the ocean. Power generation is easy. Power generation with compromised structure and injured (which, unless you are the bad guy, is the normal starting place in an assault) is a different skill.
Fighting well when you have psyched yourself up for a match is different than fighting well surprised and scared...and that is different than fighting after you have been crushed and humiliated and all you have left is a life that may or may not be worth living. I spend a lot of time on context and a little time on emotion. Partially because they are important but even more because so few people really look at them and they affect everything else.
One of the rank beginners asked a question. There is simply no way to move or stand where you are safe. Multiple targets are always exposed and every motion exposes more. If the threat has the power or a weapon, the human body is all target. He wanted to know how to defend his vulnerabilities.
I paused for a second because the question was so backward... and then we played with it. It's not about your vulnerabilities (much) it's about the threat's capabilities. He is composed of bone and meat. Any way that he stands, each motion creates and eliminates specific vectors. His weight is on his right foot? He can't kick right without shifting. Leaning away? His lead hand is weak but his rear, especially if his spine is twisted, is loaded.
Once you read the opponent, you know how he can hurt you. His options are limited. You don't need to defend everything, only what he can hurt. It's one of the reasons I prefer infighting is that people are easier and faster to read by touch than by sight, but the principle really doesn't change.
Things change by history. This isn't deep-water stuff for me. I don't think I learned it my first day of martial arts, but certainly in the first year and probably the first month. It's a basic. Getting the question from a beginner was okay... but I also got a 'thanks' e-mail from someone else at the seminar who considered this the big take-away. Not sure how I feel about that.
May 10, 2011
I Was Mean
One of my pet peeves is bad science. I'm not just talking ignorant science, where people with no background or training parrot back opinions that they don't really understand. That's just the tribal brain pretending to be logical.
I'm annoyed by bad science. Poorly designed experiments. Bad survey design. Ignorance of the process of science.
For example, in an upper-level psych class in college, our textbook had an experiment. In an effort to find where thirst was detected in the body, the experimenters injected hypertonic saline solution into the hepatic portal vein (liver) and the jugular vein (neck) to see if thirst was detected in the liver or the brain.
Can you believe that? Someone (I assume a student) designed and proposed an experiment; that was reviewed by the instructor; that was reviewed by at least one committee (ethics). It was performed, written up and submitted for publication. There it was peer-reviewed and published. Then someone decided it was really cool and found its way into a college textbook.
No one, evidently, in that long, involved process knew that veins move blood towards the heart. Away from the organ. All that they measured was which would make the hypertonicity go systemic faster.
Last night I got a call:"I'd like to ask you a few questions for a survey. What region are you in?""You called me. How can you not know what region I'm in?""Are you in Washington State?""If you knew, why did you ask?""What is your opinion on the changes to the health care law?""Federal or State?""Excuse me?""Are you talking about the changes to federal laws or the changes to state laws? They both changed last year, right?""I... I don't know.""How can you not know? You're trying to conduct a poll on a law and you don't know which law?"The survey form doesn't say.""Well, since I don't know what you're talking about and neither do you, I don't think I can help you. Good bye."
Okay, it was a little mean and maybe a little funny, but it also was wrong and infuriating. The only valid data possible from this survey is measuring the emotional reaction of people who don't know what they are talking about. Nothing else, because by the nature of it, no one COULD know what they are talking about.
What's your opinion on Blixismaciousness?
But this survey was designed and paid for and someone is going to use the data generated. Use it for what? Not to change the unknown and possibly imaginary health law. At least I don't think so. More likely to tell people what other people think: "80% of the people agree on "X" what is the matter with you?" "Over half the people surveyed in your district don't support your position, Senator." "Our survey indicates that people think this is a serious problem, so we need more funding."
If I hadn't hung up, I probably could have figured out what the survey was designed to elicit (and only really good surveys are neutral). Most people have never even seen a neutral survey. Either by design-- which seems quite common now-- or by subconscious bias in the designer, most surveys and many experiments are targeted at a specific result.
And there's some guilt in this mix of feelings as well. When everyone refuses to play the stupid game it only leaves the ones unable to see the stupid game still playing. Do they then wind up driving policy?
I'm annoyed by bad science. Poorly designed experiments. Bad survey design. Ignorance of the process of science.
For example, in an upper-level psych class in college, our textbook had an experiment. In an effort to find where thirst was detected in the body, the experimenters injected hypertonic saline solution into the hepatic portal vein (liver) and the jugular vein (neck) to see if thirst was detected in the liver or the brain.
Can you believe that? Someone (I assume a student) designed and proposed an experiment; that was reviewed by the instructor; that was reviewed by at least one committee (ethics). It was performed, written up and submitted for publication. There it was peer-reviewed and published. Then someone decided it was really cool and found its way into a college textbook.
No one, evidently, in that long, involved process knew that veins move blood towards the heart. Away from the organ. All that they measured was which would make the hypertonicity go systemic faster.
Last night I got a call:"I'd like to ask you a few questions for a survey. What region are you in?""You called me. How can you not know what region I'm in?""Are you in Washington State?""If you knew, why did you ask?""What is your opinion on the changes to the health care law?""Federal or State?""Excuse me?""Are you talking about the changes to federal laws or the changes to state laws? They both changed last year, right?""I... I don't know.""How can you not know? You're trying to conduct a poll on a law and you don't know which law?"The survey form doesn't say.""Well, since I don't know what you're talking about and neither do you, I don't think I can help you. Good bye."
Okay, it was a little mean and maybe a little funny, but it also was wrong and infuriating. The only valid data possible from this survey is measuring the emotional reaction of people who don't know what they are talking about. Nothing else, because by the nature of it, no one COULD know what they are talking about.
What's your opinion on Blixismaciousness?
But this survey was designed and paid for and someone is going to use the data generated. Use it for what? Not to change the unknown and possibly imaginary health law. At least I don't think so. More likely to tell people what other people think: "80% of the people agree on "X" what is the matter with you?" "Over half the people surveyed in your district don't support your position, Senator." "Our survey indicates that people think this is a serious problem, so we need more funding."
If I hadn't hung up, I probably could have figured out what the survey was designed to elicit (and only really good surveys are neutral). Most people have never even seen a neutral survey. Either by design-- which seems quite common now-- or by subconscious bias in the designer, most surveys and many experiments are targeted at a specific result.
And there's some guilt in this mix of feelings as well. When everyone refuses to play the stupid game it only leaves the ones unable to see the stupid game still playing. Do they then wind up driving policy?
May 5, 2011
"Facing Violence"
The new book ships in less than two weeks, if my math is correct. I should be able to bring a few to Athens at the end of the month. My publisher has express mailed me the first two off the press and they should be here, oh, about now. That's cigar worthy.
I'm not sure what it means, but on pre-orders alone, "Facing Violence" is currently ranked #7858 on Amazon out of more than eight million books. According to the secret author page, it hit a high rank of #5748 Wednesday.
Those are numbers. My assessment, as the author, is that "Meditations on Violence" was more personal and visceral than "Facing Violence" but that "Facing Violence" is infinitely more practical and useful. In the end, as always, the readers will decide.
I'm not sure what it means, but on pre-orders alone, "Facing Violence" is currently ranked #7858 on Amazon out of more than eight million books. According to the secret author page, it hit a high rank of #5748 Wednesday.
Those are numbers. My assessment, as the author, is that "Meditations on Violence" was more personal and visceral than "Facing Violence" but that "Facing Violence" is infinitely more practical and useful. In the end, as always, the readers will decide.
April 29, 2011
Two More Thoughts
High-level playing for me isn't a thing of words or sight. What I remember tends to be tactile and not stored in the word-part of my brain either, so forgive me if details are wrong.
Two more insights playing with Maija: Her instructor had moved completely away from forms and patterned drills. They trained by mixing it up with range and rhythm and weapon and intensity. It is really close to what I am trying to do in making the one-step the basic drill. Most efficient movement in any given instant. Fight to the goal. Constant adaptation. As it speeds up, the one-step blends flawlessly with jujutsu randori, but that's another thing.
The effect it had on Maija were pretty obvious on one level: she didn't need any idea of what I did or how I fought or moved to be able to play. She could adapt to almost anything I threw at her and if it took a second, that was okay, too. But possibly the most profound thing, the thing that took a couple of days to bubble up to consciousness was Maija's attitude towards fear.
I'm not going to say she didn't feel any. I have no idea what she felt. But almost every high-level practitioner I've played with had a little hesitation, a little ego, a little worry in them. It showed in how they moved and revealed quickly how to hurt them. No emotional hesitation from Maija. Damn few glitches, and almost all of those were just unfamiliarity.
By playing in chaos from the very beginning, she was expecting it. She may have been feeling fear but if so it was the kind of, "Well, what do you expect? Of course I'm afraid" that doesn't affect performance. Fear, insecurity was just a data point. The teaching method had shifted it to the 'irrelevant data' list.--------------The second thought is comparatively minor: Maija'd asked something about taking some one down to control. So I shifted mindsets and did it: pass, control elbows, sweep to handcuffing position.
Maija asked, quite reasonably, "Wouldn't that also make it easier to kill?" It took me a second to understand the question, but it opened up a huge can of worms that might be important for martial artists.
Control and injure are two totally different mindsets for two totally different situations. Yes, if I can take you down and get you in a submission, I can stab you easily. But if I can take you down and control you, there is no need to stab. It's no longer justified or necessary. If I can disarm you and then stab you with your own knife, it may be elegant martial arts, but it is also homicide.
Unless I am sure I can take the person down without injury, I don't use that mindset. It's dangerous and I will likely be hurt. Conversely, if I am sure, going into predator mode is unethical and what I would do would be unjustified and likely illegal.
Different things and this is one to watch: if your training or your personality presents these two situations as equivalents with similar skills and priorities it is profoundly out of touch with reality. If I ever make the big list of "Signs that all my training is really only indulging in a fantasy" this would be high on the list:
Does not distinguish between life-threatening and non-life-threatening situations.
Two more insights playing with Maija: Her instructor had moved completely away from forms and patterned drills. They trained by mixing it up with range and rhythm and weapon and intensity. It is really close to what I am trying to do in making the one-step the basic drill. Most efficient movement in any given instant. Fight to the goal. Constant adaptation. As it speeds up, the one-step blends flawlessly with jujutsu randori, but that's another thing.
The effect it had on Maija were pretty obvious on one level: she didn't need any idea of what I did or how I fought or moved to be able to play. She could adapt to almost anything I threw at her and if it took a second, that was okay, too. But possibly the most profound thing, the thing that took a couple of days to bubble up to consciousness was Maija's attitude towards fear.
I'm not going to say she didn't feel any. I have no idea what she felt. But almost every high-level practitioner I've played with had a little hesitation, a little ego, a little worry in them. It showed in how they moved and revealed quickly how to hurt them. No emotional hesitation from Maija. Damn few glitches, and almost all of those were just unfamiliarity.
By playing in chaos from the very beginning, she was expecting it. She may have been feeling fear but if so it was the kind of, "Well, what do you expect? Of course I'm afraid" that doesn't affect performance. Fear, insecurity was just a data point. The teaching method had shifted it to the 'irrelevant data' list.--------------The second thought is comparatively minor: Maija'd asked something about taking some one down to control. So I shifted mindsets and did it: pass, control elbows, sweep to handcuffing position.
Maija asked, quite reasonably, "Wouldn't that also make it easier to kill?" It took me a second to understand the question, but it opened up a huge can of worms that might be important for martial artists.
Control and injure are two totally different mindsets for two totally different situations. Yes, if I can take you down and get you in a submission, I can stab you easily. But if I can take you down and control you, there is no need to stab. It's no longer justified or necessary. If I can disarm you and then stab you with your own knife, it may be elegant martial arts, but it is also homicide.
Unless I am sure I can take the person down without injury, I don't use that mindset. It's dangerous and I will likely be hurt. Conversely, if I am sure, going into predator mode is unethical and what I would do would be unjustified and likely illegal.
Different things and this is one to watch: if your training or your personality presents these two situations as equivalents with similar skills and priorities it is profoundly out of touch with reality. If I ever make the big list of "Signs that all my training is really only indulging in a fantasy" this would be high on the list:
Does not distinguish between life-threatening and non-life-threatening situations.
April 27, 2011
After Action ---and Stuff
It's already Wednesday. Wow.
The weekend was good, full and rich. I'm still letting it settle.
The seminar Saturday was a small gathering, but nice. Sifu Jim Sanborn found a nice spot. I'd expected a class mostly of college students with very limited knowledge and awareness of some of the bad things the world has to offer. What I got was a much more mature crowd, mostly violence professionals or with at least a hand in that world. That let me take it a little deeper than might have been possible otherwise, but I still wish, as I always do, for more time. This particular class gave really short shrift to all but the most basic physical things.
An impromptu house party followed, with old friends and new friends and some good talking.-----------Maija was here for the weekend. I'll add links later, if I remember. She is a devoted student of Sonny Umpad and carries on his legacy... with the special difficulty of carrying on a legacy that Sonny was careful to never define. She wears it well and was a pure pleasure to flow with.
I don't want to put words in her mouth or descriptions that I'm unsure of. So all that follows should come with a 'so it seems to me' caveat:Maija's specialty is in unscripted flow, particularly with a variety of Filipino weapons. No set patterns. No if-then. Awareness of what is going on and what that gives you; what is happening and where it naturally leads... So we played with that attitude and skill in the context of close-quarters work. Played with damage when you couldn't rely on sharp steel. Touched on Sonny's idea of the dark side (and that's when the athletic club manager got nervous and asked us to put the weapons away.) Played with the shadow zone between armed and unarmed.
It was fun, and I'm still finding little bruises I did not notice during the weekend. That's cool. And moving at that level with someone so skilled, unafraid, and exploring was energizing as anything.
We also talked for hours and it wasn't enough. Just the two of us sometimes and over coffee with Mac. She told me a lot about Sonny. Maija is too humble to accept it, but she is definitely what he was trying to create and represents him well.-------More writing, which is always frustrating at this (the rewrite with editorial input) stage. Who knew that The Chicago Manual of Style was my editor's bible? Ick.
Also received the manuscript of the book that Tim wrote before he died. I'm reading it, hearing his voice. I agreed to edit it in preparation for submission. It's good, but there are parts that should be removed from an editorial standpoint that I want to keep as a memorial. It will all work out.------------------
Asked to speak with an immigrant group about American laws and customs concerning violence. Evidently some have been getting into trouble dealing with insults and the like the old-school way.
------------One day seminar in Beaverton May 8th. "Facing Violence" ships May 16. Drills workshop in Everett Washington May 21. Signing at Cedar Hills Powell's May 25th. Athens, Greece May 27-29. Check the specific page or the calendar at the main website:http://chirontraining.com/Site/Home.html
The weekend was good, full and rich. I'm still letting it settle.
The seminar Saturday was a small gathering, but nice. Sifu Jim Sanborn found a nice spot. I'd expected a class mostly of college students with very limited knowledge and awareness of some of the bad things the world has to offer. What I got was a much more mature crowd, mostly violence professionals or with at least a hand in that world. That let me take it a little deeper than might have been possible otherwise, but I still wish, as I always do, for more time. This particular class gave really short shrift to all but the most basic physical things.
An impromptu house party followed, with old friends and new friends and some good talking.-----------Maija was here for the weekend. I'll add links later, if I remember. She is a devoted student of Sonny Umpad and carries on his legacy... with the special difficulty of carrying on a legacy that Sonny was careful to never define. She wears it well and was a pure pleasure to flow with.
I don't want to put words in her mouth or descriptions that I'm unsure of. So all that follows should come with a 'so it seems to me' caveat:Maija's specialty is in unscripted flow, particularly with a variety of Filipino weapons. No set patterns. No if-then. Awareness of what is going on and what that gives you; what is happening and where it naturally leads... So we played with that attitude and skill in the context of close-quarters work. Played with damage when you couldn't rely on sharp steel. Touched on Sonny's idea of the dark side (and that's when the athletic club manager got nervous and asked us to put the weapons away.) Played with the shadow zone between armed and unarmed.
It was fun, and I'm still finding little bruises I did not notice during the weekend. That's cool. And moving at that level with someone so skilled, unafraid, and exploring was energizing as anything.
We also talked for hours and it wasn't enough. Just the two of us sometimes and over coffee with Mac. She told me a lot about Sonny. Maija is too humble to accept it, but she is definitely what he was trying to create and represents him well.-------More writing, which is always frustrating at this (the rewrite with editorial input) stage. Who knew that The Chicago Manual of Style was my editor's bible? Ick.
Also received the manuscript of the book that Tim wrote before he died. I'm reading it, hearing his voice. I agreed to edit it in preparation for submission. It's good, but there are parts that should be removed from an editorial standpoint that I want to keep as a memorial. It will all work out.------------------
Asked to speak with an immigrant group about American laws and customs concerning violence. Evidently some have been getting into trouble dealing with insults and the like the old-school way.
------------One day seminar in Beaverton May 8th. "Facing Violence" ships May 16. Drills workshop in Everett Washington May 21. Signing at Cedar Hills Powell's May 25th. Athens, Greece May 27-29. Check the specific page or the calendar at the main website:http://chirontraining.com/Site/Home.html
April 25, 2011
Depth and Breadth
Something I will have to hammer at the Logic of Violence seminar in Seattle is to remember depth and breadth. Overall, the class will use the methodology of disaster planning and apply it to self-defense. That's cool, but one of the things martial artists tend to do is to look at problems very narrowly:
A fist is coming at my face-- what do I do?The knife is arcing towards my belly-- what do I do?
By looking at this one slice of time, you miss the thousands of better options that surround it. Sure, martial arts are primarily physical skills. In many (I think most) schools, thinking and strategy rarely get more than lip-service. Tactics taught are usually limited to sparring.
Self-defense and survival are very different animals: primarily mental skills, secondarily emotional and only physical when you really screw up or have a very bad, unlucky day.
So you need to look at the problem broadly, in time. This is why situational awareness is so important... but that is another subject that rarely gets more than lip-service. Situational awareness is just a phrase and unless you are taught, specifically, what to be aware of it is an empty phrase. You need to learn violence dynamics from victim selection and terrain to predator tactics. You need to be able to tell a dominance display from a pre-assault indicator and know precisely when a dominance display becomes dangerous. You need to know how the motivations behind an assault differ from those behind a show, because those will dictate effective and ineffective de-escalation.
Broadly. The earlier you can see something coming, the more options you have. The more you know about interpreting what you see, the more precisely you can deal with it. This is, or should be, common sense and it should be integral whenever anyone claims to teach self-defense.
When a predator scans for a likely victim and works to separate her from others, there are stages where she can not be noticed in the scan; stages where she can handle things through social control by remote; where she can make the predator doubt that he has read the situation correctly; stages where she might be able to directly discourage... but if she isn't taught to recognize these or doesn't know what to do, she is left with a desperate fight with a bigger, stronger and possibly armed person who has taken every tactical advantage.
Some do win from there, but very few unscathed.
There is another blindspot that I call the depth of the problem. Things freeze people. They go into denial. "This isn't happening" or they let their identity interfere with their needs, "I know I should fight, but that would be rude." These mental errors have happened too often and been too well documented to safely ignore. The physical aspects of self defense are relatively easy-- or they would be if the mental aspects didn't interfere.
And there is a separate but intertwined emotional aspect: fighting when you are afraid or angry you rarely fight well. An experienced predator with the right victim can shock the victim into a feeling of complete helplessness. It is an incredible act of will and incredibly difficult thing to fight when you are sure there is no hope, no chance. When you know that you have already lost and any resistance will be torturously punished.
Some predators are good at putting people into that mindset. Abusers actively train victims to be afraid to do or try anything... but some few fight and prevail. As I said, an incredible act of will.
If you teach self-defense, be careful not to compress time. Long before the bear hug escape or the snap kick to the knee there was likely a better, surer, safer option. And remember that no matter who you train, in the really dark moment when he or she absolutely needs the skills, they will not be the eager student you know. They will be a chosen victim, possibly already injured, dominated and without a feeling of hope.
Teach them to fight from there.
A fist is coming at my face-- what do I do?The knife is arcing towards my belly-- what do I do?
By looking at this one slice of time, you miss the thousands of better options that surround it. Sure, martial arts are primarily physical skills. In many (I think most) schools, thinking and strategy rarely get more than lip-service. Tactics taught are usually limited to sparring.
Self-defense and survival are very different animals: primarily mental skills, secondarily emotional and only physical when you really screw up or have a very bad, unlucky day.
So you need to look at the problem broadly, in time. This is why situational awareness is so important... but that is another subject that rarely gets more than lip-service. Situational awareness is just a phrase and unless you are taught, specifically, what to be aware of it is an empty phrase. You need to learn violence dynamics from victim selection and terrain to predator tactics. You need to be able to tell a dominance display from a pre-assault indicator and know precisely when a dominance display becomes dangerous. You need to know how the motivations behind an assault differ from those behind a show, because those will dictate effective and ineffective de-escalation.
Broadly. The earlier you can see something coming, the more options you have. The more you know about interpreting what you see, the more precisely you can deal with it. This is, or should be, common sense and it should be integral whenever anyone claims to teach self-defense.
When a predator scans for a likely victim and works to separate her from others, there are stages where she can not be noticed in the scan; stages where she can handle things through social control by remote; where she can make the predator doubt that he has read the situation correctly; stages where she might be able to directly discourage... but if she isn't taught to recognize these or doesn't know what to do, she is left with a desperate fight with a bigger, stronger and possibly armed person who has taken every tactical advantage.
Some do win from there, but very few unscathed.
There is another blindspot that I call the depth of the problem. Things freeze people. They go into denial. "This isn't happening" or they let their identity interfere with their needs, "I know I should fight, but that would be rude." These mental errors have happened too often and been too well documented to safely ignore. The physical aspects of self defense are relatively easy-- or they would be if the mental aspects didn't interfere.
And there is a separate but intertwined emotional aspect: fighting when you are afraid or angry you rarely fight well. An experienced predator with the right victim can shock the victim into a feeling of complete helplessness. It is an incredible act of will and incredibly difficult thing to fight when you are sure there is no hope, no chance. When you know that you have already lost and any resistance will be torturously punished.
Some predators are good at putting people into that mindset. Abusers actively train victims to be afraid to do or try anything... but some few fight and prevail. As I said, an incredible act of will.
If you teach self-defense, be careful not to compress time. Long before the bear hug escape or the snap kick to the knee there was likely a better, surer, safer option. And remember that no matter who you train, in the really dark moment when he or she absolutely needs the skills, they will not be the eager student you know. They will be a chosen victim, possibly already injured, dominated and without a feeling of hope.
Teach them to fight from there.
April 22, 2011
Coolness
Conflict simulations done right, with skilled and experienced role-players, non-lethal subcaliber marking rounds and all the toys, is about as close as you're going to get to a real rubber meet the road experience. But for shooters, the video simulators can come close. Movement is limited, you can't think too far outside the box and you pretty much are limited to move, talk or shoot (pistol whipping the screen would be costly...)
Our agency had a Range 3000. Programable, cool. Fun.
I had no idea that anything like it was available to civilians. I was wrong.
In the ongoing quest for a place to hold some regular classes, Mike McDonald of Threat Solutions introduced me to Ryan Tuttle of Threat Dynamics. Threat Dynamics is a business out in Hillsboro that uses video graphics and safe weapon simulators to run anyone, officer or civilian, through scenarios ranging from gang ambushes to active shooters to just witnessing a drug deal between guys who don't like witnesses.
It was a blast, but I am woefully out of practice-- my one hostage shot was okay but should have been down and left at least an inch. I actually missed a long range shot. Use of cover was okay (though it took a minute to get used to the 300 degree screen and what was and wasn't cover.)
Like I said. Coolness. If you're a shooter, especially a range shooter, definitely go play. I can't evaluate Ryan's coaching, though from the scenarios I played he has an excellent eye for bad guys, but I suspect it's pretty good. More on that when and if I get a chance to see him teach.
Heee. Heee. Heee. The modern world has the BEST toys.
Our agency had a Range 3000. Programable, cool. Fun.
I had no idea that anything like it was available to civilians. I was wrong.
In the ongoing quest for a place to hold some regular classes, Mike McDonald of Threat Solutions introduced me to Ryan Tuttle of Threat Dynamics. Threat Dynamics is a business out in Hillsboro that uses video graphics and safe weapon simulators to run anyone, officer or civilian, through scenarios ranging from gang ambushes to active shooters to just witnessing a drug deal between guys who don't like witnesses.
It was a blast, but I am woefully out of practice-- my one hostage shot was okay but should have been down and left at least an inch. I actually missed a long range shot. Use of cover was okay (though it took a minute to get used to the 300 degree screen and what was and wasn't cover.)
Like I said. Coolness. If you're a shooter, especially a range shooter, definitely go play. I can't evaluate Ryan's coaching, though from the scenarios I played he has an excellent eye for bad guys, but I suspect it's pretty good. More on that when and if I get a chance to see him teach.
Heee. Heee. Heee. The modern world has the BEST toys.
April 19, 2011
Talk Around
I had a good weekend. Lots of scotch and good meat. People I enjoyed and a new friend, some crafty old dog who I think could teach me a lot about his world.
The most valuable part came in the wee hours after most had gone to sleep. RC and I talking about the things we can only talk around with most people. Not because of lack of skill or interest or vocabulary... just a lack of frame of reference.
CS was a good kid. He was a rookie officer when I was a rookie sergeant. He had an FTO as his primary but as I was learning my new job I spent a lot of time teaching him my old job. He was good at it, and it was looking like a good career. He had just gotten married and seemed deliriously happy. For whatever reason, a mystery to me, his friends, his bride, he went to the coast alone, got a room in a hotel and hung himself in the shower.
That was my eighth funeral in two months, all from suicides. I still hate funerals.
I'm on leave in British Columbia when major news source runs a banner below the regular news citing a number of Americans killed at the Baghdad Police Academy bombing. Shit. That was a hundred yards from where I slept! Those were guys I knew! Who? How many?.... Turns out it was just another bullshit story. Guess they figured people wouldn't get worked up just over Iraqi bodies...
Four hard core barricaded bad guys. The weapons we can confirm include the handle from a paper cutter, twelve-inch-long shards of glass with wrapped handles and a pile of used syringes. Some administrator decides "these are only children" and orders us to go in unarmed. I know how to survive that but it's not by taking chances and the end result is the decision that today will probably be the day that I kill a child. In the end, a wiser head prevails and things end flawlessly, with the right tools and without serious injury.
What are the odds of stopping a full power knife thrust to the kidneys because I saw a stupid reflection? Or talking down the drunk old man with the shotgun pointed at my belly? And always, what were the alternatives?
Maybe that all sounds like bragging or whining. Not the point. I can tell the stories (but usually don't) but the things behind the stories, the 'why' and the lessons learned and the things going on in the head and the belly are things I (we, really, that's the point) usually wind up talking around.
A few get it. Mac and Sean are my usual go to guys. Mike. A few others. I had the chance last weekend with a relatively new face, someone I've trained with but not bled with, and it was pretty comfortable. Good timing, too.
The most valuable part came in the wee hours after most had gone to sleep. RC and I talking about the things we can only talk around with most people. Not because of lack of skill or interest or vocabulary... just a lack of frame of reference.
CS was a good kid. He was a rookie officer when I was a rookie sergeant. He had an FTO as his primary but as I was learning my new job I spent a lot of time teaching him my old job. He was good at it, and it was looking like a good career. He had just gotten married and seemed deliriously happy. For whatever reason, a mystery to me, his friends, his bride, he went to the coast alone, got a room in a hotel and hung himself in the shower.
That was my eighth funeral in two months, all from suicides. I still hate funerals.
I'm on leave in British Columbia when major news source runs a banner below the regular news citing a number of Americans killed at the Baghdad Police Academy bombing. Shit. That was a hundred yards from where I slept! Those were guys I knew! Who? How many?.... Turns out it was just another bullshit story. Guess they figured people wouldn't get worked up just over Iraqi bodies...
Four hard core barricaded bad guys. The weapons we can confirm include the handle from a paper cutter, twelve-inch-long shards of glass with wrapped handles and a pile of used syringes. Some administrator decides "these are only children" and orders us to go in unarmed. I know how to survive that but it's not by taking chances and the end result is the decision that today will probably be the day that I kill a child. In the end, a wiser head prevails and things end flawlessly, with the right tools and without serious injury.
What are the odds of stopping a full power knife thrust to the kidneys because I saw a stupid reflection? Or talking down the drunk old man with the shotgun pointed at my belly? And always, what were the alternatives?
Maybe that all sounds like bragging or whining. Not the point. I can tell the stories (but usually don't) but the things behind the stories, the 'why' and the lessons learned and the things going on in the head and the belly are things I (we, really, that's the point) usually wind up talking around.
A few get it. Mac and Sean are my usual go to guys. Mike. A few others. I had the chance last weekend with a relatively new face, someone I've trained with but not bled with, and it was pretty comfortable. Good timing, too.
Rory Miller's Blog
- Rory Miller's profile
- 130 followers
Rory Miller isn't a Goodreads Author
(yet),
but they
do have a blog,
so here are some recent posts imported from
their feed.
