When jj is the most martial, it is also the most artistic. Efficiency of movement is always artistic imo, no matter the skill.
The black belt and fact that it is a martial art always raises so many questions, since it also clearly a sport. In a sport the goal is to get good and to win. Pretty cut and dry. In a martial art there are so many other factors such as rank, lifestyle, philosophy, and other self imposed virtues placed within martial arts. In wrestling or boxing are all these things not being attained as well, in one form or another? The best in those will also have the most reps and quality training along with extremely dedicated mindset as well. I think the packaging of a sport in the form of an art helps get it to all ages, genders, and demographics. It is a very effective medium.
Our way is already set and it is our passion so we can be biased. But anyone who dedicates themselves passionately to any skill will eventually create art through movement imo. And there is usually a strong subculture around the skill where some form of ranking or belt system could be created. Musicians, welders, fishermen, hacky-sackers, wrestlers, skeet shooters, dancers, pole vaulters, woodworkers, painters, you get the point.
Another comparison between the two kinds of black belt. Manny Pacquiao- clearly a blackbelt, Freddy Roach- also clearly a black belt imo. Micheal Jordan- cleary black belt, Phil Jackson- also clear. Black belt.
I agree with the statement of 'if the intructor says so, then it is so'. Its completely subjective anyway.
Bookmarks