Hmmmmm....

I had not intended to return to Mohammed Ali but "floating" is more about imagery, as much as technical interpretation. Each of us seems to need one, the other, and some both. Ali is best known for his own description of himself - to "Float like a butterfly and sting like a bee." Floating evokes a sense of effortless, even grace. Translating it to a mechanical action, with the same visualization, will require more word-smithing than your's truly can muster at the moment.

".....If I "float" someone in Aikido it means my center of mass is lower than his and just as he is at the top of his trajectory so he's going neither up nor down I apply a force upward in the direction he had been travelling...."

Dear Wer:

With the fervent prayer that I can stay with this discussion, are you familiar with the training flights astronauts take in which the large plane in which they are riding performs an aerial maneuver such that the astronauts become weightless? Is this the sort of "flow" you are alluding to in your post? Are you espousing targeting the optimal point in time and space, or are you suggesting that one "accompany" their antagonist TO that point and then exploit it to accomplish the technique? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Ah....imagery of words to evoke meaning....

Such is the nature of language. Sometimes language conciseness can evoke as much imagery. (Anyone studied Shakespeare?)

Quote:

---

Floating evokes a sense of effortless, even grace.

---

Quote:

---

...an aerial maneuver such that the astronauts become weightless?

---

"Floating" = weightless is probably a more apt description. Unfortunately, as we are bound by the laws of gravity, at some point the person must succumb to such law.

Quote:

---

Are you espousing targeting the optimal point in time and space, or are you suggesting that one "accompany" their antagonist TO that point and then exploit it to accomplish the technique?

---

If I can answer this for wer (excuse the boldness). The answer is YES to both, but exploiting the law of gravity at that point in time and space, in such a way that it would seem "effortless" on our part.

".....Does that agree with your views?...."

Yes, it does, but not, perhaps the way you might think. In the Hapkido arts this skill MAY develop at higher levels but it is not something that we pursue or focus on specifically. For instance, during a recent series of seminars in Australia, Dojunim Kim (Yong Sul Kwan) demonstrated a very high level of "aiki" work which many times seemed to border on the incredulous. While I deeply respect his skill level, for myself I do not aspire to such skills. At the yu sool level of Hapkido I focus on polishing my use of simple Newtonian physics to accomplish a successful technique. At the hapkiyusool level I see to facilitate my techniques by impacting or exploit the use of my antagonists neuro-muscular system. I am not saying what you are describing is not a fair goal or that I would resist the development of such skill. What I think I am sensing is that the actual returns on being able to accomplish such skill may not justify the time and effort necessary to take my practice to that level. Hope this came out right.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

It seems like you are drawing a distinction between "aiki" and a high level of skill. Whilst most people would feel like you do, that such a level of skill is not something that they would aspire to, it is nonetheless implied specifically in most "aikido" and from what I gather, explicitly taught as a set curriculum in the parent art Daito-ryu (aiki-no-waza).

It also appears that you are drawing a distinction between what you focus on at the "do" level and "jitsu" (yusool) level, albeit from a structural physical perspective.

Whilst I generally agree that this is a sound approach to understanding the technical principles, as one should if approaching the art from a "jitsu" perspective, but I believe that the "do" expression completes the "circle" - as it were.

I've said this before in other threads, I think you need a balance of both "do" and "jitsu" to be a more complete MAist.

Can I ask what was so incredulous about Dojonim Kim's "aiki" work? What is it about his level of expression makes you draw that distinction?

Dear Eyrie:

".....Can I ask what was so incredulous about Dojonim Kim's "aiki" work? What is it about his level of expression makes you draw that distinction?...."

{Here Bruce is observed to enter a minefield. }

For my part I have always drawn a distinction between physical attributes and those qualities of execution which transcend common practice. Had it been I on the mat performing for the attendees I could have done a few of the things that Dojunim Kim did, but would have worked much, much harder. But there was something else. True, all of his technique was in response to a committed attack, which would satisfy my original definition of "aiki". However, beyond that there were techniques which he accomplished that directly related to exploiting that "teetering" point mentioned earlier that allowed him to hold and lead his attacker in a way I am still working to understand. In those instances what he was doing was plainly beyond my skill level.

I think I also need to point out that my conclusions about the nature of "aiki" vis "kiai" is not a function of Dojunim Kims work. Rather I continue to pursue this as part and parcel of my own personal study. Having spent years in Hapkido watching people make much of what I have discerned to be little more than high quality "yawara" it was an eye-opener to find an individual, a native Korean, who has taken it upon himself to press the evolution of the Hapkido arts to a higher level. However, there is a mountain of material at the yawara level that one could pursue and make a career of as has my teacher, Myung Kwang Sik. Add to this yet another layer of technical proficiency with hapkiyusool and the challenge can be all but overwhelming. In the kwan to which I belong I would like to begin to teach some of the material Dojunim Kim has shared, but it would require a separate portion of the curriculum off by itself to do it justice. But, if there were any place to make practical use of all the great information that has been exchanged on this thread THAT would be the place to do it. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

The more I think about it and read O'Sensei's writing (the thread's petering out, but that's not stopping me!), the more I think it's that cultivation of sensitivity to uke's intent that makes it aiki. Or at least, that makes it aiki not ju.

Anyone else?

Please, don't let this thread petering out stop you.

One of the best imagery I can think of is like bamboo swaying in the breeze, as opposed to bamboo bending from the weight of snow on it's leaves.