Review by David Isenberg
February, 1999. 

There comes a time in a person's life when they question just about everything.  What is the meaning of life, what is our place in it, have we achieved our goals, should we do things differently, et cetera?  Usually we call this a midlife crisis and as such serves as a useful reminder to take note of the inevitable changes that are a part of the cycle of life.  But as martial artists we need not and should not wait that long to realize that life is too dynamic, too mutable to be confined to one way of doing things.  That is the essence of this book by Bob Orlando, who has studied martial arts for over three decades, including aikido, anis, escrima, Chinese kuntao and Indonesian pentjak silat.

This is not a book for those merely wishing to learn new techniques or kata.  While there are some pages devoted to discussion of techniques to use in self-defense situations, that is not the primary purpose of the book.  Instead Orlando seeks to challenge the traditions and myths that far too often accompany the teaching of the martial arts in the West.  Many of us who pride ourselves on practicing traditional karate will find his ideas unsettling, perhaps even off-putting.  I know I did when I first started reading the book.  After all, who are we to question why shotokan, or any other art, is taught the way it is. We know our instructors to be men and women of high character who have devoted many years to the art.  If it was good enough for them it should be good enough for us.

But as I read further I found myself nodding my head in agreement.  One of Orlando's main points is this: many American martial arts students spend years training without doing that for which Americans are famous – asking why and can you prove it.  Orlando is not just questioning tradition for the sake of sensationalism.  In fact, he quotes Gichin Funakoshi, who, in his book "Karate-Do" wrote "Times change, the world changes, and obviously the martial arts must change too ... I have no doubt whatsoever that in the future, as times change again, and then again, the kata will [even] be given new names.  And that, indeed, is as it should be."

Orlando makes the little appreciated point that self-defense skills and systems of combat move through cycles.  During times of chaos and conflict they evolve rapidly upward, gaining in sophistication and effectiveness.  During times of peace and prosperity they stagnate and devolve downward.  In his view in the United States we are now, with some exceptions, in the regressive part of the cycle, due to the post-WWII perception of a lessened need for personal self-defense skills.  Thus martial arts have become martial ways and martial sports.  In his view the very fact that we don't train in the clothes we would likely fight in, i.e., our regular street clothes is evidence that have not adapted martial arts to our environment and needs.

It is part of the book's appeal that it often focuses on things considered so mundane that we pay no attention to them.  We take for granted that our training methods are time tested so there is no need to change them.  But, the conditions and weapons which caused techniques to be created, change, and, thus, our methods must change as well, or we might one day, literally, perish.

But if instructors have an obligation to adapt teaching methods the student also has an obligation to study and train to ensure that specific kihon and bunkai work for their particular body type.  Putting in sweat equity is a must; otherwise one is only talking the talk, instead of walking the walk.

Although not everything in the book is equally useful – as members of the ISKF we can skip over the chapter on where to find quality instruction – others are worth reading over and over, such as the analysis of the usefulness of sport karate.  His view on martial sports is equivocal.  He believes first that participation is karate competitions is not necessary to be a capable martial artist.  Second, particiation in such events may make one more effective.  But the prospect of that happening is dependent on the quality of the tournament.  He is sympathetic to the view of Funakoshi Sensei that the rules necessary to make karate safe for tournament play would also dilute the art.  Yet he does see certain advantages to competition in terms of developing initiative and dealing with new, unfamiliar techniques and styles.  Thus, he gives qualified approval to "good" tournaments.

As karateka we learn early on not to stand out; if we heard it once we've heard the old adage that the nail which stands out gets hammered down.  We often use that as a reason not to ask questions such as why.  But as the book notes "philosophies and methods of instruction must match the culture of those being instructed."  Orlando's contribution is in reminding us that it neither insulting or disrespectful to ask our sempais and senseis why.  After all if our founder, Funakoshi Sensei, could embrace change so can we.

David Isenberg is an analyst at DynMeridian.  He is also an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and an associate fellow at the Maatthew B.Ridgway Center for International Security Studies at the University of Pittsburgh.  Mr. Isenberg holds the rank of shodan and is a member of the Washington, D.C., ISKF Karate Club.