-Staff
There
are now a number of videos on the market showing the teaching
of Grandmaster Edmund Parker. These are no doubt historic documentaries
and show Parker at his best: making jokes, expounding key points,
developing analogies that force practitioners to re-think basic
concepts. But we'd like to address the issues surrounding the
man, not the videos.
First
there is a simmering controversy about the exact nature of Kenpo.
To put our prejudices squarely up front we consider Kenpo to be
a respectable part of the general Kung Fu picture. Some teachers
disagree. Some agree strongly. We can nonetheless evaluate Edmund
Parker's contributions to the martial arts. Many people think
of him as an expert self-defense teacher and practitioner. Some
as a strong anti-traditionalist. To our mind, his greatest strength
was his creation of a vocabulary of motion.
This
was a true break with normal methods of martial training where
Asian were generally used to designate traditional moves. While
good in itself, this often led to incomplete understanding of
the movements. Parker succeeded in the creation of a western vocabulary
that was accurate not as a translation of ideas but as a set of
working terms with meaning in a Western context.
For
example, his "contouring" actions, which follow the
contour of one's own or the opponent's body are precisely the
type of movement one finds in Kung Fu. Yet this skill termed Shih
or "shape" was rarely if ever taught to students. Parker
developed this and dozens of other words that clearly designated
important principles of martial theory. In some cases he gave
form to concepts that were rarely designated even in the original
languages.
Unlike
so many who dealt with martial arts like a "dead language,"
Parker thought long and hard about the components of movement
and brought to light ideas that were vague - if even recognized.
This informal seminar shows him as he worked: inspired, creative
and innovative. A brilliant American contributor to our understand
of movement and meaning.
But,
to be honest, there's more to the story which - one day - we will
expound. Parker might also be thought of as a top notch promoter.
What many Kenpo practitioners are sadly unaware of is that many
of Parker's concepts are not - shall we say - entirely his own.
Parker was a promoter, first and foremost. When people assumed
every word from his mouth was his exclusive idea he did not always
bend over to correct them. His rise to fame came at a time of
many people competing with one another and cross-pollinating ideas.
A number of people come to mind who were strongly influential
on this thing we presently call Kenpo. We think, as time passes,
that the record will correct itself and what seems to many to
be "Parker Kenpo" will be revealed to represent, as
always, the entire community.
Though
this is hardly a biting criticism we expect reactions to this
(though it's a commonly shared thought in the general Kenpo community)
because, unfortunatley, Parker fame has somewhat come to obscure
the man. Whatever his real contribution his followers have placed
him high and themselves almost in the area of "cult".
How many times have I hung around with Kenpo pracitioners who-frankly-
have almost no appreciation for anything in the martial arts outside
"techniques" and their immediate self-defense concerns.
Admitedly, Kenpo was a back alley style, born in Asian ghettos
and practiced often by people who didn't "fit" into
any particular world. And, admittedly, some of the kindest and
best people we've met in the art have been Kenpo practitioners.
But, in the interests of the first rule of martial arts - sincerity-
we have to admit there's a streak of self-satisfaction and arrogance
in this self-proclaimed "ultimate self-defense". Now
is the time to stop with the separate Kenpo divisions at tournaments
and rejoing the rest of a community far too fractured already.