What To Compare?

I've said that we're going to be engaging in comparative analysis, which means that we have to select those martial arts which we are going to compare. This is a process fraught with potential for disaster; if we choose poorly we'll end up doing nothing more than reinforcing our own biases. So its important that we try to identify some practice-agnostic criteria to help us on our way.

This blog is primarily concerned with exploring the martial arts as they are practiced in the US, so it would be a mistake not to include those arts which are popular here. By this I mean to include not only those that have significant followings, but also those that have inserted themselves into the public consciousness over the years. I'll toss out the following off the top of my head:

• Karate
• Kung-fu
• Tae Kwon Do
• Judo
• Muay Thai
• Jeet Kune Do
• Jiu Jitsu
• Capoeira

Obviously this list has problems already. The terms "karate" and "kung-fu" encompass a huge range of practices; to talk about one or the other monolithically risks the (perhaps justified) wrath of their practitioners. Some people are likely to say "Jeet kune do? Isn't that just karate?". To which I'll reply "Yes, but Bruce Lee is probably the single most recognizable martial artist in America, so it merits special mention". This list also excludes boxing, aikido, tai chi, and kendo. Boxing is excluded on the grounds that it's not typically thought of as a "martial art", while the rest failed the initial cut because they aren't as popular (by either definition). But all four represent distinct traditions with interesting things to say, so "popularity" clearly isn't the only metric to consider.

So now our list looks like

• Karate
• Kung-fu
• Tae Kwon Do
• Judo
• Muay Thai
• Jeet Kune Do
• Jiu Jitsu
• Capoeira
• Tai Chi
• Aikido
• Kendo
• Boxing

But this list is very heavy on the East Asian martial arts. Depending on how you classify Jiu Jitsu (Brazilian, but derived from a Japanese art), there are only two or three which count as non-Asian. Surely there's valuable martial practices to be found outside of East Asia?

And that's where my personal experience peters out. We're going to have to dig together to find out what's out there, but first we should set some ground rules. I justified including kendo, aikido, and tai chi on the grounds that "represent distinct traditions with interesting things to say". What did I mean by that? Well, aikido and tai chi are "internal" or "soft" arts, with a distinctly different emphasis than the "external" or "soft" arts already on the list. Kendo is the only art I can think of that focuses on weapon work. Those focuses aren't covered by the other arts, thus helping to broaden the variety of techniques we're going to compare. But the "tradition" portion is important as well; we want to look at arts that have some substance to them, and longevity/historical depth seems to be a good initial proxy for this.

So what now? Time to start breaking out those encyclopedias. I know I pooh-poohed them earlier, but I think they're valuable in this instance because they can help us to inform ourselves about major traditions outside of East Asia. As far as I can tell the gold standard right now is Martial Arts of the World: An Encyclopedia by Thomas Green. Unfortunately its on the pricey side, so we're going to have to make do with lesser sources. After poking around what's currently available on Amazon it looks like the next best thing is the Ultimate Martial Arts Encyclopedia. The reviews are positive, and they mention specifically that the book covers non-Asian arts as well; the other encyclopedias appear to concentrate on the Asian arts. So we'll return to consider this topic further once I've had a chance to give the book a once-over.