IN SEARCH OF JEET KUNE DO
By Watchdog
Like water, which can be a powerful force, yet nearly impossible to grasp, the art of Jeet Kune Do (JKD) has eluded precise definition. Yet one researcher has made serious efforts to try to define Jeet Kune Do. Professor Jerry Beasley of Radford University has written two books, IN SEARCH OF THE ULTIMATE MARTIAL ART: THE JEET KUNE DO EXPERIENCE (1989,Paladin Press) and THE WAY OF NO WAY: SOLVING THE JEET KUNE DO RIDDLE (1992, Paladin Press). Unlike most other books on JKD, which tend to focus on techniques and training methods, these books represent serious analytical attempts to define JKD.
In his first book, Beasley approaches the subject as if he is writing a master's thesis. He poses, as the "Statement of the Problem," that his purpose is "to provide an acceptable definition of the term jeet kune do, based on the principles that compose the conceptual framework." He goes on to explain his methodology of data collection, namely, participant observation, interviewing, personal experience, the use of informants, and content analysis.
The early part of the book consists of interviews Beasley conducted with Dan Inosanto, Larry Hartsell, Joe Lewis, and second-generation student Tim Tackett. In these interviews, Beasley tries to glean a sense of how each individual views JKD, what their respective training was like, and, except for Tackett, some personal experiences with Bruce Lee. It is an interesting approach in that Beasley wants the reader to go along with him in his quest to find out what JKD is, rather than simply be spoon-fed his conclusions. The Inosanto interview alone provides fascinating insights into Lee's thinking at the time he was formulating JKD.
While his choice of Inosanto and Hartsell as interview subjects is appropriate, his selection of Joe Lewis is rather curious. Although Lewis studied with Lee for a time and implemented some of the JKD principles in full-contact competition, he was never certified as an instructor by Lee and has generally not associated himself with other JKD practitioners. It also seems strange that Beasley did not interview other important figures in the development of JKD, namely, Taky Kimura and Ted Wong, who both trained extensively with Lee and were certified by him in JKD. These two individuals could have provided some different perspectives that would have rounded out the data collected.
The second half of the book covers the "skills" of JKD. Liberally making use of photographic sequences, Beasley briefly discusses the five ways of attack (illustrated by Inosanto), grappling (demonstrated by Hartsell), altering styles (using himself and Joe Lewis to show how even karate techniques can be used to show JKD principles), altering methods (with Tackett intercepting an attack), as well as wing chun, boxing, self-defense, Ninjutsu, kali, Thai boxing, and savate.
Beasley concludes that JKD is defined by philosophical, physical, and social components. On the philosophical level, JKD is a conceptual framework developed by Lee to help solve the problems of combat. This framework includes six major principles: (1) employment of multicultural arts; (2) proper use of range, or fighting distance; (3) the five ways of attack (4) instructor and individual preference in the arts and skills stressed; (5) impact of environment on techniques used; and (6) absorbing what is useful. The framework includes other principles concerned with tool development, such as economy of movement, attribute development, and flow. It should be noted that these are the characteristics most writers and instructors use in describing JKD.
On the physical level, Beasley observes that the majority of JKD practitioners tend to combine the Jun Fan arts with kali, muay thai, and silat. Finally, on the social level, JKD is characterized by a sense of "family." Beasley observes that practitioners within the JKD family recognize one another, whereas those who cannot trace their lineage back to Lee are not considered part of the family.
In his follow-up book, THE WAY OF NO WAY, Beasley continues his inquiry into the nature of JKD. To an extent, this book is a bit of a disappointment, because he basically repeats some of what he has already written in the first book. In addition, much of the book appears to be a compilation of magazine articles previously published. Hence, the book tends to be choppy. However, there are some new areas that Beasley goes into that are worthwhile.
Beasley develops the "JKD Matrix," a tool for categorizing each martial art studied by an individual into its most effective ranges of combat. The matrix can be used to assess areas of strength and weakness for a particular practitioner. For example, after listing all the arts one has studied into such a matrix, one might see that he is deficient in the grappling range.
Beasley acknowledges that, at the time he wrote the first book in 1989, his definition of JKD was that of conceptual JKD. He made no distinction between "Original JKD" and "JKD Concepts." A major focus of the second book, therefore, is in trying to understand the distinction between the two, and to offer an explanation as to why the conceptual approach came about. He categorizes the original approach, developed by Lee, as based in kickboxing, wing chun, and fencing. The concepts approach, developed by Inosanto, stresses kali, muay thai, and silat. He theorizes that the the concepts approach emerged because original JKD relies heavily on highly developed attributes such as speed, power, flexibility, and reaction time. However, as a practitioner ages, these qualities diminish. In order to maintain one's superiority in fighting, a new approach was needed which did not match one's attributes against another's. The conceptual approach stresses an understanding of strategy, of learning different arts that can be used at different ranges, and an ability to flow from art to art.
While an interesting theory, it is basically intelligent speculation on Beasley's part. One wonders why Beasley did not interview Inosanto, as he did for the first book, and simply ask him why he developed the conceptual approach. Of course, if recent history is any clue, Beasley would probably not have obtained the answer he was sought. In a recent article in "Fighting Knives" magazine, Inosanto wrote that there was no difference between original JKD and conceptual JKD.
It is possible that Beasley did not go to the source this time around because he had likely fallen out of favor with the Inosanto camp. By the time he wrote the second book, he had been promoting original JKD. If the recent controversy over the Jun Fan JKD Nucleus is any indication, being "for" original JKD is tantamount to being "against" Inosanto and JKD concepts. His claim of being a certified JKD instructor, under Joe Lewis, has not sat well with the Inosanto camp either. In 1993, Inosanto's wife, Paula, wrote a scathing letter to Black Belt magazine, shooting down his qualifications to teach and write about JKD. Beasley's association with persons who only teach original JKD, namely, Lewis, Ted Wong, and Lamar Davis II, only seems to have solidified his position outside the Inosanto family. In that sense, it appears Beasley can only lay claim to what he characterized as the first and second components of JKD, as he is not viewed as part of the JKD "family," which is the third component.
Whatever their shortcomings, both books are recommended reading for anyone who wants to obtain a better grasp on JKD. Beasley has succeeded to some extent in examining the art from a detached, objective viewpoint. Whether he can continue to do so, in view of his active involvement in promoting original JKD, remains to be seen.
Copyright (c) 1997 by Watchdog
Return to the Musashi-Do Homepage.
Designed by Ovidiu Semenea
