What If...

Watching a class at a local Tae Kwon Do School and found myself thinking 'what if,' which lead into some interesting areas of my brain.
Sometimes a frightening experience, sometimes not, depending on what's what.

What if, I thought, these high flying fancy things are not what they are taken to be? Then transposing with my own experience, what if... What if I am looking at this all wrong? Then there was the final thought... You're over-analysing as usual Dave.
I think about some of the other influences from which I draw, some things I have really taken to and thought about deeply, then I realize, perhaps I really am over-analysing, but still. What if?
I once read a book about Conceptual Blending and thought deeply about the Conceptual workings of the mind, essentially conceptualizing concepts... What if?

Okay, so the 'what if' is this... In the average Dojo a person is taught Kihon, they spend a great deal of time on Kihon (though in some instances a great deal more time is spent on the lecture of Teachers who like to talk more than they like to do), from this is where conceptual blending takes off and people find themselves whisked away to lalaland of delusional thinking, believing, being...

They punch air, they practice endless drills against a partner using the same techniques, day in and day out, no mind paid to mind at all, and no one really asking the big questions that need to be asked to begin with.
Then you have people that think outside the box and point out the errors, the flaws, the delusional nature of the illusion itself, calling attention to the farce because of the fact that it leaves out 99.9% of the essentials.

Like Sanchin Kata, calling attention to the fundamentals of posture in a way that is not readily apparent, or perhaps was readily apparent at one point until the 'Dynamic Tension' Cult stepped onto the grand stage.
You have Kata that display principles of movement, not technique, again, in a way that does not call attention to itself; a good Teacher will point this out and read less into interpretation, utilizing 'interpretation' as a way to illustrate essential concepts within the principles of motion.

Now back to the Tae Kwon Do class. Everyone puts Tae Kwon Do down as essentially impractical, ineffective beyond the sporting arena, they are correct when it comes to the manner in which it is taught, but it is not so different from other arts.
I once trained in Tae Kwon Do a really long time ago, before I enrolled in my first Karate Class, but we did not really do all those high-flying kicks and the fancy showy stuff - for the most part our feet remained on the ground and, not for lack of trying, we barely kicked above the waist.
Thinking about this now, the principles of motion are always more important than the actual motion itself - at least insofar as the notion of variations are concerned.

Iain Abernethy prescribes kicking high in order to develop explosiveness with shorter range, lower height kicks.
Essentially like the concept of Tsuburi training in Kendo, where the cuts are larger, swinging with a wider arch, ect., in order to train the muscles in the arms for more explosive and stronger cuts on a shorter range of motion.
Even still, the more esoteric concept is that things have a way in which they can move that maximizes the motion itself, and the principles would point out various ways in which to move that maximizes motion and power, yet at the same time limits the output so that the muscles are not working so hard and energy is conserved.

Taking note that a Chuden Uke is essentially the same thing as a Jodan or Gedan Uke (the basic principles of motion are the exact same in all three cases with the difference being in direction and height), one can see this principle at work (or at least that is the way I look at it).
Again this goes to the notion that the only real movement in Karate is Mawashi Uke (at least with the hands and body positions)which is akin to the 'Fence Concepts' often taught by Geoff Thompson, Al Peasland, and others, essentially the end motion being put in place to emphasize the motion itself.
As such there seems to be a mnemonic code (yes, I said code, now don't think I am going off the deep end please) that the Okinawans used in order to disguise concepts while preserving them, which became de-emphasized and eventually lost altogether, or at least de-emphasized to the extreme.

So, going along with the 'what if' train of thought, you really have to get beyond the end results and look at HOW you are moving in and of itself.
Not the position you are in, but how you move, what direction are you moving in, what principles of motion are at play, heck, you could even break the movement down further and study it via the snapshot method that gave rise to the mistaken idea of fixed stances and positions themselves, but remember the flaws that are in place in order to avoid this folly in the future.
It is also not about WHAT you are doing, or what a movement MEANS, but rather what the movement is SAYING in the process of moving itself.

What if...