One Style, Many Styles

                My last post, The Way of the Intercepting Fist, reminds me of a debate  which has raged in the martial arts for longer than it may be possible to know, a question to which every martial artist must ultimately find their own answer. The debate is a simple one: is it best to study one style, and concentrate solely a single system of fighting, or is it better to branch out and gain experience in a variety of different styles, potentially sacrificing depth of learning? This question ultimately frames a trade-off like those found throughout the animal kingdom; a limited supply of something (in this case, our energy, time, money, and attention) must be allocated among many possible candidates. This can be compared to different types of animals which allocate different amounts of parental care to their offspring; for example, elephants, which can take a year to even give birth to a growing baby, and then will care for it long into subadulthood. By contrast, sea turtles will lay thousands of thousands of eggs in their lifetime, producing just as many young, but provide absolutely no parental care beyond burying these eggs, and about 99% of young are lost to predators.

                So, do we specialize, like the elephant, and put all our “eggs” in one basket, or do we generalize, like the sea turtle, and spread our efforts far and wide, and gain great breadth of experience in our training? On one hand, we will have great, focused depth in our learning, and on the other a wide range of preparation and experience.

                Starting my martial arts career as a Jeet Kune Do enthusiast, I never thought much of this question; interdisciplinary practice (“cross training” in other martial arts) is a central part of Jeet Kune Do, and I never doubted that it was the wisest and best route. More recently, though, as my training has matured, I have become more moderate in my views, and started to appreciate the rapid progress one can develop in concentrating their training and specializing in a single style.

                I have since then become more moderate in my thinking, and am convinced that the answer to the specialist vs. generalist problem is different for every martial artist; we all come to the martial arts seeking something different, and different combinations of specialization and interdisciplinary training will be necessary to achieve those goals.

                As a resource for myself and fellow martial artists, though, I would like to lay out this debate as it has played in my head and write on both side of the argument. The martial arts are full of deception and contradiction; teachings can seem antipodal and mutually exclusive, yet in my experience, the clearest truths most often arise from the simultaneous acknowledgement of seemingly irreconcilable views of reality. In many arts, for example, students are first told to be "relaxed, but tense", or told to "use less muscle, be less forceful" one moment, and "give it all they've got" the next; at first, it sounds like the teacher is contradicting his or herself, but often one finds that such contradictions are only in appearance, and beneath it all there is a unifying truth.
              The two sides of this debate are one expression of the Yin and Yang of martial arts training, two inseparable parts, opposite forces which tug at the student, and in which she or he should fine her or his personal balance, matched to their individual needs and goals. Through the awareness of polar opposites, like a tightrope walker balanced by two ends of a long stick, we find our center point. It's my hope that in exploring this debate I can offer a resource to examine the truth underlying this central contradiction in martial arts training.

                For my next two posts, I will outline my thoughts supporting each side of this debate, which I will call “One Style, Many Styles”, and encourage readers to examine their own preferences along the spectrum of specialization to generalization. Please comment and share your own thoughts and experiences on the subject; I welcome the input and am always looking for new insights into this fascinating argument.