So you think you do JKD do ya?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Mixed Martial Arts
1

NOTE: Following are excerpts from a letter written by Paula Inosanto to Curtis F. Wong, Publisher of Inside Kung Fu and Inside Karate. The letter is well over 5 pages long and deals with articles, commentary and letters concerning Guro Dan, Jun Fan Gung Fu and JKD Concepts. I (Mike Krivka) have condensed the letter, to highlight some important passages, and have made notations to clarify information or to identify certain individuals…

Dan has been involved in the martial arts for over 40 years, the last 20 have been devoted largely to carrying on the arts of Jun Fan Gung Fu and Jeet Kune Do Concepts, as mandated by his Sifu Bruce Lee. As I am sure you will agree Dan’s skill, reputation and credentials in the martial arts are above reproach.

[In reference to a recent article in Inside Kung Fu …] I have included an excerpt from Si Gung [Grandfather or your teachers instructor…] Lee’s notes, “The Martial Way”, from his original “Tao of Jeet Kune Do”. Please note that the excerpt on Pentjak Silat is in Si Gung Lee’s own handwriting. This passage on Pentjak Silat clearly shows that he did in fact investigate the art, as he did every art that he came across. To quote someone such as Fran Joseph [A student of Jerry Poteet …] on what Si Gung Lee would, or would not have investigated or studied is completely irresponsible.

Perhaps I should explain how the Jun Fan Gung Fu Institute was run. Dan taught 90% of all the classes, with the remaining 10% of the classes being taught by Si Gung Lee himself. At the time the institute was founded in 1967, Dan had already been Si Gung Lee’s constant training partner, student and close friend for three years. In addition he was already a certified instructor in Si Gung Lee’s three arts: The Tao of Chinese Martial Arts, Jun Fan Gung Fu and Jeet Kune Do. When the school opened Dan invited his Kenpo students (Jerry Poteet, Pete Jacobs, Daniel Lee, Steve Golden, Larry Hartsell, etc …) to train under him at the Jun Fan Gung Fu Institute.

[In reference to Jerry Poteet’s training with Si Gung Lee …] … Jerry Poteet’s actual training time during the Chinatown era was less than ten months, and his attendance was not consistent during that time. In fact, the vast majority of Jerry’s training in the arts took place after Si Gung Lee’s death, when Dan accelerated Jerry’s training schedule to help him “catch up”.

After the death of Si Gung Lee, several of Dan’s students were promoted to the status of “Instructor”. It was Dan, not Si Gung Lee, who promoted Jerry Poteet, Daniel Lee, Ted Wong, Richard Bustillo, Larry Hartsell, Steve Golden, etc to “Instructor” rank.

[In reference to the many JKD “experts” being published in Inside Kung Fu and Inside Karate …]

As for Dr. Jerry Beasley [A professor at Radford University in Virginia …], he is neither qualified nor certified, and has apparently proclaimed himself an authority on a subject which he knows close to nothing. Dr. Beasley is not a trained practitioner in the arts of Si Gung Lee. To the best of our knowledge, he attended less than a handful of seminars, during which time he would merely observe and take notes. He is an “armchair” Jun Fan / JKD fraud. He misrepresents the facts and misleads the public. It is a shame the press lends space to promoting this type of individual. [Not to mention the fact that he is currently teaching a class in Kali at Radford University … another art which he is not qualified or certified to teach.]

Gary Dill [A student of the late James Lee, who was not certified by Sifu James Lee to teach Jun Fan Gung Fu or JKD …] is yet another example of someone trying to “cash-in” on the late Si Gung Lee’s name, and who, like the others, is without the proper credentials or qualifications

Lamar Davis [An extremely prolific student of Gary Dills …] is another unqualified and uncertified individual who like Dr. Beasley, is merely capitalizing on the name of Si Gung Lee.

Contrary to what is often stated in articles appearing in your magazines Dan teaches the Original Jeet Kune Do. He is truly the only individual that knows the roots, techniques, principles and concepts of the arts developed and taught by Si Gung Lee. Dan however, will always recognize Taky Kimura as his senior and fellow instructor, along with the late James Lee.

Dan continues to train a core group of lineage instructor in the arts of Si Gung Lee, not only here in Los Angeles, but in various locations around the world. Dan has done what Si Gung Lee desired of him: to continue exploring the concepts and ideas of the martial arts as developed and taught by Si Gung Lee. What Dan has not done is sold out. He has not commercialized, mass-marketed, prostituted or capitalized on Si Gung Lee, the man or the martial artist. Dan has never charged the instructors under him in Jun Fan or JKD for private lessons and he has never charged anyone to join an association or society. Dan has never “sold” instructorships.

Dan has kept the art, philosophy, teachings and techniques of Si Gung Lee alive, true to form (and integrity), as well as protected and preserved for the future. There is no one alive today, with the exception of Si Bak Taky Kimura, who can stand in judgment of the job that Dan has done.

2

OOOOOOOOOH Boy!!!:eek: There is going to be a lot of unhappy campers in here!:eek:

3

Who cares? These JKD people are just a bunch of pussies anyway.

4

Who cares? These JKD people are just a bunch of pussies anyway.

That was definetly uncalled for.

5

1993

Guys this letter was written in 1993. So all campers have seen and heard all Mr Krivka has to say. And Mr krivka also has 3 articles of response from the 3 people named in the letter.

And i have it on very good authority that almost everything written by Mr krivka is twisted, at best.

So make of it what you want.

Damian

6

And i have it on very good authority that almost everything written by the 3 people that responded is twisted, at best.

7

Some women are an assest to their husbands, other women clearly are not. If Dan had something he wanted to say about JKD he should have written the letter himself and not let his wife do it. For the record Lamar M. Davis is NOT a Gary Dill student.

Regards,

John M. Drake

8

perhaps paula inosanto is actually expressing an opinion of her own as an accomplished practitioner of JKD concepts rather than as an ‘asset’ to her husband. i’m told that women do that these days.

stuart b.

9

Originally posted by apoweyn
[B]perhaps paula inosanto is actually expressing an opinion of her own as an accomplished practitioner of JKD concepts rather than as an ‘asset’ to her husband. i’m told that women do that these days.

stuart b. [/B]

Fair enough. So what are her “accomplishments”? Has she written any books on the subject? Any articles? Done any videos? In other words, is there any reason why anyone would care anything about what she has to say about JKD other than the fact that she is married to Dan? And the entire letter is “Dan this, Dan that” not “these are my personal accomplishements in JKD that and this is why people should give thoughts to my opinions on the subject.”

Regards,

John M. Drake

10

Yeah, who is this Dan character anyway?

11

Do you think that’s bad?

Dependent on which martial art is commercially popular and profitable, there were always people claiming that they were 10th degree black belts in whatever karate style around (and they were 24 years old or younger) or they were directly trained by some fighting monk from the Shaolin Temple. but they don’t remember the name.

Sorry state of affairs, but that is reality. Just try to be careful and I hope that you don’t get burned.

I had one kempo instructor that could do katas (kuens) like you couldn’t believe. When he did a kata, it was a work of art in motion, but when it came to fighting…as long as you didn’t use his style to spar with him…a little kid could beat him…and he claimed 5th degree black when he was 30 years old.

12

Originally posted by rogue
Yeah, who is this Dan character anyway?

Hello Rogue,

I have no problems with Dan. I think he’s a great martial artist and a valuable member of the JKD community. In all of the articles I’ve read that were written by Dan I’ve never seen him write anything antagonistic. I’ve certainly not seen him write any junk like what you’ve posted by Paula which is not only needlessly antagonistic but also inaccurate. So I ask “who is this Paula character anyway?” Or more precisely “why should anyone care about what she wrote almost a decade ago?” If you care based on her “accomplishments” as a martial artist I must ask what those accomplishments are? If you are paying attention to what she writes because she is “Dan’s wife” then wouldn’t it be better to just pay attention to what Dan has to say himself?

Regards,

John M. Drake

13

jmdrake,

i’ve been put in a series of completely unpleasant submission holds by her. so if you’re asking what her accomplishments are, well i can’t list a slew of certificates or paperwork. and frankly, i wouldn’t put much stock in it if i could. but i’ve seen her train, and yes, she knows what she’s on about. and she’s been a student of guro dan for years and years.

so… why wouldn’t her opinion be valid? why would it be any less so than that of burton richardson, paul vunak, or any of the other reknowned JKD practitioners under dan inosanto (who also, consequently, make frequent references to guro dan).

“If Dan had something he wanted to say about JKD he should have written the letter himself and not let his wife do it.”

this is just sad, to be honest. just LET his wife do it? she’s her own person, with a background in JKD/FMA spanning many years. she doesn’t need to be ‘allowed’ to express anything. she has as much right as the next person.

stuart b.

p.s. what are YOUR accomplishments? what are MINE? why should anyone pay any mind to either of our opinions either? does that mean we don’t have the right to express them? someone at ‘inside kung fu’ clearly thought that paula inosanto was valid enough a source. so who are you to question that? and who am i to question you on it? as the saying goes, opinions are like arseholes.

14

Hello apoweyn,

I think you’re missing the point. I’m not questioning whether or not you feel she has skill from your actual interaction. What I’m questioning is what makes her an “authority” or “spokesperson” for JKD? You raised the question as to my accomplishments or yours for that matter? Very good point. If you or I wrote a letter to Inside Kung Fu about people in the JKD world is it likely that someone would quote it nearly a DECADE later? I SINCERELY doubt that. Paula is free to speak her mind just like everyone else. But I honestly don’t think that anyone would be quoting a letter she wrote to the editor a decade ago if she wasn’t married to Dan. And what is “sad” is your attempt to make this into a feminist issue. It’s not. When I think of women who have made a name for themselves in the martial arts Karen Shepherd, Cynthia Rothrock and others come to mind. Paula Inosanto does not.

Regards,

John M. Drake

P.S. In regards to “someone at Inside Kung Fu thinking she was a valuable source” this was a “letter to the editor” right? Ummm…last time I checked getting a letter printed in a magazine isn’t much above posting information on a web forum. :slight_smile:

Originally posted by apoweyn
[B]jmdrake,

i’ve been put in a series of completely unpleasant submission holds by her. so if you’re asking what her accomplishments are, well i can’t list a slew of certificates or paperwork. and frankly, i wouldn’t put much stock in it if i could. but i’ve seen her train, and yes, she knows what she’s on about. and she’s been a student of guro dan for years and years.

so… why wouldn’t her opinion be valid? why would it be any less so than that of burton richardson, paul vunak, or any of the other reknowned JKD practitioners under dan inosanto (who also, consequently, make frequent references to guro dan).

“If Dan had something he wanted to say about JKD he should have written the letter himself and not let his wife do it.”

this is just sad, to be honest. just LET his wife do it? she’s her own person, with a background in JKD/FMA spanning many years. she doesn’t need to be ‘allowed’ to express anything. she has as much right as the next person.

stuart b.

p.s. what are YOUR accomplishments? what are MINE? why should anyone pay any mind to either of our opinions either? does that mean we don’t have the right to express them? someone at ‘inside kung fu’ clearly thought that paula inosanto was valid enough a source. so who are you to question that? and who am i to question you on it? as the saying goes, opinions are like arseholes. [/B]

15

jmdrake,

points taken. but when you say that a husband ‘lets’ a wife do anything, it stands to become a feminist issue. if the question were simply, “why is paula inosanto’s opinion carrying so much weight?” that’s a relatively innocuous question. when you ask, “why did dan ALLOW his wife to do this?” that’s entirely another. it sounds highly condescending.

true. getting a letter published in the ‘letters to the editor’ is no great accomplishment. anyone can do it. and anyone else can then find this information and share it with the rest of us, who can then react to it as we see fit. and if all of those things can happen in a completely unremarkable way, why fuss over why so and so isn’t accomplished enough to be quoted?

if you or i had written that, would it be reposted years later? i honestly don’t know. it’s a good question. but it seems perfectly natural that a longtime student of dan inosanto would be quoted as a reliable source on the history of JKD (regardless of the nature of their relationship outside of class). is the fact that she co-teaches dan’s seminars qualification enough? or that she’s featured in his videos on the filipino martial arts? or that she’s been training with him for years and years?

you’re asking whether she’d be quoted if she were other than dan inosanto’s wife. and i’m asking what qualifications a person needs to comment authoritatively on events surrounding the evolution of JKD ABOVE AND BEYOND studying the style for years and sharing her life with the man who was a big part of those events. it seems to me that she’s in a very good position to comment. that doesn’t mean she speaks the gospel truth. only that she has access to information that might be interesting or useful to the rest of us.

stuart b.

16

as a sidenote, would we martial artists be at all interested in what linda lee cadwell had to say were she not the widow of bruce lee? does that, then, invalidate her observations on JKD?

stuart b.

17

Hello apowen,

That’s a fair question. We probably wouldn’t. But then again I haven’t read any letters to the editor by Linda Lee Cadwell saying “so and so is a fraud”. Anyway you are right about one thing. It is a free country and Paula is free to express her opinion. And if anyone else wants to base the question of “you think you do JKD do ya” on what she wrote a decade ago then they are free to do that as well.

Regards,

John M. Drake

18

"What I’m questioning is what makes her an “authority” or “spokesperson” for JKD? "

Well JD that’s a question to ask of any “authority” on JKD. What makes Poteet, Vunak, Richardson or even Lamar, authorities on JKD? How do you know what you’re doing is really JKD? Then again we can always argue about “what is JKD”. :slight_smile:

BTW
The title was a friendly poke at the crowd that believes that only they do JKD and that everyone else is wrong. :wink:

19

jmdrake,

first of all, i’m sorry for getting short with you. and i’m glad that you have been able to remain so reasonable with me.

understand that i do think paula inosanto’s letter was a bit heavy handed and that i’m far more impressed with guro dan’s approach (which seems to be to do his own thing and not waste his energy on the debate). obviously, paula has a vested interest in one side of this debate. also, mike krivka (who edited this letter evidently) has a vested interest, as a member of dan inosanto’s lineage (teaching right up the street from where i’m sitting as it happens; i bumped into him at the local shopping center a couple of weeks ago). perhaps they were overzealous. my only point was that she’s as qualified as anyone else making their viewpoint known on the subject.

i haven’t read any letters in which linda lee cadwell calls anyone a fraud either. can’t argue with that. however, she is the president(?) of the jeet kune do nucleus organization, as i understand. and as such, she presumably makes authoritative statements about the nature of JKD frequently. and given that she’s not a practicing martial artist herself, the weight of those statements rests on her close personal association with people that do/did (primarily, of course, her husband).

all that said, i don’t particularly dig statements about people being frauds either. i have personal opinions, though generally not strong ones. perhaps if i were more vested (had committed years of my life to JKD), i’d be more bent out of shape by the idea of people cashing in. thing is that members of each side of this split feel the same way about members of the other. and it all gets a bit overblown.

anyway, i’m glad that you and i seem to be avoiding getting that overblown. thanks for that.

stuart b.

20

Hey all! I don’t know if this is supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing but Paula Inosanto’s article corresponds exactly to what my friend that studied at Master Lee’s kwoon for over three years told me back in '75. He got to train with the master ten times the last year. He had no complaints about anything. He said the training he recieved from Sifu Dan was exellant. He said the time he spent with Master Lee was special and like an exelerated lesson that came at you a million miles an hour. He said some of the stuff he got months later. More importantly he said he could discuss any of this stuff with Sifu Dan and get help.
Just a thought.