When we look for a Sensei or a teacher, we search for
certain traits, personality, knowledge and characteristics. Often times we can only get a glimpse
watching or taking a trial class. One of
the best ways to judge a teacher is to observe the students, on and off the
mats. Are they friendly, welcoming,
serious about their training with a sense of humour or are they arrogant,
unfriendly, or aloof? This tends to be
reflective of the teacher.
But what does a good teacher actually look like? If you had to
pick based largely on physical appearance, who would you choose? And how much are you influenced, consciously
or unconsciously, by how a Sensei looks?
At first glance (pun intended), you’ll likely want to
respond that a person’s appearance has nothing to do with your selection
criteria. After all, we’re all striving
for perfection of character in our studies, right?
Truth be told, we all have our biases. This isn’t always a bad thing. It’s part of the human condition. Some are based on a survival instinct. Many we have ingrained at a subconscious level. Some of these unconscious biases are
incongruous with our conscious positions or beliefs. Our society and the media have programmed us
to respond to certain physical characteristics.
So what does this have to do with selecting a martial arts
teacher? Who do we naturally gravitate
towards?
As I mentioned, our unconscious, or subconscious biases, are
often at odds with our consciously held beliefs.
No? Pop quiz:
1. Male, 40’s, muscular and lean, military or MMA
background
2. Female, 40’s, short and a tiny bit plump, works as a mid level manager in a
large company
You’ve now got a picture in your head.
So, who’s the better pick to teach self defense? We could all answer that it doesn’t matter as
long as they had the knowledge, skills and abilities but without an extended
period of time observing or being taught, we have a tendency to assign value to
factors that may or may not be accurate.
If you picked number 1, are you now defending your position
because of his background? That’s fine,
but if I hadn’t mentioned the military or MMA background, would your initial
pick have changed from the fit male to the shorter, 'softer' female? This isn’t an attack or criticism, simply
something to think about.
Even if we’re able to logically and consciously dispense
with gender and physical traits, could we still be influenced unconsciously?
The curious thing is that we often respect or seek out
martial arts teachers that are, well, bad asses. Impressive physical specimens, who look tough,
even a little intimidating. The type of
guy (or gal) that looks like they could kick our butts.
There’s nothing really wrong with that. We want to learn from people that we figure
could easily ‘take us' in a fight. You
don’t seek out someone to teach you that you believe you could easily beat in a
physical altercation. You want to learn
to be tough from someone who is tough, tougher than you. You want to learn to be just as tough, tougher.
But what does that really mean? Are we potentially ruling out people who may
have more to offer than we initially think?
Who, as a teacher is really more impressive? And what do we hope to learn? If our true goal is to learn to deal with
real violence and to survive if attacked, who should we look to? Should we pick the big, strong, amazingly fit
person, of the more average one?
When weighing our options, we need to make sure we balance all
the factors. What’s actually more
impressive, someone more physically fit that you are doing a technique on you
effectively, or someone less imposing doing the same?
In styles such as Jiu Jitsu, you use your opponent’s energy
and force against them. It is an
effective martial art for learning how to defeat a bigger, more powerful attacker. Sometimes referred to as the “gentle art” –
ha!
How, then, you answer the question of who’s more impressive?
The vast majority of time, the smaller, less powerful
individual will have a higher level of skill in their technique. They won’t have the luxury of being able to
‘power through’ a poor application of technique to compensate. They will often be superior in the way they
teach as they had to learn it properly right from the start. There are no cutting corners; you have to learn
to do it right or you’re in trouble.
Back to the pop quiz.
Obviously, there was not nearly enough information to make a
proper assessment, and gender was thrown in as a means for a little introspection, but the fact remains - It may be better to seek out someone of
lesser physical stature who has learned his or her art to such a level that
they can effectively defend themselves and teach others, as opposed to a genetically
gifted athlete.
Those that have had to
work harder for their accomplishments are often better teachers and more
skilled than the ‘naturals’.
Appearances can be deceiving.
Picture Morihei Ueshiba, especially later in his life.
You could argue he didn’t look very intimidating physically. Imagine you passed on training with him due
to his somewhat diminutive status as compared to many other ‘tough guys’.
It may be better to seek out someone who can effectively
defend themselves when they’re at their worst, as opposed to someone at their
best and at their peak.
A short, heavy, injured person who can take defend
themselves may have more to teach you than an elite athlete in their prime that
can do 10 minute rounds without breaking a sweat.
Obviously, physical fitness is an important
component of martial arts training, and it can only make things easier for
you. For pure quality of technique and
teaching effectiveness, however, it may not be the only pre-requisite.
Keep an open mind.
An
important lesson in the martial arts.
And in life...
