Interview with Musician, Historian and Author Antonio Aloia
By Mick Michaels
AIMPOINT: Hello, Antonio and thank you for taking the
time to talk and answer some questions. It is greatly appreciated.
Antonio Aloia: Thanks for having me! I look forward to your questions.
AA: The topic was based off of a paper I wrote in my undergraduate capstone course at West Chester University. Being new to the whole “writing like a historian” concept, I had no idea what to write about, find sources, and make an argument out of it all. The class was given free reign of topics and we all had some difficulty zeroing in on our own specific topic. However, after talking with the professor and further thinking about it on my own, I settled on aikido. When I did, I realized that I wanted to focus on something other than the Japanese pioneers of the art because there were many outlets that have done so already, namely Aikido Journal. My professor stressed originality, so I decided to cover the American pioneers of the art.
While I was writing in class, I did not foresee
this paper becoming the basis of the book. After the end of semester review of
the class’ papers, one classmate suggested to expand it further, because the
paper read like a book and it needed a book’s length to cover everything I
wanted to cover. After five seconds of thinking about it, I was immediately
hooked on the idea and shortly thereafter, I began further research and
writing, expanding the paper into what it is today.
AP:
Why do you feel a number of early American pioneers are often overlooked when
discussing Aikido in America especially when compared to their Japanese
counterparts and contemporaries? Is it a case of the art being a foreign import
and thus, many look to hold such cultural origins maintaining its validity and
marketable appeal? Or is it more of a way to avoid multicultural influence
whereas some may feel the art becomes tainted and diluted from its original
form?
AA: I think it is a combination of everything you said. There is a
sense of Eastern or Japanese mysticism that still pervades in aikido, as well
as other martial arts. However, that sense of mysticism was the aspect that
drew a lot of people to the art in the 1950s, ‘60s, and ‘70s because no one had
the Internet to assist them in learning about aikido and other arts.
In
some sense, many American pioneers and practitioners only became known because
of their relation or connection to a certain instructor or pioneer. Many, if
not all, of the aikido community knows who Yoshimitsu Yamada is, and because of
him, there are a good handful of American practitioners who are famous or
well-known because of their affiliation with Yamada. Even the late Stanley
Pranin of Aikido Journal fame associated
himself with Morihiro Saito, one of that last students of the Founder and the “Keeper
of the Way” in Iwama, Japan.
And
those American pioneers who largely began from nothing and worked their way up
to “aikido fame” – Robert Nadeau and Frank Doran first come to mind – did so
during a time where there were no knowledgeable or high ranking instructors. I
recall in one of Nadeau’s quotes, he expressed the sentiment of wanting to
establish his school without any Japanese instructors in the area because he
did not want potential students to think or feel that only the Japanese can be
proficient in aikido. In doing so, Nadeau “skipped” associating himself with a
Japanese instructor and essentially made a name for himself that is still
popular to this day.
To
some degree, however, it was important to document and tell about the early
Japanese aikido pioneers because they helped facilitate the art’s growth here
in America. Unfortunately, to only focus on them and their deeds creates a
history that is one-sided and causes many to forget others equally as important
– their American counterparts. Therefore, the art’s history in this country is
not whole. And a whole history, whether it is about martial arts or the Cold
War, is extremely helpful when deciding how to move forward.
AP:
From your research for the book, was there one individual in particular who
stood out for you as an integral piece to the art's early dissemination in
America? If so, who and why?
AA: That’s a hard question to answer, because America is so large that some
individuals only had an impact or influence over a specific region or area.
Time also is an important factor as well, because what one person considers
early might be considered later by another.
For
me, personally, Thomas “Doc” Walker had an interesting story, as he was a
driving force in Florida and assisted in the development and establishment of
at least ten schools in that state alone, not to mention he had his hand in
building up aikido schools in a few other parts of the world. Additionally, he
was one of many who helped write and put together the by-laws and the like for
the United States Aikido Federation, the first Aikikai-affiliated aikido
organization in America. By those deeds alone, it would be an understatement to
just say he was part of disseminating aikido – he took the art and ran as fast
as he could with it! [Laughs] His story ends in a twist of sorts, however, I do
not want to spoil the readers’ fun of finding that out.
As
I mentioned before, some individuals impacted their respective regions more so
than others. Case in point, Walker was a major force in Florida and in various
regions of the East Coast – there is no record of him pushing the art into the
West Coast, let alone the Midwest and the Mountain States. That’s where
pioneers like Robert Nadeau, Frank Doran, Bill Witt, Walther von Krenner, Sam
Combes, and Karl Geis come into the picture. All of these practitioners had
interesting and amazing stories, but, for me personally, the one that takes the
cake has to be Thomas “Doc” Walker.
AP:
The forward to "Aikido Comes to
America" was written by American jujitsu pioneer, Professor George Kirby. Kirby,
though an outsider to the Aikido world, was also building his own legacy during
that time, thus, paralleling Aikido's State side origins. Were there certain
similarities with development of the two respective art forms that readers
would find surprising? Or were many arts facing the same hurdles to overcome
while building a base and framework?
AA: In talking with George Kirby, yes, I did see many of the same
parallels with aikido’s history and pioneers in America. Though jujitsu and
aikido were and are not as popular as their Japanese counterparts of karate or
judo, each art had its ebbs and flows of students and of pioneers. An issue that
plagued martial arts across the board was the retention of students. Even
though the American public was fascinated by things Eastern, that fascination
quickly left when potential students’ expectations did not line up with the
reality on the mat. As it was then and it is now, student retention is a major
obstacle for any martial arts school to overcome.
AP:
Aikido has undergone a more negative sentiment in recent years, especially
among many of the more modern day martial styles and systems. One of its
largest debates with critics is whether or not the art is effective and even
worth pursuing. Being an Aikido practitioner yourself, what are your thoughts
on the concerns?
AA: In one sense, the negative sentiment is right, but then in another,
it is wrong. I think there are a few ways to answer this question and there are
a few factors that played a role in the negative sentiment that is prevalent
today.
The
first thing you have to look at are the early students of the art, both
Japanese and American. After reviewing their backgrounds, you see that a
majority of practitioners had experiences in judo, karate, and kendo, among
others. So these practitioners, though their aikido may not be either up to
standard of today or it did not have the aesthetics as today, had an idea or
two of what it was like to be in a physical confrontation. Whatever their
training was, aikido was an added layer on top of that. Fast-forward to today,
and many of the newer aikido practitioners do not have much or any prior
martial arts experience – just pure aikido. Gaining more practitioners is fine,
it is just now, these people are training for different reasons.
The
second thing is twofold: the context of aikido. Firstly, the Founder, Morihei
Ueshiba, created aikido as a way to achieve or work towards a spiritual
enlightenment that included a unification of mind and body. Yes, Morihei joined
the military; yes, Morihei cross trained; yes, Morihei dueled others, mostly
emerging as the victor; however, he did not advertise aikido as a fighting
method, especially in his later, Iwama years. Secondly, the context of aikido
techniques are mid-range, where an opponent can quickly punch or grab you. Thus,
to pit an aikido practitioner against a judo or Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu practitioner,
who both deal with a much closer range than the mid-range aikidoist, will
result in defeat for the aikido practitioner almost every time.
The
third thing is the way that many aikido schools train – they are not training
to fight! This then goes back to the context of aikido, where it was a way for
enlightenment and self-betterment. I am sure there are aikido schools where
they utilize judo and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu drills and training methods to create
a more competent aikido practitioner, but you do not see the majority of aikido
schools doing this. Why? Because most of them are not interested in becoming a
well-rounded fighter or grappler. They just want to train, better themselves
within their own art, and be done with it.
Perhaps
the aikido practitioner of yesteryear could hold themselves against a judo,
karate, or Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu practitioner, but that does not mean all of
aikido’s training is for naught. To give a personal example, I recently took up
judo a couple of years ago and I was surprised at what I could do with little
training in judo. I was not throwing people left and right effortlessly –
though I wished I was [Laughs] – but I felt myself moving out of the way more
often than my white belt counterparts. Though I knew no techniques by heart
then, I did not take advantage of my partner’s confusion, but I utilized one of
the main tenets of aikido: move out of the way. It was only recently that I
started to understand where to place techniques after I successfully moved out
of my partner’s way so I can throw them, or at least, try and throw them.
All
I can say is not to let the training go to waste, as there is always something
from each art that can help you improve on something you are doing.
AP:
Another heated debate among critics, even from those within the art, is the
belief that for Aikido to be a valid modern day martial form, a major overhaul
of its curriculum and methods of training need to be addressed. Is there a
level of validation in this belief in your opinion or do the critics
misunderstand Aikido’s purpose? Do they have the wrong definition of what the
art truly is and designed for?
AA: I discuss this topic in one of my blog
articles, if you are interested in reading that as well. However,
the real question here is how much of the curriculum can one change while
keeping the uniqueness of aikido? I have had this conversation with myself and
others around me, and we get to talking in a circle. It all goes back to the
context and purpose of aikido training: it is not to fight.
This
should not stop practitioners to, every once in a while, “test” their aikido in
a live, resisting situation in the training halls. These practitioners make up
only a small percentage of the whole aikido community who want to take their
aikido to another level, whether it is using it in a tighter environment or
with a resisting partner. Such options and experiments should not be restricted
to practitioners, however, it should be realized that many do not partake in
those types of training because it may not align with what they think aikido
is.
To
me, aikido works well with other martial arts. Much like the aikido
practitioners of old, to have the skillsets to prevail in a fight-type
situation, you have to have a few more tools in your arsenal.
AP:
What one would get out of training in a particular martial art is different
than what another would experience. This is what makes training so personal and
so unique. Does an art form need to be effective as they say to be worth
pursuing in your opinion? Are there other benefits besides physical combative
ones?
AA: An art form does not have to be effective for someone to pursue. I
think people’s definition of effective needs some context; is it with bare
hands or with weapons? Are the weapons sticks, swords, spears, or guns? The
debate can go on and on. Since we are talking about aikido and its
effectiveness in hand-to-hand combat, then no, it does not have to effective to
be worth pursuing. There is Tai Chi and many forms of Kung Fu that have, by
modern Mixed Martial Arts standards, been deemed ineffective, but you still see
people continue to learn from teachers and instructors. Kendo, iaido, kenjutsu,
and any form of a weapons-based Historical European Martial Art are not effective
if you take the weapon away. But people still practice those arts.
Being
effective and being martially sound is a great goal to try to achieve, however,
such skill only stays with us as long as we keep training and the purpose to
have those skills is still present. Getting to know your body and how it moves
in relation to others and yourself is a fun, frustrating, and enjoyable
endeavor because it makes you active and keeps you thinking. And sometimes,
that is what a lot of people want; they just want to be active. Those are the
people who are training aikido and not exploring the effectiveness or martial
aspect because they want exercise, and that is great. We have to come to terms
that there are some aikido practitioners who want to take training to another
level, and they should be allowed and supported to do so.
AP:
You also regularly contribute and publish for the blog Martial Arts of Yesterday, Today and
Tomorrow, where you interview various martial
artists and do book reviews. Do you see such an endeavor as a way to preserve
and archive modern martial arts history? Is there a need to do so?
AA: By the end of my graduate career at West Chester, I had a handful
of papers that focused on martial arts in some way. They were written
academically, but I felt that they would not fit into many of the themes or
topics of such outlets. In order to create a forum for my research, I had to
create my own platform. Additionally, I felt that I could expand on different
aspects that I could not cover in my book.
Then,
the purpose quickly evolved to preserving and archiving martial arts history in
America, because I have not seen anyone else doing the same thing. I think it
is important to find out and publish these stories that are in the martial
arts. In doing so, I have seen readers connect with the material presented and recalling
memories of this instructor or that instructor. That is what makes history come
alive – to have others remember it and start talking about it. Preserving and
presenting this material allows me to create a sort of archive for future
martial art researchers or former practitioners. This will keep the deeds and
influence of those not normally discussed or remembered fully alive.
A
recent example was the publication of a short biography of judo great Takahiko
Ishikawa and his time in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. My one
judo instructor personally emailed me to congratulate me and recalled some
memories that he had with Ishikawa. Additionally, there have been a handful of
comments across social media platforms that have shared some personal
experience with Ishikawa and their joy to see an article or piece on someone
that had some influence on them or their judo training. It’s moments like those
that I really enjoy what I do because it demonstrates that history is not old,
dry, and dead, but it is alive in people all the time.
AP: Are traditional martial arts looked at the same as they were 40 or 50
years ago? Has some of the mysticism disappeared?
AA: By the American public today, no. I recall George Kirby mentioning
that opening a martial arts school or offering a class was like placing sugar near
ants – it was a hit! Now, with the development and dissemination of Brazilian
Jiu-Jitsu and Mixed Martial Arts, traditional martial arts have taken a back
seat. The mystique and mysticism that once drew many Americans into the
training halls has been lost on the general public. There are those who still
see the mysticism and take up the arts, but they are a smaller group than what they
once were. One could say that the current trend with Mixed Martial Arts and the
Ultimate Fighting Championship has forced people to think of only fighting
another person. However, if you look back into history, many Americans after
the War, and even their Japanese counterparts before the War, took up martial
arts to learn how to fight. Look at Bruce Lee’s time in Hong Kong; everyone
took up martial arts to participate in street fights!
The
difference now, or currently emphasized, are traditional martial arts looking
at more of the philosophical, physical, and, at times, spiritual aspect of the
arts. Karate pushes that kata has
lasting effects on the human body, not only just containing the art’s
knowledge; kendo stresses that the training and matches assist practitioners to
become better versions of themselves; aikido asserts that the practice can help
instill a “go with the flow” mentality off the mat. To many, the knowledge of practitioners
in the past took up martial arts to learn and get better at fighting has been either
censored or forgotten by modern practitioners.
If
someone wants to learn to fight, they will find someone or something to teach
them that. However, what Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and Mixed Martial Arts have been
able to do since the inception of the Ultimate Fighting Championship in the
1990s is to adapt themselves to the times, or they allowed themselves to evolve
and experiment with different aspects. Though there may be some exceptions,
traditional martial arts as whole has largely remained stagnant compared to
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and Mixed Martial Arts and I think that is what traditional
martial arts need to consider, now more than ever.
AP: What's next? Any plans for a new
title in the coming future?
AA: In the short term, there is more content coming out on Martial Arts
of Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow – interviews, editorials, and articles.
Hopefully, one article will help put some things into perspective. Additionally,
Aikido Comes to America is now
available through Tambuli
Media and on Amazon, so I will
be letting people know about the good news.
In the long term, I have already started research
on another book. Not to spoil the surprise, but I will be covering a
not-so-popular Japanese martial art here in America. I also plan to branch out
a bit more with the blog, possibly covering some Historical European Martial
Arts and Chinese martial arts. However, these things take time, but the journey
is always an adventure – I never know what will turn up! [Laughs]
AP: Thanks again for taking the time to talk and share with our readers. It has
been a pleasure. All the best and continued success.
AA: It was a pleasure! Thank you for having me and for the questions.
More
on Antonio Aloia can be found at:
Official: martialarthistory.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AntonioAloiaAuthor/
To purchase
the book, “Aikido Comes to America”
on Amazon:
https://amzn.to/3kVU5d6
0centpiprop_sa_Paterson Efrain Pleasant https://wakelet.com/wake/O71uJXqRalQhIPXVfyg4R
ReplyDeleteenopboopat