Interview on Martial Arts, Academia and Theory

Daniele Bolelli on the 'duality of the martial arts scholar'

I've been interviewed for a Czech cultural journal on the relations between martial arts, academia and 'theory'. It will be published in Czech in the end, but for none Czech readers, here is the full interview:

1. Your interest in martial arts is theoretical as well as practical. Do you see yourself as a practitioner of MA who wants to theorise this phenomenon, or rather as a theorist who needs to have practical background for his theoretical interest?

In terms of my life, martial arts came first. When I studied cultural theory at university, I would often try to put complex theoretical problems into physical terms in my head - so I'd think about things in terms of martial arts. In other words, I think that my practitioner knowledge of martial arts has helped my thinking - and in many more ways than thinking about martial arts. In many ways, my academic work on martial arts could be construed as simply thinking about martial arts according to the terms and questions of cultural studies. But, at the same time, anything I say about the practicalities of martial arts is informed by my practical knowledge (or rather, experience). However, anything I say about other writers' work on martial arts is normally informed by my own preferred approaches (deconstruction, mainly).

2. Is there something as "martial arts studies" as a theoretical discipline? How well is it established in academic world? Is your academic interest in MA considered unusual, or even exotic among your colleagues?

I think that martial arts studies have existed in different contexts in different ways for quite some time. Lots of different approaches to martial arts are coming into existence in different ways now too. Sociology and anthropology are seeing more and more ethnographic studies of martial arts. History has long had studies of martial arts. Psychology, sports science, literature, and so on and so on, all have their approaches. However, there hasn't really been a 'cultural studies' approach. There are ethnographies and there are treatments of martial arts in film studies. But what I think we see developing now - and what I'm involved with in my own way - are approaches which seek to engage with the vast range of dimensions to martial arts that often exist within one person - dimensions that come from film, TV and computer games as much as gender and class, and the way these all interact in complex ways. So, in a way, I think it has been both very hard and very easy for my colleagues to understand what I am interested in and why. At first, many think that I am writing about martial arts simply because I love them - which is just 'eccentric'. But when I phrase the matter in terms of cross-cultural communication, globalisation, post-colonialism, and so on, people immediately get the sense that this is not just a matter of personal interest, but may relate to bigger cultural and political issues. However, when people listen to my presentations on martial arts and culture, I know that many feel bamboozled and perplexed about my approach. So, it's a circle, a flicking between people thinking I'm doing something eccentric but also important, and something obvious and clear but also complex and obscure. Hopefully my next book should set things out clearly.

3. In one of your articles you describe difficulties you have with seeking an appropriate method for analyzing MA. What is so difficult about MA in connection to contemporary theory? And what academic approach to MA you prefer now?

It's a question of what you prioritise and how and why. 'Theory' can allow you to 'see' things that you could not see without 'Theory'. But all too often, 'Theory' wins and the thing you were using Theory to try to engage with kind of vanishes. You see this all the time in Zizek, for example. So I didn't want to do that. Nor did I want to just write history, or to do any of the kinds of things done in other disciplines. So I have been looking around for a way to combine all of the best bits that different disciplines offer - in a manner that is exactly like what martial artists do when they try to construct an 'ultimate' martial art. This is why I am particularly interested in the cases of invention in martial arts - it is because they play out in physical and institutional form the universal problem of trying to find the best way to approach… anything! In other words, I find it hard to trust the existing approaches because I know that they are just institutional stablizations (as Derrida would say), with particular values, histories, borders and limits. But how do you 'improve' upon them? This is a problem that is played out in dojos and universities all the time and all over the place… However, to answer your final question: I am very much taken by the approaches of Adam Frank (who wrote the book Taijiquan and the Search for the Little Old Chinese Man) and Greg Downey (who wrote the book Learning Capoeira). Both of these people understand the complexity of the object of study, the ways that it is not one single or simple thing, and the ways that 'it' lives, operates and is operated upon by multiple forces. However, at the same time, I have lots of critical comments to make about these approaches - and these critical comments come from my involvement in deconstruction and cultural studies.

4. What kind of MA do you practice? Do you also see MA as a sort of "way of living" and do you identify with some basic principles of "living according to MA"? Do you think that it is even possible for persons who come from different cultural background than original practitioners of asian MA?

I have studied lots of martial arts. I stuck longest with taijiquan and choy lee fut kung fu. However I no longer practice the kung fu, and have replaced it with escrima. So now I would say I practice taijiquan and I am learning escrima. I like to have one hard and one soft. I like the subtlety of taijiquan, but I also like the brutal efficiency and good hard workout of escrima. I stuck with kung fu for a long time, but I think I learned more about fighting in my first year of escrima than I did in ten years of kung fu. … I don't think there is a single 'way of living' attached to the martial arts. However, I think that something like taijiquan puts you in touch with your body in a very interesting way. So you become attuned with it. You don't pull muscles or get a bad back if you stick with taiji principles in your life! Also, very street-conscious arts will help you to 'see' things that the untrained would not perceive - dangers and threats, mainly, as well as chances for escape or attack. This is part of the training of any good self-defence martial art. But when it comes to cross-cultural matters (like 'can Westerners truly learn taiji?', etc.), I think that we tend to get things the wrong way around here. I think that cross-cultural communication should not be approached by starting from an idea of difference and distance, but rather by finding the thing shared in common. I learned this from reading Rancière and thinking about my experiences in Hong Kong around martial arts. One immediately becomes connected when one shares something in common. I think - but I'm not sure - that the more physical this thing is, the better. So, if you go to China with a love of and some knowledge of kung fu, you are likely to get intimately involved with other people very quickly. So when it comes to culture, I start from objects, practices, bodies, and interests, rather than some idea of a huge gulf between 'cultures'.

5. One of your main interests in your articles about MA is Bruce Lee. Why is he such paradigmatic figure for you and your interest in MA?

Bruce Lee was amazing and he made it all happen the way that it has. I have written so many words about Bruce Lee that I hope you can forgive me for not writing even more here and now. But, basically, whichever way I look at it, Bruce Lee was and is the most influential figure.

6. You also wrote that you are interested in the theme of MA in popular culture. Do you see any basic difference in approach to MA in western and eastern media (for example in Hong Kong an Hollywood movies)?

Yes, there are many differences. This is because of different cultural traditions and film traditions. When it was the 40th anniversary of Bruce Lee's death last year, I found myself being asked to do many radio interviews - phone calls with radio presenters in the UK, the USA, China and Hong Kong, mainly. Overall, I found that the UK and US questions were always really basic and pedestrian, while the HK and Chinese questions were much more sophisticated. This is because, in a sense, HK and China feel that they own kung fu, even if Bruce Lee straddles both worlds. In the UK and US media, it is still something 'foreign', even if the majority of practitioners have grown up their entire lives knowing of it and studying it in their own language in their own country. So there are nationalist dimensions too: the Chinese media clearly see the question of the status of kung fu in the west as a question about the status of China in the west.

7. How important is popculture for your studies of MA? What "lesson" can there be for someone who is interested in MA theoretically?

I really don't think you can or should try to divorce popular culture and martial arts. In China, martial arts are part of a clear nationalist and popular cultural discourse. In the west, they have different factors permeating and percolating in and through them, but one thing is certain - Asian martial arts exist in Western popular consciousness at all thanks to the work of popular media - films and TV, first. As for 'lessons' for someone interested in cultural theory, I'd say that there are many: the 'cases' of martial arts can enrich your understanding of 'culture', globalisation, postcolonialism, multiculturalism, hybridity, cultural communication, pedagogy, the body, fantasy - you name it.

8. Are you interested in social ascpect of MA? For example the difference between some kind of democratic tradition in MA in China in contrast with more aristocratic approach in classic Japan. There is also big influence of Asian MA in afro-american popculture (blaxploitation movies with MA, Wu Tang Clan etc.). Do you se MA as more essentially conected with lower social classes?

Martial arts continue to to be connected to nationalism (and tourism) in China and Japan. Other countries are cottoning on to this idea too (Indonesia, Philippines, Brazil, etc.). And, as you say, they have been connected to poor black ghettoes in 1970s America. But they are not 'essentially' working class. They are connected to military and paramilitary activities, of course; and they proliferate around borders and crime, as well as in areas where one needs to be 'tough'. But they also become 'arts' - national, cultural, and so on. So there is a lot of movement and a complex sort of circulation. (As I've said something negative about Zizek, I should say something positive: Zizek makes the point that Asian martial arts were popular among poor communities first in the west because those who have nothing have only their bodies, only their discipline. Zizek is right here. But the black connection was connected to the economics of circulation of certain types of film to certain types of cinema too.)

9. MA sometimes seems to be interesting subject for contemporary western thinking - there is famous situationist movie Can Dialectics Break Bricks? and there is a documentary about Pierre Bourdieu that is called Sociology is a martial art. Do you think that some contemporary philosophical or theoretical approaches have something in common with MA?

I think that academia has everything in common with martial arts! This is exactly what my next book will be about!

10. What is your opinion on post-marxist or post-colonial studies in context of MA?

I think that the connections are complex, intricate and intimate. My two academic books on Bruce Lee were of course informed by my research into post-Marxism, cultural studies and post-colonialism. Most of these books and articles are freely available online, so your readers can look into them to the extent that they are interested! Many thanks.