Forms and Sets > Form 4 > Analysis

Analysis Perspective describes from which point-of-view a reader should assume when thinking about the information as presented in the analysis of a form.

This is a tricky subject, because at first thought most people would say the answer is quite apparent - and might even be befuddled by the subject being brought up in the first place. The answer is first-person (e.g. me). I am the person executing the form, I am the person "defending myself", and I am the person analyzing the form. Therefore, the evident answer is first person.

But, although that answer is correct, it is only partially correct. First person perspective is only one (1) of three (3) possible points of view. A list of all three (3) perspectives is:

1)first person - a.k.a. the defender (me)

2)second person - a.k.a. the potential attacker (the opponent)

3)third person - a.k.a. the observer (a bystander)

In order to complete a thorough analysis of Form Four, one must take into consideration all of these viewpoints. It is not enough to just think through the first person perspective. This fact becomes patently obvious when one considers a major theme of Form Four - in-flight major attacks.

The very theme itself is based around the second person point of view. Therefore, It is simply impossible to complete the analysis of the higher forms without this second person vantage point.

Stop to consider the major themes of the previous two (2) forms - Short Form Three and Long Form Three. The major theme of Form Four builds upon those previous themes. The progression was: applied, minor in-flight, and finally major in-flight - with all of these themes based solely around the potential offense (e.g. the type of attack). Without the second person perspective, there is simply no way this could be accomplished.

Another way to think about this situation is that the theme is based around what is being done (second person) to you (first person), and not necessarily around what your response is (first person) to the potential attack (second person). Although, that is unquestionably and obviously another factor.

At this point it must be noted that this perspective shifting is not required for an analysis of the lower forms (e.g. all forms up to and including Long Form Two). With those forms, first person perspective was enough. That is true because those forms concentrated on defining motion.

In contrast, the higher forms (e.g. forms after Long Form Two) concentrate more upon principles, theories, and concepts as they relate to offensive maneuvers - not just first person defensive and offensive maneuvers, irrespective of the attacking maneuver. This is one of the key progressions between the lower and upper forms.

This shift in form dynamics also necessitated an expansion in one's perspective. And, without this fundamental understanding about the forms, one is simply not able to produce a proper analysis (or comprehension) of the higher forms. Understanding this principle is undeniably that important.

Now, there is one more crucial point that must be made clear about this shift in perspective. When performing the analysis within a specific perspective, the person doing the analysis (e.g. you) should be mentally placed within that perspective. Ideally, one should see and perceive everything from the point of view that is being analyzing.

An easier way to think about this point is that the person doing the analysis (e.g. you) are the performer (defender), is the attacker, and is the bystander. One must learn to shift their perspective into each of the roles for the purpose of analysis. It is not enough to understand that the perspective is shifted. One must stop being only the performer (first person) and become the second (attacker) and third (bystander) person for the duration of the analysis.

It is vital to understand and conduct this method of thinking, because the analysis presented within this section is illustrated in this manner. So, as one assesses the information, they must also be clear of the perspective of the material being read. Otherwise, the data might not make sense, or may appear to be incorrect - from a first person only perspective. This becomes a critical point when dealing with direction.

To clarify this point further, first person and second person perspective directional information can be thought of as a local perspective that shifts throughout the form and begins with the targeted maneuver sequence and ends when that sequence ends.

First person is from the defender's point of view, and second person is from the attacker's point of view (the opposite perspective). But again, each of these is from a locally isolated perspective - from both a sequence and spatial context.

Third person perspective, in contrast, deals with the same sequence of movements from both the first person (defender) and second person (attacker) perspective. But the major difference is that this perspective is from a global point of view.

Global point of view can be thought of as the form is being analyzed as a whole and that the focused maneuvers are just a sub-set of the whole; and therefore, do not effect directionality. Because of this, there is no reorientation of focal points for the individual sequences. Once directionality is established at the beginning of the form, the reference points remain fixed until the form concludes.

From the global (third person) perspective, direction always remains fixed throughout the entirety of the form, with the targeted maneuver sequences using the global directions, rather than the targeted (local) directions.

Because of this shift from a local to a global perspective, understanding the currently used perspective becomes critical when dealing with direction. If this is not understood, direction may not appear to be correct within the data of the analysis.

To specify perspective, sub-sections of information will be titled with a header clarifying from which point of view the material is being presented. The reader should understand this detail before attempting to study the breakdown of data within that region. Otherwise, one may become confounded and/or confused by some of the information being depicted.

Like Form Four, this format of analysis is deliberate and intentional, and specifically designed to help the reader open up more dimensions of though and investigation in the hope of further exploration into not only American Kenpo, but martial arts in general.