Journaling - Readings, Muay Thai, Concepts and Articulations

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

I feel like even when I find a voice in Muay Thai with whom I may have some sympathy, discourse itself is impossible, because of the highly political nature of social media life-rafting, everyone grabbing onto their own piece to stay afloat, often using the social media form to assail others, but also signaling their potential place within commerce. The very sense of reachable agreements become divorced from the possible. Allies and potential allies because disagreeable promimates and competitors for attention or even a place in the "idea space". I can't even suitably ask: Do you actually agree with the things you are saying? It's a very odd hyper-real collapse of what discussion is supposed to be.

This is why the discussion now can only be had at the level of the muay you build - which is difficult as they fast change the rules to favor foreign schematics and values - the muay becoming the language of a true-ist discourse. The alphabet of limbs and spaces and nothing more...a muay that betters what it disagrees with.

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

There is a fundamental dichotomy, a catch, which farang will experience when coming to Thailand to dream of becoming recognized in a traditional way. The more "value" you have...in your attempted authenticity, the more you are pulled into a traditional hierarchy in which the fighter holds an extremely low position, and in which your opportunity to develop as a fighter becomes highly restricted to the meaning-system of those held by those high in that pyramid. In short, the more value you achieve, the less opportunity you have. And, for women - because traditional Muay Thai is quite patriarchal - this can be more intensely so. So, if your aim is to develop as a fighter to the height of your capacities, our experience and guiding rule has been: Be very careful about how much "value" you have, especially within traditional concepts of value. This means that to some degree you have to skate by, across some concepts of "authenticity", certain types of recognition or symbolic value (because they can foreclose growth and opportunity), and instead carve out new, creative forms of value to others. This is Sylvie's secret gift and path, the way she carefully avoids kinds or limits of value, while creating value and meaning, so that her horizon as a fighter is not curbed by tradition itself. 

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

Today I watched Chatchai imitating Samson Isaan's interfering, smother style when teaching Sylvie how she should fight. It came out of nowhere, but it warmed my heart so much. and his movements were so beautiful. It's not his style, but he was adopting it. He also told a short story of when he used to be a sparring partner of Samson's at Petchyindee when Samson turned to Boxing. He said that Samson didn't really like sparring him as Chatchai would hurt him with select shots (Chatchai more experienced at the time). He knew how to handle that tempo pressure. So something really special today. Chatchai guiding Sylvie into some of Samson's tactics because it would be really good for her style, but also having experienced them directly himself, and knowing the solves. Such a great instructor.

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

Pretty crazy that all time elite Muay Thai fighters of the Golden Age ended their careers incredibly young. Oley 20 (two fights at 22, but basically done at 20), and Saencherng at 22. Really craziness. Not even (arguably) physical prime, and certainly not mental prime, but some of the best who ever fought. 

Sylvie trained with Saencherng today, full of physical wisdom almost 40 years from retirement.

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

Reflecting on it, I think these are my three main objections - or at least points of constructive criticism - towards some of the globalizing efforts on Thailand's Muay Thai:

1. Changing the rules and very form of the sport so that Westerners (and other non-Thais) will win fights that they otherwise would have lost. (This goes from changing weigh-in rules to down-regulating primary Thai skills - defensive counter fighting, narrative control, clinch, etc - that non-Thais just are not good at.)

2. Decaying the once vast small kaimuay/festival culture of provincial Muay Thai which created such diversity and complexity of skillsets in Thailand historically AND radically altering the developmental training methods of Thais. Both of these lead to Thai fighters just becoming less and less skilled, and more in line with a Western/International baseline.

3. Changing the ethos of Muay Thai fighting. Moving it from a sport that fundamentally expresses control to a sport that expresses violence.

 

The first of these puts a thumb on the scale that gives the illusion that Western/International fighters are much better than they are. This is great for International marketing. And the second of these reinforces that illusion because it drains the Thai standard of greatness that gives Muay Thai its allure in the first place. If Thais become less skilled, again International fighters will win more fights. The primary motivator and promise of the "Magical" or untouchable fighter of Thailand becomes lost, an image that ironically enough has been essential to Soft Power.

The third of these is maybe the most troubling, or at least harder to see and pernicious. In order to align Thailand's Muay Thai with Global appetites it must move towards expressing similar values that combat fight culture expresses in global capitalism, which is that of transgressive violence. The very foundational value of control-in-the-face-of-possible-violence that generated such high level fighters of Thailand, which gave it its aura in the world, becomes culturally colonized; it is replaced by a lower value of entertainment violence (which over time produces much less complex or fluent skill sets).

Prescriptively, one would maybe list:

1. Try to take the thumb off the scale for International fighters. Now that they have been skewed for start sliding the sport back towards complexity and higher level skills.

2. Protect and nurture the kaimuay/festival grassroots of Muay Thai, the small gym networks and fighting circuits that develop rich skillsets. AND, preserve or return to aspects of traditional training practices, because higher level skills were embedded in these practices. 

3. Pull back on the valorization of violence or aggression for its own sake, and embrace the uniqueness of control in the face of violence, extol "gep awut" for instance. This unlocks the greater levels of skill which will give Thailand enduring value in the world. 

 

I could mention as well, this is really core to the persistent debate about youth fighting in Thailand. From an Internationalist perspective because fighting is fundamentally violence, it is inherently transgressive and "adult". Because fighting in Thailand's history is NOT fundamentally violence, but instead is about mastery and control (quite complexly developed, including the use of aggression, but not fundamentally so), it is not inherently adult. In fact, it is an inculcative practice, a practice of maturation that aligns with the process of becoming adult, possessing control. One reason why Thai fighters have been so sublimely skilled is that they grew up within a process of developmental control over oneself and threatened violence. An art counter to violence as it is commonly conceived in a fundamental way. If we change the spectrum of this valuation, not only are the highest level skill sets threatened to be lost, but also the valuable lesson that Thailand's culture has for the world will fall away.

Ideally, the key to long term Soft Power for Thailand has to be founded on the uniqueness of Thailand's perspective on fighting and fight culture. This is what brings people across 1,000s of miles and causes them to invest their lives in the specialness of the art. And this comes out of the valuation of what fighting itself means and the incredibly high level of skill that was developed in that value, come out of the root-system of provincial fighting.

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

42 minutes ago, Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu said:

Reflecting on it, I think these are my three main objections - or at least points of constructive criticism - towards some of the globalizing efforts on Thailand's Muay Thai:

1. Changing the rules and very form of the sport so that Westerners (and other non-Thais) will win fights that they otherwise would have lost. (This goes from changing weigh-in rules to down-regulating primary Thai skills - defensive counter fighting, narrative control, clinch, etc - that non-Thais just are not good at.)

2. Decaying the once vast small kaimuay/festival culture of provincial Muay Thai which created such diversity and complexity of skillsets in Thailand historically AND radically altering the developmental training methods of Thais. Both of these lead to Thai fighters just becoming less and less skilled, and more in line with a Western/International baseline.

3. Changing the ethos of Muay Thai fighting. Moving it from a sport that fundamentally expresses control to a sport that expresses violence.

 

The first of these puts a thumb on the scale that gives the illusion that Western/International fighters are much better than they are. This is great for International marketing. And the second of these reinforces that illusion because it drains the Thai standard of greatness that gives Muay Thai its allure in the first place. If Thais become less skilled, again International fighters will win more fights. The primary motivator and promise of the "Magical" or untouchable fighter of Thailand becomes lost, an image that ironically enough has been essential to Soft Power.

The third of these is maybe the most troubling, or at least harder to see and pernicious. In order to align Thailand's Muay Thai with Global appetites it must move towards expressing similar values that combat fight culture expresses in global capitalism, which is that of transgressive violence. The very foundational value of control-in-the-face-of-possible-violence that generated such high level fighters of Thailand, which gave it its aura in the world, becomes culturally colonized; it is replaced by a lower value of entertainment violence (which over time produces much less complex or fluent skill sets).

I could mention as well, this is really core to the persistent debate about youth fighting in Thailand. From an Internationalist perspective because fighting is fundamentally violence, it is inherently transgressive and "adult". Because fighting in Thailand's history is NOT fundamentally violence, but instead is about mastery and control (quite complexly developed, including the use of aggression, but not fundamentally so), it is not inherently adult. In fact, it is an inculcative practice, a practice of maturation that aligns with the process of becoming adult, possessing control. One reason why Thai fighters have been so sublimely skilled is that they grew up within a process of developmental control over oneself and threatened violence. An art counter to violence as it is commonly conceived in a fundamental way. If we change the spectrum of this valuation, not only are the highest level skill sets threatened to be lost, but also the valuable lesson that Thailand's culture has for the world will fall away.

Ideally, the key to long term Soft Power for Thailand has to be founded on the uniqueness of Thailand's perspective on fighting and fight culture. This is what brings people across 1,000s of miles and causes them to invest their lives in the specialness of the art. And this comes out of the valuation of what fighting itself means and the incredibly high level of skill that was developed in that value, come out of the root-system of provincial fighting.

 

This is aside from the worrisome corrosive effect of replacing extremely knowledgeable, deeply invested in-stadium fans with phone scrolling tourists who know very little about the sport or what is going on in the ring. A sport (and art) in a certain sense cannot survive at a high level of performance with such a huge in-stadium fan disparity. Audience will over time shape the product...when it becomes a "product". This is one of the quagmires of a consumerist approach. 

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

Whatever one's position on the future of Thailand's Muay Thai, its hard to deny that many of the arguments for the unstoppable - but sometimes delayed - "evolution" of the sport, it's imagined "potential" being reached through globalization and hoped-for mass popularity, it's provincial/parochial (or corrupt) nature being technologically "modernized" and rationalized, mirror the justification reasonings behind colonialism, which held a concept of beneficent, educating husbandry and willful, well-rewarded participants in the culture. This is not to say that they are the same, we are in a different time in history, but only that the ethical questions about colonialism likely need to also be answered in this case, where "development" by powerful outside forces and interests is assumed as an unproblematic Good.

[The Bongo]

On 7/14/2026 at 10:42 AM, Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu said:

Reflecting on it, I think these are my three main objections - or at least points of constructive criticism - towards some of the globalizing efforts on Thailand's Muay Thai:

1. Changing the rules and very form of the sport so that Westerners (and other non-Thais) will win fights that they otherwise would have lost. (This goes from changing weigh-in rules to down-regulating primary Thai skills - defensive counter fighting, narrative control, clinch, etc - that non-Thais just are not good at.)

2. Decaying the once vast small kaimuay/festival culture of provincial Muay Thai which created such diversity and complexity of skillsets in Thailand historically AND radically altering the developmental training methods of Thais. Both of these lead to Thai fighters just becoming less and less skilled, and more in line with a Western/International baseline.

3. Changing the ethos of Muay Thai fighting. Moving it from a sport that fundamentally expresses control to a sport that expresses violence.

 

The first of these puts a thumb on the scale that gives the illusion that Western/International fighters are much better than they are. This is great for International marketing. And the second of these reinforces that illusion because it drains the Thai standard of greatness that gives Muay Thai its allure in the first place. If Thais become less skilled, again International fighters will win more fights. The primary motivator and promise of the "Magical" or untouchable fighter of Thailand becomes lost, an image that ironically enough has been essential to Soft Power.

The third of these is maybe the most troubling, or at least harder to see and pernicious. In order to align Thailand's Muay Thai with Global appetites it must move towards expressing similar values that combat fight culture expresses in global capitalism, which is that of transgressive violence. The very foundational value of control-in-the-face-of-possible-violence that generated such high level fighters of Thailand, which gave it its aura in the world, becomes culturally colonized; it is replaced by a lower value of entertainment violence (which over time produces much less complex or fluent skill sets).

Prescriptively, one would maybe list:

1. Try to take the thumb off the scale for International fighters. Now that they have been skewed for start sliding the sport back towards complexity and higher level skills.

2. Protect and nurture the kaimuay/festival grassroots of Muay Thai, the small gym networks and fighting circuits that develop rich skillsets. AND, preserve or return to aspects of traditional training practices, because higher level skills were embedded in these practices. 

3. Pull back on the valorization of violence or aggression for its own sake, and embrace the uniqueness of control in the face of violence, extol "gep awut" for instance. This unlocks the greater levels of skill which will give Thailand enduring value in the world. 

 

I could mention as well, this is really core to the persistent debate about youth fighting in Thailand. From an Internationalist perspective because fighting is fundamentally violence, it is inherently transgressive and "adult". Because fighting in Thailand's history is NOT fundamentally violence, but instead is about mastery and control (quite complexly developed, including the use of aggression, but not fundamentally so), it is not inherently adult. In fact, it is an inculcative practice, a practice of maturation that aligns with the process of becoming adult, possessing control. One reason why Thai fighters have been so sublimely skilled is that they grew up within a process of developmental control over oneself and threatened violence. An art counter to violence as it is commonly conceived in a fundamental way. If we change the spectrum of this valuation, not only are the highest level skill sets threatened to be lost, but also the valuable lesson that Thailand's culture has for the world will fall away.

Ideally, the key to long term Soft Power for Thailand has to be founded on the uniqueness of Thailand's perspective on fighting and fight culture. This is what brings people across 1,000s of miles and causes them to invest their lives in the specialness of the art. And this comes out of the valuation of what fighting itself means and the incredibly high level of skill that was developed in that value, come out of the root-system of provincial fighting.

Your comments here remind me of two authors in particular.  The first, Walter Benjamin, who wrote Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction in around 1920, and William S Burroughs.  Both were concerned with the ability of modern modes of production of profit increasing quantity, with a corresponding collapse in quality.  

 

The intersection of traditional art and contemporary media consumption is not new.  We still have art galleries, museums and opera.  We still even have cheese rolling, dwile flonking and the Atherstone Ball Game in the UK.  Let's hope there are enough lovers of true Muay Thai to support it at festival level, certainly these traditional forms can be promoted, there are numerous examples of art forms which have promoted their pure selves.  One example is playhouses live broadcasting to cinemas.  The old art form utilises the newer to its benefit.

 

I certainly intend to travel to Chenjigou to train the martial art that the Chen family have taught there since the 1640's.  I intend to travel to Thailand for similar reasons.  

Edited July 30 by The Bongo
Accidentally pressed return.

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

Frequently Sylvie and I have talked about native Muay Thai as if it were a language. There are many ways to imagine this, but in this film montage (sound on), the particular way that a film genre will communicate itself, discursively, through "blocs of sensation", discursively, gives clue to its communication. These tropes and movements (including camera movements) compose a "language" of expression. It is the same with traditional Muay Thai, the refining of these communications. 

 

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

 

this video shows how Boxing isn't all about combos. Combos are the easiest to train and to also hold for. This is about teaching how techniques control and manage timing and space. It also points up how Muay Thai cannot be effectively taught in combinations. 

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

On 7/30/2026 at 8:33 AM, The Bongo said:

Your comments here remind me of two authors in particular.  The first, Walter Benjamin, who wrote Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction in around 1920, and William S Burroughs.  Both were concerned with the ability of modern modes of production of profit increasing quantity, with a corresponding collapse in quality.  

sorry, I did not see your comment until now. I definitely have some Benjamin influence. I know less about Burroughs in this area though. For Benjamin as well, his stooping Angel of History here also pertains. Also, important contemporary ideas about Capitalism and de-skilling I think apply. 

Quote

Let's hope there are enough lovers of true Muay Thai to support it at festival level, certainly these traditional forms can be promoted, there are numerous examples of art forms which have promoted their pure selves.  One example is playhouses live broadcasting to cinemas.  The old art form utilises the newer to its benefit.

I do think there is a kind of capitalist, tourist-oriented avenue of protection (and participation) in traditional Muay Thai. Right now the legacy of the sport is being exploited in certain ways, extracted, and unfortunately eroded, but the depth of the sport and its knowledge is quite deep, and the country's Muay Thai has survived many cultural incursions and pressures. I suspect that the pendulum will swing and Thailand will realize that that true draw of the world, the most substantive draw of the world, is how Muay Thai is like no other fighting art, and that changing it to match what others do is detrimental to that draw. 

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

ALL IN.

I see high-awareness, well-intentioned Westerners urging Thai fighters to invest (the operative word) in social media content creation (labor), which is smart, even needed advice as it goes. But...in the larger scope, the more you work (operative word) to turn Craft into Labor, the further you work to transform it into an exploitive - that is to say more precisely, extractive - means, and subject it to the forces of de-skilling. "We are not very good fighters...but, please become much more like us, so we can consume you more readily, even as fighting skill erodes". The Nouvelle Era has many hidden pitfalls, not the least of which is the making of the New Man (the hyper individual) who has become supremely digitalized. All this is well and good, as its the tide of the Earth right now, but I say: "Keep an eye on where Craft gets turned into Labor" if you want to trace the operative drain of the human skill and meaning...as we all become Digital Laborers. As we all are Colonized.

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

 

Interesting fight featuring top two 105 lbers of the two Entertainment promotions. Islay Erika Bomogao with the victory, Mongkutpetch complaining later that she was robbed. Round 1 a VERY clear win for Bonogao. Round 2, I don't believe somewhat wonk throws in the clinch really score in Amateur (at least IFMA amateur, I've seen Loma toss fighters all over the place and lose). Seems like a solid win for Bomogao who is a really interesting little fighter, who I kinda love watching fight (even though she's on ONE).

Here most recent fight, where she's fairly well handled, until she closes the deal. I love the vitality she fights with, and that she's not a heavy combo-forward fighter. 

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2029120667993528

[Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu]

I'm kinda stunned. I went back on my interest and clicked on some ONE highlight which supposedly involved one fighter using the other fighter's "pet move" against them. I played the video and just watched two people throwing crazy techniques and hitting air back and forth. I never got to the "move". Why? How did this happen that missing strikes was a "thing". It's like watching basketball highlights of "moves" where the basket is missed. Why? This seems to be a product of Technique Porn, the spread of demos and "moves" mimicked from fighters, where the actual efficacy is of no merit...until there is a Knockout. A crazy "evolution" of fighting.