Talk:Tao of Jeet Kune Do

New Version
I completely rewrote the article as more pertinent information was needed about the book itself. Also much of the prior information was not entirely accurate. FrankWilliams 14:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

The information in this article is all accurate and can be verified in the Introduction section of "Tao of Jeet Kune DO". Including the the part of about his notes that lacked construct and were incomplete. This is NOT a POV; it is fact. User wishing to edit this article need to atleast READ the cited material before they make assumptions (You know what they say about assuming?). FrankWilliams 22:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I Began Reading The Tao of Jeet Kun Do. It Is Very Hard. The Philosophy Part Might Take A Lifetime of Contemplating To Understand. On The Other Hand Each Bit You Decipher Is Worth It.

24.12.108.99 18:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC)Lcpl Malfitano Xavier A24.12.108.99 18:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2nd Battalion. 24th Marines. 3rd Platoon Echo Company.

Recent Edits
The article currently explains facts about the writing of the book. They can be corroborated by reading the Introduction in the book itself. Adding information such as: The theories and documentations were written by Bruce Lee is a truism and doesn't have to be spelled out again as the article's ending paragraph clearly says this. Also that the material was incomplete and lacked construct is NOT arguable. This is very clearly stated in the intro section of the book. I would ask those that edit this page at the very least read the book before editing and commenting. FrankWilliams 14:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Authorship
For clarification Bruce Lee did not write the book "Tao of Jeet Kune Do". The materials that Bruce Lee left behind (IE. handwritten notebooks) were used by editors to put this book together. The statement that Bruce Lee is not its author simply means that:
 * A. He was not around when the book was put together.
 * B. He did not have any input as to the arrangement of the material.
 * C. He did not compile a "Framework" for the book which authors normally do when composing a body of work such as this.
 * D. He did not approve of the work, therefore it is arguable if he would want his name associated with this work. FrankWilliams 09:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


 * // see FrankWilliams' talkpage.

I'm having some major issues with this entire article. Gil Johnson was one of my closest friends, and I have it first-hand from him how this book came to be. Very little of the tale told here is accurate. If one looks to Danny Inosanto's early books, one sees the same writing style? Why? Because Gil penned them as well. Bruce's notes and drawings were compiled by Gil for the benefit of Linda, after Bruce' death. Bruce would not have condoned a Style called JKD. He was very much a "do what works for you and your body" kinda guy. Not sure how to get rid of this tripe and get some truth into the article. JT (talk) 21:32, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:51, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * TAO OF JEET KUNE DO 2.jpg
 * TAO OF JEET KUNE DO 3.jpg
 * TAO OF JEET KUNE DO 5.jpg
 * TAO OF JEET KUNE DO.jpg

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * TAO OF JEET KUNE DO 2.jpg

One small comprehension issue
Hi I am having a little bit of a tough time comprehending this line: "Johnson along with Linda Lee, Dan Inosanto and other students of Bruce Lee helped him understand Jeet Kune Do well enough to editorialize and organize Lee's material into text." Question is helped who? Helped Bruce Lee or Johnson? I was wondering if anyone here can maybe redo the one line.PierceCK2300 (talk) 04:46, 6 July 2019 (UTC)PierceCK2300