Each Aikido style, and sometimes each teacher within a style, has his own method. This can not be right. The individual can not decide the method. As certain old European rennaisance texts mention, it is the nature of the weapon to the man that determines the method.
Long or complicated partner forms are difficult to learn, practice, and remember. Just as any chain is only as strong as its weakest link, one's development is restricted by an inefficient method, an incomplete system, and by a slower partner who is struggling to come to terms with it. Having 'travelled' and seen what is 'out there', I no longer trust the sword I learn in the dojo, no matter where it is claimed to be from. I no longer trust that what I am shown as being a genuine sword art (if that is what is being claimed).
This problem is compounded for the Aikidoka in that the sword is supposed to help better his Aikido. Thus, it has become acceptable that practice be for perfection and not for reality. And if this is to be the case, then it is absolutely vital that Aikido movement match sword movement. Yet, often it is not so. Sword offers Aikido a lot, but misunderstanding in sword feeds misunderstanding in Aikido - the purpose (for Aikidoka, not necessarily swordsmen) is for one to help the other, not hinder it.
The 'Saito' weapons method that was once universal in many dojos is now losing ground to techniques, patterns, and forms from more traditional sources such as Kashima Shin Ryu, Katori Shinto Ryu, and Ono-ha Itto Ryu, etc. Indeed, many are finding remarkable similarities between the Saito method and certain traditional styles, which leads to them abandoning what they learned assuming the more traditional to be better (not a bad argument, but not perfect either). We are presently in what appears to be a transition stage where Aikido teachers feel it important to 'return to the source', which means studying more traditional ryu to compliment their Aikido. However, the problem with this is that people are learning a few techniques from direct sources, then teaching these 'parts' to others, who in turn pass them on, and so on. This process is perhaps inevitable, as most do not possess the half-a-lifetime necessary to study a traditional ryu to completion. The result is a mish-mash of new ideas and techniques. The obvious problem, that is totally unrecognised and therefore perhaps not so obvious, is that there is no effort to collate all the 'new' old techniques into one complete, logical system, which is perhaps, without even knowing why, the reason that people are beginning to look elsewhere - traditional ryu. My prediction is that this 'chaos' will continue for the forseeable future.
My argument is for short forms/movements, with the intention of moving towards no-form as soon as possible. Memory of form should be replaced by perception of the moment in a rapidly changing situation. I would like to practice a system where the nature of the sword reveals itself to the serious practitioner.
My personal training system: