Lies, damned lies and kata descriptions

[Mr. Precision]

I've been going over the kata descriptions for the kata I can perform[1] in Funakoshi's books. He was either a complete muppet or he's deliberately lying through his teeth over major parts of the applications of the kata. He never, not once gives a good explanation of a movement...

Now. I don't believe for a second that he was a muppet because he gives little hints and winks all over the place.

So why? I think the answer is in one of the anecdotes in Karate-do Nymon about the student story teller. From a western cultural perspective however, it's exceedingly exasperating.

[1] I was going to put "know" in there but I don't.

[AngelaG]

I don't think Master Funakoshi was lying (and you possibly get sent to karate hell for suggesting such things ), but I think Shotokan Karate became a mass produced product, suitable for environments such as the Japanese school and University system. After all the Heian Kata are were all devised for their young school children to learn. These were environments where the major emphasis was on following whatever the person at the front was doing – Though Shalt Not Ask Questions! Perhaps the huge change came because karate had to adapt to the Japanese mindset rather than the Okinawan mindset?

It is also worthwhile remembering that Funakoshi sensei seemed more interested in the intangible benefits of karate-do; the seeking of perfection of character; a healthy and long life; peaceful mind etc. Reading Karate-do: My Way of Life, it strikes me that Funakoshi had pretty much turned his back on all violence. He was probably knowledgeable of what everything in each kata did, but perhaps he preferred not to spread such knowledge?

Therefore a lot of the knowledge possible got lost when all these changes came about, and as the emphasis in the Japanese Universities seemed to be on kumite, all the interest in bunkai gradually totally declined, and it is only recently that the sudden interest has appeared.

[Mr. Precision]

angelag said:

I don't think Master Funakoshi was lying (and you possibly get sent to karate hell for suggesting such things ), but I think Shotokan Karate became a mass produced product

He does it in Karate Jutsu (pre Shotokan, 1922.) too almost word for word at a couple of points though he says "with the feeling of" far more, I suspect the "feeling of"s are closer to the truth than the statements that X is a block. I reckon he used little white lies the way sports psychologists do today. To get the student to perform the movement correctly, effectively and not to think about what they're really doing.

angelag said:

After all the Heian Kata are were all devised for their young school children to learn.

There's some evidence by the way they have spread to different schools that the Heian/Pinan kata predate Kushanku/Koshokun or that they are both chopped up versions of an older kata.

angelag said:

Reading Karate-do: My Way of Life, it strikes me that Funakoshi had pretty much turned his back on all violence. He was probably knowledgeable of what everything in each kata did, but perhaps he preferred not to spread such knowledge?

Certainly not in book form where anyone can read it and then apply it.

This is an interesting read, found it looking up stuff on the tekki salutation.

www.wadoryu.org.uk/naihanchi.html

Something that struck me about the way " Hironori Ohtsuka" (Founder of Wado) has to go elsewhere to get information on kata and techniques. It suggests again, either Funakoshi is unable to answer the questions and is basically a muppet or he's unwilling to hand out the information to someone he doesn't trust.

[Aefibird]

I think that a lot of it was possibly unwilling to hand out information to people he couldn't trust (or felt he couldn't). Similar to the way in which some Japanese/Okinawan instructors only handed out snippets or parts-of-systems to Westerners who initially trained with them.

I don't feel that Funakoshi is a muppet - I believe there's a lot more to it than meets the eye (or can be found in a book!)

[Mr. Precision]

aefibird said:

I don't feel that Funakoshi is a muppet - I believe there's a lot more to it than meets the eye (or can be found in a book!)

Agree. It's just an exasperating way of teaching for the caffeinated products of our instant gratification culture like me.

[AngelaG]

I think you were closest to the mark when you said:

"To get the student to perform the movement correctly, effectively and not to think about what they're really doing."

I think that's basically how it's all taught out in Japan. Don't think, don't question, don't ask, just do!

[Sionnagh]

I think Funakoshi spent too long training under Itosu and Azato to not have known. But if you were taught things which were only imparted after you had gained the trust of the teacher I do not think you would write them down in a book for just anyone to read. His books have a fair bit of detail buried in them, and a lot of hints at other things besides.


Mick

[AngelaG]

To be honest, I'd prefer not to be told and have to work it out by myself than read some of the cack applications there are in some karate books.

[Mr. Precision]

angelag said:

I think that's basically how it's all taught out in Japan. Don't think, don't question, don't ask, just do!

I think it's got some merit as a method. I showed one of the other guys (another green belt) in the class an application for the first two moves of heian shodan. When he tried it out on me he basically struck my forearm rather pathetically but didn't move his body at all. When I said you have to block down to the left, blocking a kick from the left he said "but you're in front of me". I'm not going to show any more, if they want to know I'll give them hints on ways to work it out.

[Mr. Precision]

angelag said:

To be honest, I'd prefer not to be told and have to work it out by myself than read some of the cack applications there are in some karate books.

Yeah, but all the ones other people think up are cack and all your own are always cool. ;D Just a hint is handy though once you know how to look.

[Sionnagh]

Most of the karate books I have on my shelf have cack applications. Most also have a few nuggets of valuable information. One book has just a single paragraph (btw it has other stuff too) which almost seems like it was put in at the end of a chapter as an afterthought. As I learnt more it's meaning became more significant. But most books have cack applications.

For me, an application has to be simple, it has to work if your partner doesn't play along, and it can't be only good for lunge punch or front kick in a long stance.


Mick

[AngelaG]

mrprecision said:

angelag said:

I think that's basically how it's all taught out in Japan. Don't think, don't question, don't ask, just do!

I think it's got some merit as a method. I showed one of the other guys (another green belt) in the class an application for the first two moves of heian shodan. When he tried it out on me he basically struck my forearm rather pathetically but didn't move his body at all. When I said you have to block down to the left, blocking a kick from the left he said "but you're in front of me". I'm not going to show any more, if they want to know I'll give them hints on ways to work it out.

Blocking a kick from the left? A mae geri being blocked with a gedan barai perchance?

[Aefibird]

sionnagh said:

For me, an application has to be simple, it has to work if your partner doesn't play along, and it can't be only good for lunge punch or front kick in a long stance.

That's the only trouble with some applications - it's the "If he does X, you do Y".

I prefer to try and come up with 'concepts' to be used, rather that"if he attacks me with a roundhouse punch I will step back and do this particular technique."

There's some great stuff in books, but an awful lot of cack, which is a pity as some karateka won't ever think to look any further and dig deeper.

[Mr. Precision]

angelag said:

Blocking a kick from the left? A mae geri being blocked with a gedan barai perchance?

Yeah, but I was standing in front of him holding his shirt at the time rather than beside him kicking. If he'd done it as if he was blocking a kick rather than trying to break my grip he'd have pulled me off balance and maybe broken my grip. As it was it was rather feeble, half striking, half pushing. He was looking at my arm and trying to hit that, the only power was from his upper arm, not his whole body.

That's when it occured to me that the psychology of what you're doing is really important. i.e. When Funakoshi says block a kick with an X block, take him literally, the fact that the opponent's arms are in the way is irrelevant, it's a kick you're trying to stop. A very clever man.

[Sionnagh]

aefibird said:

That's the only trouble with some applications - it's the "If he does X, you do Y".

I prefer to try and come up with 'concepts' to be used, rather that"if he attacks me with a roundhouse punch I will step back and do this particular technique."

I prefer the approach of "a hand coming in a straight line/curve/whatever to head/body/whatever presents ... options". What you think?


Mick