2001
It seems my thoughts have stirred the pot, and I truly appreciate the feedback you’ve all shared.
I belive I understand Fernando’s point about Funakoshi’s Taikyoku kata may have been influenced by the 12 kata created from the Karate-do Promotion Society from 1937. For those kata the embusen is essentially the same as the Taikyhoku kata, and if you substitute the low block for the middle block, the relationship is obvious.
But looking at Harry Cook’s work this evening, I notice in the 1935 publication of the ‘Karate-Do Kyohan’ the Taikyoku were not present (but were in the 1956 2nd edition). Mr. Cook also relates there are those who maintain that the Taikyoku were the product of Funakoshi’s son, regardless of later attribution to Shotokan’s founder. I don’t propose the few works I possess will answer those questions, but it certainly is possible Funakoshi sensei would have paid attention to Nakasone’s ‘Karatedo Taikan’ from 1938.
I confess I don’t know the Shito Ryu kata Fernando references, yet Mabuni Kenwa, appearing in Nakasone’s work, would be very familiar with those earlier kata.
I appreciate the comments on the social context of trying to develop cross-group standards, and the parallels to Jing Mo Association in China. That is something I hadn’t thought of before and I can see the relevance.
Just an aside on the Jing Mo Association forms. Member systems in the Jing Wu, each system begins their students with the same 10 forms prior to studying the forms of their own style.
Ernest Rothrock used to talk to me quite a bit about how the Eagle Claw system (Ying Jow Pai) began with a set of 10 common Jing Mo forms. He considered them way to advanced for the normal beginner and requiring many years of preparation for them alone.
I haven’t been following what he is using to develop his new students since the full time switch to Eagle Claw (as my focus has been on our joint Tai Chi work), but he felt another approach would be more sound, to prepare the student.
Where the Chinese took a high road and developed a common set of advanced forms to begin training, I have a different thought about the Okinawan example.
In a nutshell, here are some of my thoughts on the developing open kata practices.
I’m of the impression, preparing secondary school students (among the elite as most Okinawan’s didn’t send their children to school) for military service using the open karate training for physical development, following group orders, and basic karate via the Pinan kata (admittedly not the most basic forms) may have been the reason those forms were created.
Moving karate from private instruction to large group drill, Itosu’s Pinan kata began to prove their worth.
Then the exercise of Funakoshi and Mabuni (and others) training larger groups in Japan had to raise awareness of further possibilities. That and the force driven from Japan to ‘nationalize’ instruction seem probable instigators to the 1937 Karatedo Promotion Society, and perhaps also for the 1940 Karate-do Special Committee.
I wonder that they were seeking a ‘public’ karate, for public good. Self defense, physical enhancement and group practice. And, that their intent was not to replace a groups curriculum but rather provide something common enough that those who develop the ‘right’ skill could move into one of the specialized Okinawan instructors. In that case the goal of this development may not have been to change any of the ‘systems’.
I believe this is where the choice of review of this potential comes in.
All of our programs, as currently constituted work, we’re living proof of that. I’ve been training young people in Isshinryu for the past 25 years. I train young people with exactly the same curriculum as I do adults, and because I keep the group size small, permit them to train part time but not lower my standards, those young people who spend the 7 to 9 years average, develop into fairly adequate sho-dan material.
For teaching children I’ve never found reason to ‘simplify the course’, but then keeping the group small allows for some tradeoff advantages.
On the other hand, what I do in a small group setting, would not work well in a very large group as the personal focus we offer would be diluted. My kata would work, but it would not develop IMO in the same manner.
In my mind, I see a clear case for a simplified ‘public karate’, good for youth, part time adults and older people, using simple kata, which include developmental kata, basic self defense techniques and appropriate drills. I’m of the opinion, formal study of kata ‘bunkai’ would not be the best focus for this program. A program which would give some of the basics of self defense, physical enhancement, etc. for those who don’t spend the time into deeper studies.
A good program like that could also become a feeder program for the more talented students into the traditional arts.
I don’t propose current ‘schools’ change their practice, as ‘freedom ‘ rules, for good or for bad. But I wonder about the offering of more ‘public’ karate, unlike the watered down McDojo variety.
As far as the 12 promotion society kata, the concept is similar to the Sutrisno Weapons kata. In Bo ,Kama and others, the forms are enhancements on the earlier form, working with much the same embusen. Having learnt the first form, on the 2nd form you can simply concentrate on the differences, and gain synergy in technique development. From that experience, I do understand what those 12 kata are doing. That and the fact the Sutrisno system, uses these kata as a black belt drill, but that’s another topic.
One thing I do believe, there is little need to develop more basic kata. There are enough there to simply consider using them. Such as
Promotion Kata 1-12
Fukyugata Kata
Heian 1-5
Of course there are many other variations possible, but some such curriculum would be sufficient to keep ‘general’ students busy for quite some time. And I can be charged with just re-inventing Shotokan.
The difference being, however, is ‘Public Karate’ isn’t intended to feed the students into the traditional programs, instead being a complete program in itself. It is only in those cases where the students excel and need greater challenges, would I consider them candidates for the traditional studies.
My thoughts on this grow ever more complex.
On this I’ll stop at this.
Victor
No comments:
Post a Comment