Serendipity
is often something that has worked in my favor when I have tried to piece
together the reasons things changed in karate. Change that affected all karate
in different ways.
It
is clear that when karate moved to Japan it was not different from the way it
was taught on Okinawa. But in time it changed. What I found was an old issue of
the ‘Journal of Asian Martial Arts’,
one of the quality martial publications.
When
I moved to Arizona I had to dispose of much of my martial library. Hundreds of
pieces then of less relevance, more for reasons of space and being able to haul
it here. This issue of JAMA was one of several I kept, more out of chance than
anything, a memory of what was in those issues. Almost every issue had
something of relevance to me as well as many articles that did not fit my
needs.
So
in JAMA Volume 16, Number 3 an article by Giles Hopkins titled “Politics and Karate: Historical Influence
on the Practice of Goju-Ryu” did not necessarily make an impression on me.
As an Isshinryu stylist I am only tangentially interested in Goju discussion.
But reading it today I see how valuable Giles Hopkins discussion really is.
And
the shame is likely most of you have not seen it.
What
he explores is how economics and politics (as social pressure)
affected Okinawan karate when he then examines the account of the 1936 meeting
of the Okinawan Masters and the subsequent events.
That
meeting was sponsored by an Okinawan living in Japan who published a small
newspaper. Nakasone Genwa was passionately interested in promoting karate and
also published several books on that theme. He called the meeting on Okinawa,
along with Miyagi Chojun, to promote all karate to a better place in Japan for
the good of Okiawa.
In
my own poor words I will try to summarize that detailed article.
First
you must realize Okinawa was very cash poor against the rest of Japan. It was
not well regarded and almost influence in Japan and no control of what occurred
to itself. Depressed 54,000 Okinawan’s moved away, often sending money home to
help make up for what Japan wasn’t doing for Okinawa.
Japan
was coming off of a war, part of which made them realize being able to
strengthen the young was important to Japan’s interests. Okinawa had already
done part of that, claiming karate in the school system was both quasi-military
education and for physical education. They had also begun a public education
campaign to state the purpose was for physical education and not for brutal
hand to hand combat. Miyagi himself had
written that karate could be used for its health benefits for the nation in
1933 clearly thinking about how to popularize the public perception of karate.
The
1936 meeting primarily addressed several issues which addressed the politics
behind karate in the overall Japan which Okinawa was a part.
Foremost
the adoption of the recast of the name for karate to mean empty hand, was to
encourage Japan away from the reality of the China roots to the art. Japan had
been at war with China and they agreed to change the term to moderate any
Japanese feelings. They agreed that a more pubic form of karate used for strengthen
the people by using new forms to be developed. After that meeting a group
formed to commission those new forms be created.
Those
forms, 10 of them, were created however the war intervened and much changed.
They were never formally adopted. They were published in Nakasone’s 1938 publication
of the ‘Karate Do Taiken’.
At
heart those things were done to make Okinawa appear more sensitive to the views
of the Japanese state. The island had partially already done this by the
adoption of karate training in the
school systems.
In
Japan Miyagi and Mabuni published books working towards the same goals. For
example Mabuni only showed more fundamental bunkai for kata. The karate in
Japan did not show a great amount of the bunkai actually in the kata to
emphasize the value in karate was more to physically strengthen of the
practitioners. As for Miyagi ,Hopkins
suggests that is why the division was made for the kihon and kaishu kata
of Goju Ryu. (But that is not so much why I find this so interesting). I
believe we can see how these changes manifested themselves in how karate became
what ie became in Japan as time passed. Developed more along the lines stated
from that conference in 1936.
I
admit I have left many details that Hopkins Sensei made out of this discussion.
But everything has always been in change as it still is.
Karate
may not have changed on Okinawa, but many instructors also taught in those
schools over time. Then after the war when Japan was to have taken over the
administration of Okinawa, many of the features of the Japanese karate were
adopted on Okinawa. Then and of consequence to this day.
Economics
and Politics
still are having an effect to change karate. When one thinks about the changes
of commeralization, the need for insurance and government standards which
affect karate. The need for many schools to show a profit to exist. We can see
those new pressures still exist but in changing different forms.
With
the worldwide spread of forms of karate, worldwide organizations, the spread of
competition and many other things we can clearly see that all of that also
becomes the politics (social pressure) of today.
I
believe the more clearly see what occurred in the past we can reflect on what
is occurring today.
Patrick McCarthy has
the details of the meeting of 1936 on his site at https://irkrs.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-1936-meeting-of-okinawan-karate.html#!/2013/08/the-1936-meeting-of-okinawan-karate.html
Addendum:
More
serendipity, among the few volumes I saved was Journal of Asian Martial Arts Volume 8 – Number 1 from 1999.
It
has an article by Fred Lohse called “Self
–Transformation & the Martial Art in the American Cultural Environment”.
A perfect look forward to what happened in more current times to karate in
America. IMO it is a continuation of how (politics or the American Social
Pressures) are changing the arts. Fred goes into great detail how a non-Okinawan
society moved the arts into new layers of justification for change. It does not
address the economic pressure also
causing changes, such as karate becoming a small business, etc.
And of
course we must recognize those pressures have continued to make Okinawa change
karate there too.
This is also worth listening to:
The Shuhari Concept: Imitate, Innovate, Invent
I miss the days of thoughtful discussion, like the Koshi Discussion Group, and the original CyberDojo. Maybe it's a sign that people are actually spending more time training than talking now. Probably not. Be well, Victor!