Does karate need to evolve?

[Steve]

How is this not kata? Is it any different than the iaido practicing the cut? He explains the concepts, imagine he is talking about karate. First practice shot is at 4:30 mark if your impatient.

Ultimately, I don't have a dog in this hunt. So, I say train what you like, and have fun. I don't think doing kata (whether it's like the gun guy above or the more orthodox kata that we think of) is going to make a person worse at anything. And some folks really get a lot of spiritual fulfillment from it, which is terrific. There is also a very legitimate cultural element, which I totally understand.

But from an objective training perspective, does kata actually promote skill development? And if so, does it promote skill development more efficiently than more dynamic drills? Or is it just something different?

In basic training, I learned to march and to fold my t-shirts into six in squares. In the remaining 3+ years of my enlistment, I used those skills zero times. But we did them because, at least, at the time, it was part of it. We did those things because everyone did those things. And we were told that it taught us some relevant skills, like attention to detail. But it was also widely known that only an idiot would ever use those t-shirts after folding them the first time. The trick (that everyone including the instructors knew) is that you lived out of your laundry bag and never touched the inspection ready clothes. So, why did we do those (and many, many other things like them)? Did they actually teach us anything other than to march and fold our laundry? At best, it's an open question.

That's how I think about kata. Does it teach you anything other than to perform a choreographed set of movements slowly and deliberately? At best, it's an open question.

 

[hoshin1600]

But from an objective training perspective, does kata actually promote skill development? And if so, does it promote skill development more efficiently than more dynamic drills? Or is it just something different?

I will answer the second question first.
I feel it's just something different. Another approach. The big question long ago was, how to train. Kata/ forms was just one societies solution to the problem.
Short answer to the first question is Yes. But maybe that begs the question, what skills and how developed can kata make it in my view kata does the same thing as drills. Kata is a methodology.
As an interesting side note. Japanese manufacturing also uses the term kata.
The term is used when you want to apply the method of...
What do we do? Define it exactly.

How can we make it better? Define an adjustment we want to try.

Did it achieve the desired results? Test it out.

Adjust if needed and repeat the process until you can't get it any better.

 

[GojuTommy]

His basic complaint is that karate isn't MMA.

Again people making **** up.

 

[GojuTommy]

Kinda sounds to

Sounds to me like you don’t sweat enough and not sore enough after a good workout or training session.

Whatever you say, but you can sweat and be sore and still not know how to fight

 

[GojuTommy]

Most of this is my view. I will add a response to #2: because it's harder that way. Some of what we (some of us who teach) do is not directly about fighting/martial skill. Some of it is just personal development. It could be done in sports and other areas, as wel - we just choose to do it within martial arts. So some things we do are just about what the person gains by doing those things.

That’s fine, but if being better at fighting isn’t a side effect of martial arts training, are you really training a martial art?

 

[Doc]

As I understand karate and it’s history, there’s been a constant fluidity and evolution of karate and what would eventually be known as karate.
However it seems to me that by and large karate has stagnated.

Sure there’s some people doing some new stuff like kudo, but even that came around in ‘81.
We’ve got karate combat, but if you look at the comments there’s supposed ‘karateka’ all over their videos saying “this isn’t karate” so it’s hard to say there’s any major evolution happening within the karate community as a whole.

I was an early subscriber to the Karate Culture YT channel, and don’t hold modern karate against those who enjoy it. However the question about the lack of ‘middle age group’ people, not the young kids and not the 40+ crowd in karate shows that karate is falling behind in some metrics.
Sure targeting children will keep dojos open and the style alive as some of those kids will be lifers themselves, but that’s a survival via life support imho.

I believe for karate to have a renaissance and have a chance to thrive again, there need to be some changes that occur. Changes that require some people to become students again to learn new ways of doing things.

I think a style that offers 3 K training side by side with honest pressure testing can exist. I think pointing fighting dojos can exist while karate combat style dojos also become more common, heck I believe one dojo can successfully do both.

The one thing I believe most of all is this idea of never changing ‘traditions’ that are largely less than a century old is going to kill karate especially in the west.

While everything you stated is very well said and on point, I think you're missing a critical aspect of the evolution of what is called "karate" in general, and methods of its Japanese Origin specifically. The original "kara-te-do," by definition, is done the "way" the prevailing leader or creator of the system designates. Therefore, its mandates are, Japanese Cultural Mandates that by design only allow slow changes, if any, to core material. The original focus of Japanese Karate was never about practicality or function, unlike the Okinawans, but instead, a cultural mandate of discipline and conformity in what was essentially a physical education model. As a young man, I grew up watching Karate follow the Judo Model, and practitioners were known as "karate-do players," much like Judoka were also called "Judo-players" because both were considered "cultural competitive activities" as their primary goals. I watched as slowly it expanded on its original training that focused exclusively on kata as its primary training activity, with minimal 1, 2, and 3-step sparring, to Funakoshi's son pushing more toward competition "free sparring." Karate-do Player was appropriate then. But as an export, karate undertook scrutiny of "fighting" and "self-defense" that wasn't a part of its cultural origin. They dropped the "players" moniker, followed by the "do" designation as selling the art became an issue and a priority. It is here where its cultural revolution really began to the modern product, but even with that, at its core is a set of basics that practitioners adhere to maintain the identity of what many see as a traditional activity sprinkled with some modern ideas, and in some cases necessities. Therefore, even today, there are significant albeit subtle differences between what you see as "karate" versus "Karate-do," and the now-extinct for the most part, "Karate-do Players" of my youth.

 

[hoshin1600]

I think the disconnect is that most people only apply the method and think of the solo practice. It's the solo part that limits the development not the kata method. That's why I chose the judo kata clip. But you have to apply what was learned from the kata method. That's the entire point that most people miss. If a Toyota plant only did engineering experiments for the sake of experiments they would go out of business. You got to apply what you learned to the shop floor.

 

[hoshin1600]

That’s fine, but if being better at fighting isn’t a side effect of martial arts training, are you really training a martial art?

I dont know ask the Tai chi guys and the obscure Chinese weapons guys.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I’ve been around this forum for a long time and heard a lot of definitions of kata. This thread seems to be applying the loosest, non traditional definition I’ve ever heard.

Kata, as I understand it, refers to a repetable drill. The strict view of the movements has more to do with the way the arts are taught than the nature of the kata. If you use the same setup to introduce a specific single-leg to new students, that’s much the same thing. As is a specific drill with the mitts.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Maybe most gun fighting is garbage. For precisely that reason.

Gun fighting training has to start somewhere. New students usually need a simple drill with limited variables, regardless of the topic, in my experience.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That’s fine, but if being better at fighting isn’t a side effect of martial arts training, are you really training a martial art?

False dichotomy. You can do both.

 

[GojuTommy]

While everything you stated is very well said and on point, I think you're missing a critical aspect of the evolution of what is called "karate" in general, and methods of its Japanese Origin specifically. The original "kara-te-do," by definition, is done the "way" the prevailing leader or creator of the system designates. Therefore, its mandates are, Japanese Cultural Mandates that by design only allow slow changes, if any, to core material. The original focus of Japanese Karate was never about practicality or function, unlike the Okinawans, but instead, a cultural mandate of discipline and conformity in what was essentially a physical education model. As a young man, I grew up watching Karate follow the Judo Model, and practitioners were known as "karate-do players," much like Judoka were also called "Judo-players" because both were considered "cultural competitive activities" as their primary goals. I watched as slowly it expanded on its original training that focused exclusively on kata as its primary training activity, with minimal 1, 2, and 3-step sparring, to Funakoshi's son pushing more toward competition "free sparring." Karate-do Player was appropriate then. But as an export, karate undertook scrutiny of "fighting" and "self-defense" that wasn't a part of its cultural origin. They dropped the "players" moniker, followed by the "do" designation as selling the art became an issue and a priority. It is here where its cultural revolution really began to the modern product, but even with that, at its core is a set of basics that practitioners adhere to maintain the identity of what many see as a traditional activity sprinkled with some modern ideas, and in some cases necessities. Therefore, even today, there are significant albeit subtle differences between what you see as "karate" versus "Karate-do," and the now-extinct for the most part, "Karate-do Players" of my youth.

The -do was added post WWII when the occupying forces outlawed fascist, nationalist, or militaristic activities.
It was added as a way to survive because no one knew how long the US military would be running the country nor how long the ban would be in place. Turns out it ended very quickly, but still at the time they had no way of knowing

 

[GojuTommy]

False dichotomy. You can do both.

I never said you couldn’t, just said you can do one without the other.

I can run down to my basement turn on my sauna, And spend 30 minutes sweat every day for the next year and not get better at fighting
Meanwhile I can do a minute of light playful sparring every day for a year in a cold space and have some improvement to my ability to fight.

 

[Oily Dragon]

I dont know ask the Tai chi guys and the obscure Chinese weapons guys.

Yes?

 

[Hyoho]

This is judo kata. Each throw is a different kata.

This is iaido sword kata, there are 7 different kata in this clip.
These are true japanese kata. These types of kata existed long before the term was applied to karate forms. So how can the term kata be defined as a long sequence of movements in the way most people define the word?

I'm not saying kata is not long forms, I'm just trying to point out that the long Chinese form style past down to Okinawa is not the defining characteristics. It's more about the training methodology.

As stated below the video this is "Renmei Iaido". It's a made up set of forms taken from classical schools. It is purely "kata". It was designed to introduce kendoka to the sword. At one time ZNKR had a purge insisting that all kendo teachers in Japan should do it. I was tasked with the job of teaching them in my prefecture. It is totally devoid of any creative visualization. In actual fact in competition the one who does it closed to the manual wins. I was admonished many times by my sensei (a hachidan) for trying to put character into my form. Also the renmei "What grade are you taking next?" was prevelant. Although I did practice renmei Iaido and am grateful for the fundamentals it taught me. I moved on as I improved to classical.

So when we talk about classical schools themselves its different. They take what was a supposedly tried and tested killing technique (waza). to study this waza they break it down into sections called...........kata.

Sad to say watching the video almost has me dropping off to sleep. I practiced karate for some years and sincerely hope that it does not turn into something like this. When I see a karate embu I look for creative visualization and character.

 

[Steve]

I think the disconnect is that most people only apply the method and think of the solo practice. It's the solo part that limits the development not the kata method. That's why I chose the judo kata clip. But you have to apply what was learned from the kata method. That's the entire point that most people miss. If a Toyota plant only did engineering experiments for the sake of experiments they would go out of business. You got to apply what you learned to the shop floor.

That’s a dilemma for many students because they never get to fight. The ones who do get better at karate or whatever they are training.

 

[Steve]

Kata, as I understand it, refers to a repetable drill. The strict view of the movements has more to do with the way the arts are taught than the nature of the kata. If you use the same setup to introduce a specific single-leg to new students, that’s much the same thing. As is a specific drill with the mitts.

I wouldn’t call that a kata and personally, I don’t see that as the same. I think kata is the subset. All kata is repetitive, but not all repetition is kata.

 

[GojuTommy]

I dont know ask the Tai chi guys and the obscure Chinese weapons guys.

The definition of the word would say no.

 

[GojuTommy]

That’s a dilemma for many students because they never get to fight. The ones who do get better at karate or whatever they are training.

It’s not that most don’t get to fight, most choose not to.
There’s plenty of opportunities. While I tea-dojo competition isn’t ideal, it’s better than nothing, but still you can find an amateur promotion in every medium sized city/metro area (at least in the US) so for most who never fight it’s a choice, rather than an unfortunate happenstance.

 

[GojuTommy]

As stated below the video this is "Renmei Iaido". It's a made up set of forms taken from classical schools. It is purely "kata". It was designed to introduce kendoka to the sword. At one time ZNKR had a purge insisting that all kendo teachers in Japan should do it. I was tasked with the job of teaching them in my prefecture. It is totally devoid of any creative visualization. In actual fact in competition the one who does it closed to the manual wins. I was admonished many times by my sensei (a hachidan) for trying to put character into my form. Also the renmei "What grade are you taking next?" was prevelant. Although I did practice renmei Iaido and am grateful for the fundamentals it taught me. I moved on as I improved to classical.

So when we talk about classical schools themselves its different. They take what was a supposedly tried and tested killing technique (waza). to study this waza they break it down into sections called...........kata.

Sad to say watching the video almost has me dropping off to sleep. I practiced karate for some years and sincerely hope that it does not turn into something like this. When I see a karate embu I look for creative visualization and character.

The simple fact that kata competitions exist and are so common for adults I would argue that means karate is already there.