Kata - More than meets the eyes

[Hawke]

Hey All,

In my experience I have noticed that certain groups will get more meaning behind the katas/forms due to their ethnicity or religion in certain arts. I have found other arts more open behind their moves. Once in a while a gem of an instructor comes along and opens the flood gates.

When I asked some students and instructors why certain meanings behind the kata/technique were kept hidden some of the responses were:

this technique should be kept within the race/religion
this technique should be kept until the student has proven his/her loyalty

I understand that doing the British invasion of Malaysia, the old men taught the boys a dance with a scarf. The invaders called them "girlie men" (family forum) because they were dancing with scarfs. Interesting when the Malaysians fought back they did similar movements, but using a sword instead of a scarf. They were hiding the movements in plain sight. I also heard the Hawaiians did the same using their cultural dance to hide the true meaning. Also slaves in South America (Brazil?) learn to hide Capoeira as a dance. Not sure how much of this is fact.

Some people promised their teacher they will not teach the meaning behind the art, so they send students to the original teacher of the art.

What's your opinion?

Another instructor mentioned that movements are hidden until the student is ready to learn the meaning then slowly removes one layer and another layer as the student matures in the art.

Would you tell a beginner that a block is a block or that the block is really a strike? If you choose to withhold the information at what point will you tell your students the other meanings behind the same move?

I noticed a trend where people are showing the meanings behind the katas in books and DVDs.

Some argue that the public has a right to know.

Others believe that certain techniques should not be taught to the general public.

 

[Steel Tiger]

I am definitely of the opinion that there is more to forms than is obvious from an initial viewing, and there are reasons to keep back information from students for a time, but none of them are cultural or religious, or involve some sort of oath of fealty. My students learn in gradations and they are encouraged, at higher levels, to develop an individual understanding of the forms.

For instance, my beginning students learn the Tiger form because the gross movements teach them essential basics of gongfu. But as they advance they do not leave this form behind but continue to practice it and gather new insight into it. Some of this I impart and some they learn for themselves. But I can only teach them my interpretation of the form. And yes, blocks become strikes, strikes become takedowns and throws. The form evolves through the developing understanding of the student.

As to other reasons to withhold information, I don't know. It is relatively easy to keep information within a specific group like a race or a religion, you just don't teach it to those outside that group. The fact that many MAs have escaped from this sort of situation shows that people seem to pay only lip-service to such concepts.

Martial arts as cultural artefacts are very interesting. Capoeira as we know it did develop from a desire to hide a martial skill, but the hiding itself did not produce hidden aspects of the art. When you watch a Capoeirista you can see the footwork, you can see the kicks, but without a martial reference you do not realise it is more than a dance.

Many cultures teach armed martial techniques without reference to the weapons that are involved. They might involve a stick or a scarf, but the footwork and the hand motions are accurate. The problem I can see with this is that it does not teach the feel for the weapon, especially the weight. And it can develop into an entirely new fighting art. For example, the European quarterstaff was originally a training tool for learning how to use a two-handed sword, but it became a fighting method in its own right.

Do I think the public has a right to know. Well no not really. Its all about understanding. I will not teach a new student the more complex, advanced if you like, techniques simply because they do not yet have the essential techniques that will allow them to understand and properly impliment the later techniques.

 

[chinto]

there are at least 5 techniques for every move in all of the kata in the system I study. that is the minimum number there, and so I would suggest that it would and does take time to see and find the smallest number of techniques in each kata in our system.
I find no reason to think that ours is the only system that is that way.. it takes time to begin to think in terms of how the body moves and how it does not and how that applies to what the kata is trying to teach you.

 

[tshadowchaser]

Many forms can be seen to have more meaning than meets the eye at first sight. A beginner needs to learn beginning moves and not always be looking for hidden meanings. As the student learns and advances they may find other meanings be hide a move or they may have to be shown that a certain moves is actually something else. I think over time a good student will realize that there may be more than meets the eye in any form and they will ask if "such and such" could be a different meaning of the move.
DO i tell a student that a block is a strike YES because I tell them that from day one but that dose not mean they are able to make that block a strike .

 

[Sukerkin]

I concur with the sentiments above as to the layered nature of kata. Altho' it appears true that some schools have secret or hidden techniques, largely this is a mythology brought on by fiction.

The secret nature of kata is that, as has been noted above, the depths and applications become revealed the more you study. That also applies to teaching kata too - get the physical forms somewhat correct, teach the mindset and focus to go with the moves, show a bunkai ... simmer for a few years . If you drown the student with detail and alternatives it will hinder the learning process (I feel). It also robs them of those wonderful moments when they figure something out for themselves.

 

[exile]

That also applies to teaching kata too - get the physical forms somewhat correct, teach the mindset and focus to go with the moves, show a bunkai ... simmer for a few years . If you drown the student with detail and alternatives it will hinder the learning process (I feel). It also robs them of those wonderful moments when they figure something out for themselves.

Absolutely. It's like showing students in a math class a bunch of equations of different kinds, and then forcing them to memorize the particular steps in solving specific examples of each kind, leaving it at that. What you really want to do, to teach mathematics, is to teach the general method of solution, the way to think about each kind of equation, and then provide one or two 'worked examples' so people can see how the method works in concrete cases—and then lots and lots of new problems so people can 'work the knowledge'. The method is the important thing. And in the same way, students shouldn't be memorizing bunkai; what they should be learning in the method of deriving plausible, realistic interpretations of kata movements. The main goal of specific bunkai that you provide is to show them how the method can be applied to yield a useful result. It's a way of thinking, ultimately, that you're trying to get students to acquire when confronted with kata.

 

[kidswarrior]

The secret nature of kata is that, as has been noted above, the depths and applications become revealed the more you study. That also applies to teaching kata too - get the physical forms somewhat correct, teach the mindset and focus to go with the moves, show a bunkai ... simmer for a few years .

The method is the important thing. And in the same way, students shouldn't be memorizing bunkai; what they should be learning in the method of deriving plausible, realistic interpretations of kata movements. The main goal of specific bunkai that you provide is to show them how the method can be applied to yield a useful result.

I'm a little embarrassed to be following some of these very formidable posters, but I did want to say that first, I agree with both that it takes time as Skn makes clear, and second, it's a way of thinking, not rote memorization, as exile articulates. I like to say of the latter point that we need to understand the principle behind the solo movements (again, as covered by skn) then the possible applications become, in my experience, almost limitless--staying within the basic strategic vision of one's own art that is. Chinto says there are at least five applications for each such movement, and I'd agree that's right thinking. And maybe, there are subtleties within those five, so the applications increase exponentially.

 

[Sukerkin]

<snip lots of insights>
what they should be learning in the method of deriving plausible, realistic interpretations of kata movements.
<snip more intelligent stuff>
It's a way of thinking, ultimately, that you're trying to get students to acquire when confronted with kata.

That's so important it was well worth re-emphasising. It's interesting to see it in action too whilst teaching or assisting.

Just today, I was running through some of the Bangai no Bu forms with one of my class mates and saw him make what I thought was a fairly poor example of an overhead block versus a cut from his front (poor enough to get him killed I reckoned).

I started to try and point out what I thought could be improved when he stopped me in my tracks by telling me "But the third guy wasn't there {points to front} he was there {points to the right of where orthodox kata states the first attacker to be}".

What I had seen as overly rotated hips and a drooping, receding sword-angle suddenly made sense in the context of a cut coming from the right rather than the front.

What I'm getting at here was that it wasn't kata as laid out in our 'orthodoxy' but what it most certainly was was the application of priniciple or method to a perceiving 'problem'.

I think that it is something very important, as both Kds and Exile have touched on, that a student learns not only the techniques and the formalised kata that are used to demonstrate those techniques but also the ability to apply those techiques outside of the orthodox strictures (the "worked examples" as Rob so greatly put it).

 

[jks9199]

There's no one real answer to how much depth there is in kata or forms; it's just not a "yes, there's more than meets the eye" or "no, there isn't" issue.

I'd say there are three main approaches to forms or kata: instructional, demonstrative, and physical/developmental. Instructional forms are designed to incorporate proven sequences, combinations, or principles. These are the ones that are like an encyclopedia or guidebook to a particular style. Demonstrative forms are intended as a show piece; they're there to be watched. Some may commemorate a particular event, perhaps a battle, some are purely artistic (like lots of modern wushu or XMA forms), and some are just pieces for a demo. The physical or developmental forms are things like tai chi, qigong exercises, sanchin kata, and others that are really mostly about either a physical or mental workout, more than teaching techniques or demonstrating something from the style.

So, when you look at a particular form and try to decide if there is more depth to it than the obvious interpretations -- the first thing you have to do is ask what the form's purpose is. A demonstrative or developmental form may not have much more technical depth than what you see; that's not their purpose. But the instructional forms do probably have at least a few things that aren't there on surface study alone.

Once you've determined that there is more depth in a particular form -- then you nleed to look at the story the form is telling. Maybe it's just "this is what to do against a punch to your face" -- but that story will start to point you to what else the form may contain. You have to apply the principles of your style to the form; if you practice a principle in a drill outside the form, it probably should be reflected somewhere in your instructional forms.

Once you've done that, then you have to actually try out your discovery or interpretation with a partner... If it's too dependent on the opponent doing everything just right, it's probably not a valid interpretation. If you have to make changes that move from the principles -- than, again, you probably didn't figure out what you think you did.

 

[DavidCC]

Hey All,

In my experience I have noticed that certain groups will get more meaning behind the katas/forms due to their ethnicity or religion in certain arts. I have found other arts more open behind their moves. Once in a while a gem of an instructor comes along and opens the flood gates.

When I asked some students and instructors why certain meanings behind the kata/technique were kept hidden some of the responses were:

this technique should be kept within the race/religion
this technique should be kept until the student has proven his/her loyalty

really?? still??