Who gets to change a kata or technique…

[Gerry Seymour]

There are some great songs out there. Take the "Star Spangled Banner." It has been rendered many times over the past century. Whitney Houstin, Jimi Hendrix (instrumental only), and various pop, soul and operatic singers. Each has put their individual touch and artistic interpretation on it.

Yet, the words have not changed - The meaning has not changed - Only the pronunciation, inflection and pitch. This allows each singer to explore the sounds, have it fit within their physical vocal range, and make the song "their's," without changing the message the song was designed to convey and pass on.

I like this. I'd also say that key changes are analogous to both highlighting strengths (doing a higher version of a kick, because you damned well can) and dealing with weaknesses (doing a slightly lower kick, because you are less stable on the high kick). And pace changes are analogous to...pace changes, as well as to intensity changes.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

"I love MA." "I hate MA."

If your form has "I love MA" 6 times, to reduce your form into only 1 time make sense.

Also If your form only has "I love MA" but without "I hate MA", To add "I hate MA" into your form also make sense.

After I had replaced a jumping front kick with a MT flying knee, nobody can say that my long fist system doesn't have flying knee. After I had replaced a 360 degree backward floor sweep with a TKD spin hook kick, nobody can say that my long fist system doesn't have spin hook kick.

 

[seasoned]

In practical terms, if you change a form that is used in promotion exams, you should expect to score lower.

Exactly, it's called standardization which are the roots of any art. Once we have adhered to the standard all else is a hybrid which frees up that standard kata and gives it freedom and life....I hope I'm adding to your thought line and not detracting from it........

 

[Flying Crane]

I had forgotten the name for it, but yes. And this does get into the same question. I ask about my own system: how much has to change - and how quickly - before it ceases to be the same art? I think that's the same thought experiment, and there really isn't an answer, just principles to discuss (which, of course, is the main value of a good thought experiment like The Ship of Theseus).

Im not familiar with the ship of Theseus experiment. But in my opinion, it can be possible to change the forms/curriculum dramatically, and not lose the identity of the system. In my system for example, what is important are the primary principles and the foundational approach to how we develop them. The techniques are the examples of the principles in action. Forms are more complex examples of the principles in action. We could eliminate forms altogether, or I could create my own forms, and it would still be Tibetan white crane, as long as the foundational principles are intact.

If a system’s identity depends on a specific curriculum /set of kata done without variation, then I guess any little change would alter the identity. Personally I’m Glad to not have such constraints.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Im not familiar with the ship of Theseus experiment. But in my opinion, it can be possible to change the forms/curriculum dramatically, and not lose the identity of the system. In my system for example, what is important are the primary principles and the foundational approach to how we develop them. The techniques are the examples of the principles in action. Forms are more complex examples of the principles in action. We could eliminate forms altogether, or I could create my own forms, and it would still be Tibetan white crane, as long as the foundational principles are intact.

If a system’s identity depends on a specific curriculum /set of kata done without variation, then I guess any little change would alter the identity. Personally I’m Glad to not have such constraints.

How do you feel about spelling? I mean, I guess we could just make up our own symbols to mean whatever we were trying to say. Are we constrained by the formality of spelling and grammar?

My point is, rules (or kata) are not meant to constrain, but to communicate.

 

[Flying Crane]

How do you feel about spelling? I mean, I guess we could just make up our own symbols to mean whatever we were trying to say. Are we constrained by the formality of spelling and grammar?

My point is, rules (or kata) are not meant to constrain, but to communicate.

I don’t see these as a meaningful comparison.

I can agree that kata is meant to communicate. But the exact choreography of a kata does not represent perfection, meaning that the choreography could take an infinite variety and still communicate equally well. Kata does not have the same structure as language, that makes language and spelling have meaning.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

How do you feel about spelling? I mean, I guess we could just make up our own symbols to mean whatever we were trying to say. Are we constrained by the formality of spelling and grammar?

My point is, rules (or kata) are not meant to constrain, but to communicate.

The spelling of words in English has changed over time. It’s still the same language.

 

[Flying Crane]

The spelling of words in English has changed over time. It’s still the same language.

This is a good point, and there may be some additional comparisons wrapped up here that make sense.

Maybe a better way to look at it is in telling a story. I might learn a story from my elders, that I then tell to my son. However, I may not use the exact same words to tell the story, as were used when it was told to me. That does not make it a different story. That does not mean that the meaning of the story was less well conveyed. It could, if my telling was quite poor. But it does not automatically make it so. I might even change some key elements of the story, to make it something to which my son can better relate. In that case, perhaps my telling of the story is better, more relevant.

I think kata is more like the telling of a story, than like the spelling of words. Telling it the same can be great. There may be no need to change how it is told, and someone who lacks talent as a storyteller should perhaps just stick with the script as it was first written. But it can be changed up and told differently, with results that are equally good, or even better.

Furthermore, someone could come up with a very different story, a new story, that conveys the same point and the same meaning. Because it isn’t the specific sequence of words that matters so much as the meaning and the story as a while. And someone could create a different and new kata, the practice of which bestows the same benefits, and maybe even better. Because the skills that the kata helps develop are more important that the specific choreography. The kata is a tool to be used, not an end product in and of itself.

 

[isshinryuronin]

I can agree that kata is meant to communicate. But the exact choreography of a kata does not represent perfection, meaning that the choreography could take an infinite variety and still communicate equally well.

Sometimes true. What's missing is that kata is not just a random collection of techniques - it's often a collection of a series of techniques, where the efficacy of one move is dependent on the one(s) before it. The sequence is of utmost importance. This is the essence of bunkai. Thus, there is not "an infinite variety." If the choreography is going to be changed, the particular sequence of moves must be treated as one entity.

Taking this most important provision into account, I agree the exact choreography is not important. In kata, the individual sequences (usually 2-5 moves) comprise the various lessons a particular kata is teaching.

As to who can change a kata, my default answer would be that system's Master. Theoretically, like the Pope, he is the one responsible for the integrity and interpretation of the system. In practice, the organizational branching and fragmentation of the style yields multiple "masters" who claim authority. Hopefully, they have the high and complete understanding of the principles and bunkai to make wise choices. Anyone with lessor wisdom is playing around with something they don't really understand, and any changes they make can result in some parts of the kata being ineffective, as I noted in my earlier post.

To be sure, kata has been changed over the centuries. Higaonna Kanryo changed the forms he learned in China. His student, Miyagi Chojun, made further changes. His student, Shimabuku Tatsuo, changed the kata from what he was taught. So kata have never been unchanging monoliths.

This brings us back to the question, "Who can change kata?" (without destroying it) You can! IF you are on a level with Higaonna, Miyagi or Shimabuku. But I think martial artists of that caliber are far and few between.

 

[Flying Crane]

Sometimes true. What's missing is that kata is not just a random collection of techniques - it's often a collection of a series of techniques, where the efficacy of one move is dependent on the one(s) before it. The sequence is of utmost importance. This is the essence of bunkai. Thus, there is not "an infinite variety." If the choreography is going to be changed, the particular sequence of moves must be treated as one entity.

Taking this most important provision into account, I agree the exact choreography is not important. In kata, the individual sequences (usually 2-5 moves) comprise the various lessons a particular kata is teaching.

As to who can change a kata, the default answer would be that system's Master. Theoretically, like the Pope, he is the one responsible for the integrity and interpretation of the system. In practice, the organizational branching and fragmentation of the style yields multiple "masters" who claim authority. Hopefully, they have the high and complete understanding of the principles and bunkai to make wise choices. Anyone with lessor wisdom is playing around with something they don't really understand, and any changes they make can result in some parts of the kata being ineffective, as I noted in my earlier post.

Anyone can create or change kata as an exercise or for performance competition. But I'd ask, do we need more kata? There are more than enough to go around. More than enough lessons to learn and master.

To be sure, kata has been changed over the centuries. Higaonna Kanryo changed the forms he learned in China. His student, Miyagi Chojun made further changes. His student, Shimabuku Tatsuo changed the kata from what he was taught. So kata have never been unchanging monoliths.

This brings us back to the question, "Who can change kata?" (without destroying it) You can! IF you are on a level with Higaonna, Miyagi or Shimabuku. But I think martial artists of that caliber are far and few between.

I understand a lot of people also feel this way about it.

 

[skribs]

I would fail you on your performance of the Palgwae forms because of changes your school has made.

In the later forms, I don't even know if "changes" is the right word.

With that said, I think you're in a fairly unique spot at your rank. I'm going to pretend for a minute that you're a lower belt than I am. You would be expected to do the form our way, for a few reasons:

• To help get ready for your next test
• So that all of the students are being taught the same way

Now, I don't honestly know how it works when I high-ranking person goes to a new school. Since I've gotten my black belt, we've only had one student come in who was a higher rank than me, and he was a returning student. So I'm not really sure of the dynamic.

If the only reason it's wrong is that it doesn't match the official forms, then it's not actually wrong (outside of that context). If you can insert a different movement at point X, and the flow still works, then that new version of the form isn't actually wrong. It's just different.

I would argue that (for the most part) there isn't another context for these forms. I don't see them as a practical training tool; more of an exercise and a performance. The place they are most applicable is on a belt test or form competition. Since those are standardized by Kukkiwon and World Taekwondo, there is a correct way of doing things.

As to the "flow", the form can "flow" with different techniques, but I don't feel the forms are grounded in any realistic choreography to begin with.

But for individual exploration (temporary changes by the student), I don't think there's a "wrong". If I put a punch where a kick used to be, it may screw everything up around it, but it'll likely make it more obvious why that kick worked well there.

For the most part, I think that time spent on forms is better spent perfecting the details to have a better performance on your test or competition.

 

[_Simon_]

Yeah it's really tricky to quantify. I agree with both points in that of course they will change, evolve etc depending on emphasis, interpretation...

But like it's been said, there are many I'm sure who don't actually know, understand or take the proper time to study the form, yet just prematurely decide they want to change it. I've actually seen forms be changed because the instructor "didn't like it done that way", just that, no real reason but being irked by it. And that actually may carry on through their teaching style and them actually PASSING ON the system to their students, a mentality of if I don't understand or like something just don't bother, change it. That would surely degrade an incredibly important characteristic of martial arts of discipline, willingness, openmindedness and studying deeply rather widely; just in my opinion!

In the system I practice now the founder made some changes to the original forms which make sense to me. I actually love the original versions too, so I hope to practice those too.

 

[Oily Dragon]

Yeah it's really tricky to quantify.

And yet somebody in this very thread just referenced 3/8th of the Ba Gua.

It's an Xmas miracle!

 

[_Simon_]

And yet somebody in this very thread just referenced 3/8th of the Ba Gua.

It's an Xmas miracle!

I'm unsure of the reference/meaning here, but it sounds good

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sometimes true. What's missing is that kata is not just a random collection of techniques - it's often a collection of a series of techniques, where the efficacy of one move is dependent on the one(s) before it. The sequence is of utmost importance. This is the essence of bunkai. Thus, there is not "an infinite variety." If the choreography is going to be changed, the particular sequence of moves must be treated as one entity.

Taking this most important provision into account, I agree the exact choreography is not important. In kata, the individual sequences (usually 2-5 moves) comprise the various lessons a particular kata is teaching.

As to who can change a kata, my default answer would be that system's Master. Theoretically, like the Pope, he is the one responsible for the integrity and interpretation of the system. In practice, the organizational branching and fragmentation of the style yields multiple "masters" who claim authority. Hopefully, they have the high and complete understanding of the principles and bunkai to make wise choices. Anyone with lessor wisdom is playing around with something they don't really understand, and any changes they make can result in some parts of the kata being ineffective, as I noted in my earlier post.

To be sure, kata has been changed over the centuries. Higaonna Kanryo changed the forms he learned in China. His student, Miyagi Chojun, made further changes. His student, Shimabuku Tatsuo, changed the kata from what he was taught. So kata have never been unchanging monoliths.

This brings us back to the question, "Who can change kata?" (without destroying it) You can! IF you are on a level with Higaonna, Miyagi or Shimabuku. But I think martial artists of that caliber are far and few between.

Honestly, my view is that if it takes such a high level to understand the kata well enough to make basic adjustments, that’s a problem in the training model. It makes progress difficult and leaves major failure points when one of those few inevitably pass away.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

In the later forms, I don't even know if "changes" is the right word.

With that said, I think you're in a fairly unique spot at your rank. I'm going to pretend for a minute that you're a lower belt than I am. You would be expected to do the form our way, for a few reasons:

• To help get ready for your next test
• So that all of the students are being taught the same way

Now, I don't honestly know how it works when I high-ranking person goes to a new school. Since I've gotten my black belt, we've only had one student come in who was a higher rank than me, and he was a returning student. So I'm not really sure of the dynamic.


I would argue that (for the most part) there isn't another context for these forms. I don't see them as a practical training tool; more of an exercise and a performance. The place they are most applicable is on a belt test or form competition. Since those are standardized by Kukkiwon and World Taekwondo, there is a correct way of doing things.

As to the "flow", the form can "flow" with different techniques, but I don't feel the forms are grounded in any realistic choreography to begin with.

For the most part, I think that time spent on forms is better spent perfecting the details to have a better performance on your test or competition.

I have a wholly different view of kata. When I added long-form kata (as opposed to the one-step kata) to my system, they were out there to support other training. Students are taught to use them as tools (warming up, practicing balance and stances, keeping moving when injured, etc.), rather than for the kata’s sake. So students are encouraged to work the kata to develop movement, for instance.
If the only useful context for a kata is testing, I’m not sure I get the point.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah it's really tricky to quantify. I agree with both points in that of course they will change, evolve etc depending on emphasis, interpretation...

But like it's been said, there are many I'm sure who don't actually know, understand or take the proper time to study the form, yet just prematurely decide they want to change it. I've actually seen forms be changed because the instructor "didn't like it done that way", just that, no real reason but being irked by it. And that actually may carry on through their teaching style and them actually PASSING ON the system to their students, a mentality of if I don't understand or like something just don't bother, change it. That would surely degrade an incredibly important characteristic of martial arts of discipline, willingness, openmindedness and studying deeply rather widely; just in my opinion!

In the system I practice now the founder made some changes to the original forms which make sense to me. I actually love the original versions too, so I hope to practice those too.

I suspect that dislike comes from a lack of understanding. If the instructor doesn’t understand a section, he cannot teach it properly, and it should probably be changed to something he can.

 

[dvcochran]

Yeah it's really tricky to quantify. I agree with both points in that of course they will change, evolve etc depending on emphasis, interpretation...

But like it's been said, there are many I'm sure who don't actually know, understand or take the proper time to study the form, yet just prematurely decide they want to change it. I've actually seen forms be changed because the instructor "didn't like it done that way", just that, no real reason but being irked by it. And that actually may carry on through their teaching style and them actually PASSING ON the system to their students, a mentality of if I don't understand or like something just don't bother, change it. That would surely degrade an incredibly important characteristic of martial arts of discipline, willingness, openmindedness and studying deeply rather widely; just in my opinion!

In the system I practice now the founder made some changes to the original forms which make sense to me. I actually love the original versions too, so I hope to practice those too.

Yep. Our GM is an older Korean and is not particularly fond of the newest form set that has been adopted by many TKD schools/systems. He routinely goes into detail about how certain sections just do not work or have application. We have more than a few areas we do differently because of the.
I can honestly say I agree with his assertion on everything, not from bias but from it just making sense.
One of his/our pet peeves is that the errors & omissions are in the color belt form set and very little crosses over into the black belt forms. It is a real head scratcher that as a color belt a person is taught the 'wrong way' and then expected to make corrections later on.
We do primarily 3 color belt form sets; (5) Pinan's created (brought to Okinawa) in the late 1890's, (8) Palgwe's created in 1967, and the (9) Taegueks's adopted in 1971. Some forms are elective (not a testing requirement) as a person goes through the belts.
We do get pretty form heavy.

 

[skribs]

I have a wholly different view of kata. When I added long-form kata (as opposed to the one-step kata) to my system, they were out there to support other training. Students are taught to use them as tools (warming up, practicing balance and stances, keeping moving when injured, etc.), rather than for the kata’s sake. So students are encouraged to work the kata to develop movement, for instance.
If the only useful context for a kata is testing, I’m not sure I get the point.

As I said, an exercise and a performance.

I did not make these forms. They were made before I was born. I don't make the requirements in the organization that I am in. You have a lot of luxuries in this case that I do not.

 

[seasoned]

When I first started Martial Arts a kick was just a kick, a block was just a block, a punch was just a punch and a stance was just a stance.......but, with time, sweat, hard work, perseverance, maturity in the arts and the right Sensei a whole different art emerged....At that point a kick was not just a kick, a block was not just a block, a punch was not just a punch and a stance was not just a stance... The whole art of Okinawan Goju had come full circle. It was at this point I understood that what I had undertaken was a life time endeavor, a falling in love with this art.
The old traditional arts were born out of a sense of secrecy because life itself was at stake, hence there was an art within an art where some of the most valued techniques were held back until trust and loyalty were demonstrated.
Fast forward to modern times where students pay at times big bucks for classes and they want the whole ball of wax from day one.....this is a very fast pace time we are in..

There is no good or bad. right or wrong involved, just a different time and want in life.

Back to the original question, who can change the kata.......who would want to if the kata contained everything you would want in a full well rounded system..