This was a well written article, with several good points. However, it does not directly address Karate in the 21st century. Rather, it seems to address the author's stereotype of Karate in the 21st century.
I'd like to address each of his points below. To lay the groundwork, I train in Okinawan Kenpo.
1. The One-Strike Kill
The biggest cliché of karate is the one-strike kill. This of course does not exist, but has fooled so many for years. Shigeru Egami (one of Funakoshi's top students) freely admitted there was no such thing. At one point in his career, Egami admits going into a deep depression after concluding a personal study about which martial style had the most powerful tsuki (punches). He found that karate had the least powerful tsuki, and boxing the strongest. Betting everything on one punch can get you killed.
- This is more of a stereotype (more common to certain flavors of Karate than to others). I agree with the author, there is no such thing as one-punch/one kill.
2. Waiting for The Attack
Karate philosophy states, "wait for the attack." Remember Funakoshi's maxim, "Never attack first?" This is suicidal. In real situations, the first person to strike usually walks away. The untrained public, (influenced by Hollywood and martial arts mythology) erroneously thinks you have to eat the first punch, but you give up your lawful right to self-protection by letting anyone strike you first. Criminals take advantage of this civilized mindset. If you feel that violence is about to break out, strike first.
- This is both purely philosophical and theoretical. First, in the event that violence is about to break out, I need to ask why? Are you actually involved in an altercation with someone? If so, why? If that is the case, the easiest thing to do is to apologize and walk away. Problem solved. No fight. If you are getting mugged, again, the easiest and best way to get out alive is to just turn over your wallet and cooperate. Violence rarely, if ever, just "breaks out". There is usually a cause or a catalyst to it and the easiest way to stay safe is to just not be there. In a real life and death situation, where you are truely caught unawares, odds are that the first strike already happened and you have no choice BUT to block/evade and counter. The idea that a karateka should never strike first goes beyond the concrete and stereotypical example of two people arguing and the karateka just waiting for the first punch to be thrown. It has meanings on different levels. First and foremost, you should be not be in that situation to begin with. Secondly, if you ARE in that situation, every effort should be made to de-escalate the situation and disengage. If and only if the first two rules have already been broken and you have NO other recourse should you physically have to defend yourself. At that point, you have already failed in everything you have learned in self-defense and at that point you will have to strike your oponent to stay alive. Any martial arts instructor NOT teaching the theory behind WHY you should not have to strike first and how you got into that situation is not doing a good job.
3. On Stances
Karate, (along with several hard Chinese styles) employs some of the most ineffective stances in martial arts. Deep, low karate stances make you completely immobile; they plant you in one spot, making quick movements extremely difficult. You may as well hang a sign around your neck saying "strike me at will, I can't move." If you recall early kickboxing, the first thing they got rid of were those limiting stances.
- First, kickboxing is a sport, as the author points out later in their argument. There are set rules that make deep, low karate stances disadvantageous to use. In an actual self defense situation, there are times (such as in takedowns and throws), where you actually WANT to be rooted to the ground as to not go down with your oponent. They are not always a bad idea. Furthermore, in the argument above, the author is assuming that every karateka will fight from a horse or front stance of some sort. This is simply not true. I've trained in three different dojos in three similar Okinawan styles, and in EVERY case, the instructor also has a "fighting" stance taught to students which is considerably more mobile and designed for use in a "realistic" setting.
4. Karate as a Way Of Life
Years ago while in Japan, Gogen (Yamaguchi) once came up to me and asked, "I never see you practice kata, why?" I replied that I thought it was an exercise in futility, having no functional value. He grew upset and chastised me by saying, without kata, we're just animals, like boxers or wrestlers, I replied, "that's OK, I just want the skills." More than anything else, karate people have a fear about being labeled "killers." Their reply is always, "I follow the path, karate is a way of life." I guess they feel absolved from their inner conflicts or sociological guilt when they say that, sort of like what confession does for a Catholic.
Kata serves two very important purposes:
1) Physical conditioning
2) Maintaining a catalog of all of the techniques in a given system to keep everyone doing that system on the same page.
Without some structure and rigor to training, "systems" will quickly devolve to flailing about in an effort to harm your oponent. I strongly believe that the author is missing the point of people that tell him that "karate is a way of life" or that "without kata, we're just animals, like boxers or wrestlers". What they are saying is in line with my first point. Fighting should be avoided at all costs. THAT is what martial arts is (or should be) about - promoting discipline and physical health. Fighting CAN and SHOULD be avoided. As the author makes a comparisson to catholicisim, I can just as easily compare his comment about "just wanting the skills" to really meaning that "I just want to be a better brawler for my bar fights".
5. Spirituality and Meditation
For many Japanese karateka, religion and martial arts are inseparably linked. Japanese spirituality and meditation are not a function of karate; they're emblematic of the culture that developed it. Westerners really buy into this big time. It's actually a direct affront to your personal beliefs. What if a Japanese boxer wanted to train in the U.S. with a Baptist coach, would he have to join the church, sing out loud, clap his hands, dance and get down? Changing your spiritual identity in order to learn self-defense is ludicrous! Mas Oyama once asked me how much time I meditate per day. I told him -- I don't, I have my own religion; I don't need to replace it with another.
Meditation does not necessarily benefit any martial activity. For example, I recall, in the 1983 Olympics in Korea, the Koreans had the strongest archery team in the world. They attributed their secret of success to their late night meditation practices in cemeteries. Did it help the men's team win - no, an American walked away with the gold. Did he meditate? No, before each match he was listening to Van Halen!
- Allow me to say clearly, once and for all, that meditation is NOT a direct affront to your personal beleifs, NOR is it a relegion. It is meant soley as a method of teaching focus. I have never once been told, by different Okinawan instructors, to meditate on something that I did not believe in. I HAVE been told to clear my mind, focus on what I have learned that day OR focus on something else. If you are a christian, there is NOTHING preculding you from meditating on a scripture that you just read. It is meant merely as a tool through which you can develop focus.
6. Breaking Objects can Break You!
Karate, more than any other martial art is renowned for its breaking demonstrations; but anyone can break inanimate objects, it's easy and you don't have to study karate to do so. Do breaking boards and bricks translate into fighting ability? Again Egami comments that breaking objects is very different than striking a human body, humans are resilient. He goes farther, saying that even "makiwara" training is harmful to the body, and stopped doing it already in the late '50's. Robert Smith, in his book "Martial Musings" notes that Mas Oyama damaged his hands so much he couldn't even place a blanket on top of them when he went to sleep. Continued breaking over a period of years brings with it such delights as arthritis and other degenerative diseases.
I agree completely with the author on this. Point well taken.
7. The Kata Crutch
A major part of karate practice focuses on kata. I've never understood why so many people defend it so vehemently. There's almost a cult-like obsession with doing it. Perhaps karateka feel it grants them a special kind of spiritual dispensation, allowing them to indulge in the study of fighting. Kata however is nothing more than several techniques strung together; a tool to help beginners understand how techniques flow. For advanced practitioners, it constrains your progress and adds no functional value to your fighting skills. Jon Bluming said it best, something to the effect of, "it takes up time, and the money rolls in."
- I discuss Kata in more detail above. See my earlier comment. To be somewhat blunt (and just as sarcastic as the author) - I suppose the money is NOT rolling in as your coach gives you new pad drills, ect?
8. Karate Doesn't Prepare You for the Street
Unlike a sparring match, there are no rules on the street, no time-outs, no referees to separate you; there's no sanctity of life. Street fights don't start at sparring distance; many times they suddenly erupt chest-to-chest, many times from behind without warning. Your attacker won't necessarily stop if you scream in pain. Unlike the smooth floor of the dojo, the street and pavement can be uneven, broken and contain dangerous objects you can fall over.
- I agree here too. I must ask the author though, why, in all of your years in karate, have you never taken to trying to do a form outdoors on uneven pavement? I have certainly tried it, discovered that it is in fact different, and continue to practice it and I would encourage everyone else to do the same. Training does not end when you leave the dojo.
In all the years I spent in karate, there was never a word about fighting under adrenaline stress conditions, the use-of-force, gross motor skills, and absolutely no legal considerations. Karate is only concerned with the attack stage of the encounter; no mention is made about the pre and post-conflict stages. Environmental and situational awareness, preemptive strike, what to do if you're hurt, do you run away, or make a citizen's arrest?
- I would rephrase that to state that "Many karate instructors are only concerned with the attack stage of the encounter." I've also been tought by instructors who WERE concerned with the pre and post stages of conflict.
Many karate techniques employ fine motor skills; under stress these are the first skills that abandon you. To work under excited conditions, techniques must be simple and based on gross motor skills. If you've been in fights, you know that after a few seconds of wild striking, many people start grabbing each other and quite often fall to the ground. How is your ground game? Do you know how to fight in a parking lot at midnight, on sand, gravel, on ice on a winter's day? Training barefoot in a dojo doesn't prepare you for any of these scenarios.
- I agree that under stress fine motor skills are the first to abandon you. Have you ever seen anyone do a form or spar with an audience for the first time? There are several things you can do to develop these skills SUCH as sparring (continuious, not point) and performing kata with an audience, simulating training under stress, etc. Additionally, I agree that groundwork is neglected in many (but not ALL) karate dojos.
9. Karate Makes you Stiff and Rigid
For years people have avoided weight training for fear that they would become stiff. If they only knew the truth -- weight training actually makes you flexible and supple; it's karate that makes you stiff! I've spoken at length to many boxing, kali, Brazilian Jujitsu and muaythai instructors and they all agree, karate produces a tenseness and rigidity that seems almost irreversible. I believe it's all those hard air punches and kicks, tense kata and deep immovable stances contributing to this condition. You see this state most pronounced when karate students take up reality-based defense.
- In many cases, this is true. However, in the dojo that I train in now, a regimine of boxing, kickboxing, and groundwork is built into the training to help avoid the "stiffness" that the author is describing.
10. Karate is Ineffective Against Modern Weapons
The term Empty-Hand says it all; the main focus of karate is on unarmed combat. They do practice traditional weapons however, but what use is sai, tonfa, sickle, and bo practice when you can't carry them. This is unrealistic in 2003, where attacks are mainly carried out with guns, knives and impact weapons. When you typically hear of karateka being hurt in an attack, it usually involves a knife or gun. Whenever we do seminars employing weapons scenarios, it's usually the most advanced karateka that get killed the quickest.
- I strongly disagree with the author in this area. Practicing with the sai, tonfa, sickle, and bo does wonders for your forearms and upper body strength and endurance overall. I do agree that a good self defense regimine should include a knife and gun. That being said, I certainly HOPE that you are teaching the people at your seminars that the best (and often only) way to survive an encounter with someone with a gun is to cooperate OR not be there in the first place. The only exception to this is when the person with the gun makes the mistake of getting well within striking range of an elbow (not to say that an elbow is the appropriate response, merely to delineate distance) OR if you have a gun yourself.
11. Karate Takes Too Long to Learn, and You Still Can't Fight!
In terms of effort spent, to proportion of effectiveness gained, traditional karate is one of the least efficient systems of any fighting style. Too much time is spent on the inanities of rituals and form. Most karate schools spend countless hours on kata or mindless sparring, as if this will prepare students for a real fight, but it doesn't. Free sparring in karate only teaches you to fight other (barefoot) karateka's in a dojo (school) environment. Kata practice is a primitive form of shadow boxing, nothing more. There usually is no counter-knife, counter-firearms training, if it is taught all, it's usually presented in a rigid step-by-step process, having no relation to what a real attack looks like.
- I disagree with this. Conditioning takes time. There is no way around it. Pitting an unconditioned intiate who has been to a weeklong seminar against a seasoned street-fighter or martial artist will only result in the untrained getting hurt. A week is only long enough to introduce the new person to everything they do NOT know and to stress how NOT to be in the wrong place at the wrong time or how to de-escalate a situation if you are.
12. The Apotheosis of the Master
I've always felt uncomfortable with the semi-deification of the so-called martial arts master. It just goes against the grain of my western upbringing. My goal in learning fighting was not to become a supplicant of an old man with a tough reputation. I believe that's another reason why mixed martial arts (i.e., BJJ, muaythai, boxing, and Filipino martial arts) have become so popular. There's no groveling involved just mutual respect. In the west, a coach doesn't demand a special status, over and beyond his normal duties. A coach guides athletes in their respective sports. His goal is to encourage, goad and train his charges to success. He is the father, the friend and the teacher; athletes trust him and his judgment.
- Ah, but the semi-deification of a sports legend is okay, right??? I am afraid that our "western" values are conflicted a bit here. I do agree that there are instructors that let their "rank" get to their head. However, for every one of them, I have seen good humble people who just want to teach.
If you are going to attack Karate, try to look past the stereotypes and really analyze what karate is.
Regards,
Matt
