Im reliably informed that Sensei Frank Brennans fave kata is Heian Nidan. So what do i do when trying to learn a new kara, Jitte for example, if i dont try to understand what it is Im doing? What is that?
I probably need to write an article about 守破離 (shuhari) at some point in the future. It's a process of learning in Japanese martial arts where you follow along at first, break it apart second, then walk away with as your own.
Enjoyed reading your article, especially the kanji explanations. Two things come to mind: First that your essay in its entirety is classic karate analytical process and thinking. Second, that at this point in my journey, I view bunkai as essentially a Rorschach inkblot test with multiple, likely infinite, interpretations and perspectives. You can take sequences as such. You can scramble them. And you can cut, copy-and-paste strings and techniques across then kata menu. Further, don't forget that all of them can be inverted (left to right). For me, that's the beauty of the whole thing which keeps us engaged.
The kanji explanations are something I find quite fun to display.
Personally, I don't think there's a problem with breaking down, analyzing, and mixing and matching moves from kata. The "issue" I have is when some people take it too far and end up reaching so hard they are at risk of dislocating their shoulders. One of the most ridiculous statements I've heard is that everything you need to know is in the first move of the first kata you practice. Some people might find that profound, but personally, I think it sounds like absolute BS.
I was taught that the three pillars of Karate are kihon, kumite and kata (three Ks). Plus there is innovation possible in each. It's a big karate world, not a myopic one.
There are a lot of valid approaches out there. I've done quite a few karate styles now and each one has had its own strengths and weaknesses depending on the emphasis it places on each of the pillars you mentioned.
I've been reading about the early history of Karate in Britain, the 50s onwards (might have a few posts on it early next year if I feel I have something worth discussing). Contact with Japan was limited, and the early enthusiasts did piece things together from Funakoshi's books and some rare films. I can well imagine, as you say, someone seeing the word "bunkai" in a manual and getting carried away without anyone around to correct them. (Just finished Shotokan Dawn Vol 1 by Clive Layton, Vol 2 begins with Kanazawa arriving in Britain, curious to find out what he thought of "bunkai").
"I do not believe that karate is a perfect and flawless system with every possible fighting situation there is distilled into a few movement routines. If something is so complicated that it needs a lifetime of study to be able to understand it properly, it is not a useful way to deliver a message."
TL;DR this strikes me as sound. It also goes against everything I've been taught!
I've always heard high ranking Shotokan karateka talk about mastery of the Heian katas is the path to mastery of self defense. As a junior grade this is an unfalsifiable claim (I won't know until I get there). But, supposing it is 'true', just because it's possible to develop solid self defense skills in this way, that is, a life time of drilling Heian, is it the optimal way? Probably not.
I'm not 100% sure about this but I think that it could be the case that pictures in some books were labeled as "bunkai" and the name just stuck. If those pictures were labeled as "figure" instead of "bunkai" I wonder if the word would have taken on such a life of its own.
Excellent piece. I've often heard that "there's no bunkai in Wado" and it used as a phrase to discredit the style.
I appreciate that's a different discussion in some ways about the history of the style, but I have seen in recent years a move from many away from a straight "this move = this" 'bunkai' towards a ohyo/principles approach.
I generally think that people are kind of missing the point by saying that. None of the styles I've practiced in Japan seem to use the term bunkai. Does that mean that none of the styles I've practiced are effective in any way?
I think some people have grasped the wrong end of the stick with the term bunkai. Some people also seem to have applied glue to their hands before doing so.
Im reliably informed that Sensei Frank Brennans fave kata is Heian Nidan. So what do i do when trying to learn a new kara, Jitte for example, if i dont try to understand what it is Im doing? What is that?
I probably need to write an article about 守破離 (shuhari) at some point in the future. It's a process of learning in Japanese martial arts where you follow along at first, break it apart second, then walk away with as your own.
Look forward to it 👍
Enjoyed reading your article, especially the kanji explanations. Two things come to mind: First that your essay in its entirety is classic karate analytical process and thinking. Second, that at this point in my journey, I view bunkai as essentially a Rorschach inkblot test with multiple, likely infinite, interpretations and perspectives. You can take sequences as such. You can scramble them. And you can cut, copy-and-paste strings and techniques across then kata menu. Further, don't forget that all of them can be inverted (left to right). For me, that's the beauty of the whole thing which keeps us engaged.
The kanji explanations are something I find quite fun to display.
Personally, I don't think there's a problem with breaking down, analyzing, and mixing and matching moves from kata. The "issue" I have is when some people take it too far and end up reaching so hard they are at risk of dislocating their shoulders. One of the most ridiculous statements I've heard is that everything you need to know is in the first move of the first kata you practice. Some people might find that profound, but personally, I think it sounds like absolute BS.
I was taught that the three pillars of Karate are kihon, kumite and kata (three Ks). Plus there is innovation possible in each. It's a big karate world, not a myopic one.
There are a lot of valid approaches out there. I've done quite a few karate styles now and each one has had its own strengths and weaknesses depending on the emphasis it places on each of the pillars you mentioned.
I've been reading about the early history of Karate in Britain, the 50s onwards (might have a few posts on it early next year if I feel I have something worth discussing). Contact with Japan was limited, and the early enthusiasts did piece things together from Funakoshi's books and some rare films. I can well imagine, as you say, someone seeing the word "bunkai" in a manual and getting carried away without anyone around to correct them. (Just finished Shotokan Dawn Vol 1 by Clive Layton, Vol 2 begins with Kanazawa arriving in Britain, curious to find out what he thought of "bunkai").
"I do not believe that karate is a perfect and flawless system with every possible fighting situation there is distilled into a few movement routines. If something is so complicated that it needs a lifetime of study to be able to understand it properly, it is not a useful way to deliver a message."
TL;DR this strikes me as sound. It also goes against everything I've been taught!
I've always heard high ranking Shotokan karateka talk about mastery of the Heian katas is the path to mastery of self defense. As a junior grade this is an unfalsifiable claim (I won't know until I get there). But, supposing it is 'true', just because it's possible to develop solid self defense skills in this way, that is, a life time of drilling Heian, is it the optimal way? Probably not.
I'm not 100% sure about this but I think that it could be the case that pictures in some books were labeled as "bunkai" and the name just stuck. If those pictures were labeled as "figure" instead of "bunkai" I wonder if the word would have taken on such a life of its own.
Excellent piece. I've often heard that "there's no bunkai in Wado" and it used as a phrase to discredit the style.
I appreciate that's a different discussion in some ways about the history of the style, but I have seen in recent years a move from many away from a straight "this move = this" 'bunkai' towards a ohyo/principles approach.
I generally think that people are kind of missing the point by saying that. None of the styles I've practiced in Japan seem to use the term bunkai. Does that mean that none of the styles I've practiced are effective in any way?
I think some people have grasped the wrong end of the stick with the term bunkai. Some people also seem to have applied glue to their hands before doing so.
Amen, thank goodness someone is saying this. I am going to figure out a way of sharing this.
Thank you very much. This topic is something that I struggle with...because I have some many people to argue with. lol