Hi, I have more free time than I know what to do with right now. Would forum members be willing to tell me a little of the History of Shotokan. Also it's ethos and relationship to other arts. I had heard that it's origins have something to do with the Chinese system 'Fukien White Crane' I'd like to know more. Regards Andy
Love to help...but your best bet is Ozebob and Kosokun. I bow to their far more informed contribution.
Andy, I can help you a bit, some may have more complete info since it has been a while since I have read up on this lol. In 1921, Funakoshi Sensei gave a demonstration to then Prince Hirohito of the system that developed into Shotokan, and opened his first school in 1922. The name comes from his pen name meaning Waving Pines, and Kan which means Hall. Funakoshi Sensei trained under Itosu Sensei, and Azato Sensei, who in turn were students of Soshu Matsumura. The art was spread to the US by Tsutomu Ohshima, one of Funakoshi Sensei's last students, in 1955. That is the short version anyway lol Rob
Rather than invent the wheel. Take a look at Mogens Gallardo's excellent site. http://www.shotokai.cl/ There's an english page. Also Rob Redmond's excellent and comprehensive site. http://www.24fightingchickens.com/shotokan/ Then there's also Mark Groenwold's site, Karate the Japanese Way. (I don't like the title, since there are other Japanese styles than Shotokan) www.karatethejapaneseway.com Rob
While true, it's kind of like saying that spagetti and meatballs has something to do with Chow Mein. The white crane was very much altered, adapted and modified to fit the okinawan tastes and sensibilities. Much like noodles were from the noodles brought from China to Italy by Marco Polo. Rob
Interesting perspective. The websites you have linked have a lot of good information on them. It will take me a while to find the information I was looking for. I was intrigued by the Chilean website. It had an article written by Genshin Hironishi, which reported the 'boycott' of Gichin Funakoshi's funeral by the JKA 'Kyokai'. This angle on events is missing from the other two websites. Is this a historic landmark event in the development of Karate in the West, as the writer certainly makes it seem dramatic? Andy
Hi Andy, I think Rob has pointed you in the right direction there. Shotokan is the label used by Gichin Funakoshi's students to describe his karate. Funakoshi attempted to introduce Okinawan Karate in a manner suited to the times. The kata chosen were representative of kata practised throughout Okinawa with an emphasis on those practised in his own home town of Shuri. Whatever link there was between Shotokan and White Crane kata is unknown to most shotokan karateka today. The kata can only just be traced to its Okinawan origins only. Until the early 30's, Funakoshi taught Okinawan kata but by 1935, the kata were modified and simplified to suit the Japanese concept of Budo. The JKA Shotokan is different to the original. Regards, Bob
I don't know. It does make me wonder about how much of Funakoshi's actual endorsement there was to the JKA methodology. Seems that the Seniors to Nakayama went a different way. Rob
Couple of questions for Bob when he passes here next. You said the links between Shotokan and White Crane were unknown to 'most' Karateka. Does that mean that someone knows? I noticed a possible link on one of the sites Rob posted on another thread referring to 'Nahate' and 'Nanpanken'. You said that the Kata Funakoshi taught were modified by 1935. Was it modified by Funakoshi himself? Could you possible explain the modification to suit the concept of Budo? If Funakoshi collated Shotokan, then why did the JKA feel they had the right to modify it, especially in the light of boycotting the guys Funeral? Hope these aren't 'itchy' questions Andy
My view Hello all, If I may offer an opinion. In my view there is no real connection between White Crane (Hakutsuru) and Shotokan. Too much has changed, and as far as Shotokan goes too many people had their hands in the soup. Funakoshi, his son, Nakayama to name a few. Today's Shotokan is a far cry from the karate Funakoshi originally brought to Japan. Shorin would be closer to White Crane IMO, still retaining some of the original flavor. Even fighting aspects and philosophies are are opposite ends as far as Shotokan and Shorin are concerned. Shorin, being more of a close range fighting system relies more on subtle footwork, grappling/grabbing and hooking, along with the usual kicking and punching. Shotokan on the other hand is a mid to long range more ballistic type of system relying on the big hits. Today's Shotokan practitioner may look deeper into kata and come up with Jujitsu type applications but this wasn't always the case. Knowledge of Shorin kata still is a big help, and probably a must, in figuring out the kata of Shotokan. These days there are many shotokan as well as other systems that are focused mainly on sport karate. However I also feel that karate in general has move towards that end. This has been a long time in development however and may even go as far back as the formation of the pinan kata. Around that time training methods began to change and the focus was gearing toward teaching the public (school kids). Hmmm, can't have kids breaking their fingers and poking each other in the eyes can we? Ok, lets close the fists and make a blunt weapon. Next, lets make this less about "killing and maiming" and make it more phyisical education. How? Lower the stances to excercise the legs, kick higher etc. Also, lets take out some of the body conditioning and more dangerous techniques and training methods. Move forward to the move to Japan. Kendo and judo are both enjoying a more competition oriented training philosohpy, of coarse with the welcome by product of fighting ability and self defense but light years away from what was done originally. Now that competition was governing training methods in class once again stances were lengthened and lowered as a training aid. Explosive quickness and leg strength were important factors in the "duel" type of mid to long range fighting of Shotokan. New kicking techniques, straight line movements(no c step), and what is refered to as half techniques (thus the reason for waza ari) were further developed. Today's Shotokan? Some follow sport more than others but even the ones who don't still have been stained by the modifications of Funakoshi and Japan in general. This applies also to other systems in one way or another. Seeing a link between Shotokan and Hakutsuru, IMO, is like tracing my family roots to Adam and Eve It may be there but to altered and contaminated to truly be considered a link. Tommy
Welcome Tommy. When you start posting on a forum, at least you do it properly... We look forward to hearing more from you.
Thanks Melanie. As I'm sure you've found out by now, there are more opinions and inerpretations of karate and it's origins as well as techniques than you can shake a stick at Besides the fact that the opinions change day to day! Mine is just one more..........no more and no less correct than the next guy Tommy
Re: My view Hi Tommy, Good to see ya over here! Good post and we're on the same page for the most part. From what I can see, the stances weren't so much elongated as they were codified. From what I can gather from my interaction with some "Old School" Okinawan stylists, the waste generated the movement, and the feet went wherever necessary. There was no notion of a Cat stance, say, with X% of your weight on the front leg, your rear leg bent Z degrees, rear big toe pointing towards Kowloon, etc. Rather your body shifted as the need presented. While one can teach this way, and we largely do in self-defense classes, in small numbers, with larger groups we have to spell out exactly how to put the feet and which knee to bend etc. If you look at the Shorin Ryu kata, and the goju, uechi and Ryuei Ryu kata, you see a variety of stances used and their front stances are every bit as long as the JKA Shotokan stances. So, codifying of the stances is IMO is what the changes that Itosu made were about. Also, it's tougher to teach joint manipulations to large groups of kids. So, these techniques from within the kata were probably not mentioned. *That* is how IMO the kata and Karate was made "Safer" for the kids. The Joint techniques rip apart the soft tissue of the joint. Something that any athlete of any worth, whatsoever, knows can be a permanent and a career ending injury. When compared to a percussive technique, like a punch or a kick, the joint maneuver is far more dangerous, in that it can cause a permanent injury. For example, if I were to punch someone's lights out, they could go to work the next day, even if they were a tradesman, and worked with their hands. If, on the other hand, I've destroyed their elbow, wrist or shoulder joints, they can't, and I may have seriously affected their ability to make a living. Joint techniques are far more dangerous IMO, despite the drivel that the Aikidoists would have one believe. Rob
Re: Re: My view Very good point and one that was on the tip of my tongue,so to speak, for years but I never really came to realize it. "NO STANCES" to speak of. That makes perfect sense and I agree with your statement. No need for "labeling" at the time. You also make a good point about the joint locks vs punching. Yes, a joint injury goes a long way in causing problems for the recipient! Good post Rob, thanks. Tommy
So why is there now a resurgance into the application of kata? Why not 15 or 20 years ago? Is it due to the advent of MMA competitions and Instructors trying to validate what they teach. We've got a 3rd Dan Goju Ryu practitioner in our Judo club who believes that through practicing judo he might recover whats been lost from the bunkai practice and pass it on to his own students. Oh, and as an Aikidoka Rob, I know where your coming from, but some of us do know better Thanx
The major changes to the original karate that Gichen Funakoshi brought from Okinawa were in fact made by Gigo Funakoshi, the founders third son, along with Shigeru Egami . These changes, made with the approval of the senior Funakoshi, brought to Shotokan the longer stances and "exaggerated ballistic" techniques of today which are the hallmark of modern Shotokan, along with many changes to the kata themselves, notably the kata Meikyo, a melding of movements from ****o-ryu's series of three Rohai kata. Additionally, Gigo made many changes to other of the kata that his father taught, and added some that his father knew, but seldom taught. Although I couldn't say if the kata were "simplified" per se, but one does need to take into account that from the very beginning of the 20th century, Japan was undergoing a vast militarization of it's society, and for the sanctioning bodies of the government, karate was less an art form than it was a way to instill discipline and martial spirit and conditioning in it's schoolage citizens, who would soon be engaged in a war for the very survival of Japan itself. The changes (bigger movements) to the fundamental techniques of Shotokan was done to increase the apparent dynamics of those techniques, to better help the student grasp the physical principles involved in the execution of those techniques. They were not intended to be used as a fighting style, strictly a training tool. None-the-less, some of those ballistic techniques proved effective, and as stated elsewhere in this thread, Shotokan became a mid to long range method of sparring, at least in a competitive setting. Traditional Shotokan schools that are not primarily concerned with sport karate are still using the in-your-face techniques of early Okinawan fighting. As for the JKA departing from Funakoshi's early version of karate, quite frankly, so did everybody else. Hironori Ohtsuka left Shotokan to combine it with his prior jui-jitsu training to form Wado-ryu, Egami left to form Shotokai after an ongoing disagreement with Nakayama's group, which despite allegations to the contrary, was pretty much a upper class (Egami's group) versus common class (Nakayama's group) thing, the latter which went on to form the JKA. Both groups claimed to be the only legitimate descendant of Funakoshi's original karate (and they still argue this point today), but the founder himself recognized both groups as being equally orthodox versions of his karate. Even Kyokushin's founder Mas Oyama trained under Gichen Funakoshi to dan level (4th dan I believe) before he switched to Goju, and then went out to do his own thing. As is always the case when a style splits into different, isolated factions, each separate group has their own preferences and emphasis', and eventually, they grow farther apart in they way they conduct their instruction and in the content of their curricula.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Gigo design a lot of the foot work of shotokan on the drills commonly taught in kendo classes ????
How did this slip by me for so long? There wasn't a Resurgence in interest in kata application in many styles like, Shorin Ryu, Wado Ryu, Goju Ryu and ****o Ryu. I've copies of books by Mabuni, Ohtsuka and Gogen Yamaguchi with kata applications in them. The original publishing dates on these books are from the 1930's. So, that along with the lore that I've learned from practitioners of these styles lead me to believe that kata applications were indeed taught. I think what happened with some styles that de emphasized kata application in the past, is that the pressure from their members to justify the practice of kata reached a critical mass. Rob
I have heard this statement also, but I personally have no reference to supply you with for any further clarification. It is certainly a most interesting theory, and one can see the similarities between the "striding" methodologies between both arts.
