I’m bored, so I got thinking before and thought of something. Why is it that Japanese Martial Arts and Chinese Martial Arts are so different? At least in striking and footwork? It is said Japanese/Okinawan arts of Karate are said to come fron Ngo Cho Kun and White Crane, 2 Chinese styles, yet Karate seems to have a very linear, direct approach verus Chinese arts which have more circular.
How can it be that a circular art is modified over a few centuries in another country into a linear art, yet remains a circular art in the country it originated? If you say “Tradition”, wouldn’t the tradition of been taught to the Japanese when they first learned hand to hand combat from the Chinese? So why go against tradition and change it to be linear?
Also, why wasn’t the more “mystic” stuff of Chinese arts, such as QiGong, Iron Palm, taught in Japanese arts? Sure Aikido has Ki, or chi, but Karate really doesn’t teach QiGong in its training. Why is that?
I dunno about the whole linear thing - one of the most fluid guys I knows is a Japanese friend of mine who was born in and trained in Kumamoto, Japan.
You gotta remember though, people are gonna customize their style to suit themselves. It’s possible that these early karateka thought that a more linear approach suited them better. Or, perhaps they just wanted to add more of a “Japanese fleair” to the art, no different from the way TKD was changed from it’s original, karate-like form.
Okinawan fighting came from China, but didn’t the Japanese style come from Okinawa? That means that it not only had plenty of time to change, but also to be molded through different cultures and students.
There is some ki training in karate. The Sanchin kata is a prime example. It doesn’t seem to be emphasized as much as in CMA though - my speculation there is that JMA is very much an “external” style. perhaps things like makiwara training could be likened to forms of hard qigong.
'Megapoint good probably give some good insight in this thread.
The first 2 forms in Ngor Chor are fairly linear, so I can see that. I can also see the relationship with the Southern Tai Tzu that influences Ngor Chor and JMA.
Having said all that, from what I have been told the Okinawan arts are still not as linear as their Japanese derivatives, so maybe it also has something to do with Japanese fighting philosophies.
In kung fu I was taught bigger circles early with the goal of making the circles smaller as I got better at the movement. Big circles are fine for generating power but obviously waist time. Beginning students haven’t developed the fine body mechanics (fajing) to generate the same power in a smaller circle.
I have some experience training with a group of 3rd, 4th and 5th degree black belts and those guys did NOT move in straight lines. However, their lower ranks did. My observation is that they take a path from purely linear, or nearly so, to about the same size circle as I think in.
Why? Well, how bout this theory?
The old Okinawans got taught higher end stuff first.
Chances are they had to have had some other, maybe more rudimentary, form of ma that covered their basics. And, whatever NCK or WC master passed the information on to them just taught them advanced stuff. Then, when the Okinawans needed to pass it on to perpetuate it they had to reverse engineer it in order to teach novices and went with straighter lines first.
but I’ve wondered about this as well, so I’ve done a tiny bit of research on it.
For the Japanese karate styles, it appears kendo provided a big influence on the systems. Specifically, it provided the linear emphasis you see today.
Assumption: linear attacks are less complex than circular attacks. With this assumption in mind, read my conjecture:
If you learn part of a system, you’ll train with what you know. In a system with linear and circular techniques, you’re likely to learn straight-forward material first.
If you’re from a militaristic culture, use militaristic teaching methods and organizations, linear techniques are easily organized and trained.
Like I said, it’s conjecture. . .
As an aside, I don’t like Japanese karate all that much. However, I do like the Okinawan flavors I’ve seen. They appear much more well-rounded.
I think from a cultural point of of view they both have inflected upon them different philosophy. The direct and often terse regimes of Zen is particular to Japan and hence influences. A famous saying I heard once was Zen is for Samurai’s and neurotics. Not labelling all Japanese neurotics but its that fast immediate linear approach I suppose.
Chinese has the immediate influence of Taoism and later on Buddhism which is slower longer more rounded I suppose.
It takes its time yet arrives there all the same but with power from weakness.
Originally posted by fragbot
As an aside, I don’t like Japanese karate all that much. However, I do like the Okinawan flavors I’ve seen. They appear much more well-rounded.
Originally posted by chen zhen CMA more circular? I thought u were a WC’er.
I am :p. I should have said with the exception of Wing Chun. Just that I looked at some CLF, Hung Gar, Mantis, Xingyi and Baguazhang video clips, then some Karate video clips a few days ago and noticed that those I saw in CMA were more circular in hand techniques.
Originally posted by Oso
[B]…
Why? Well, how bout this theory?
The old Okinawans got taught higher end stuff first.
Chances are they had to have had some other, maybe more rudimentary, form of ma that covered their basics. And, whatever NCK or WC master passed the information on to them just taught them advanced stuff. Then, when the Okinawans needed to pass it on to perpetuate it they had to reverse engineer it in order to teach novices and went with straighter lines first.
or maybe I should have a second cup of coffee… [/B]
I would disagree with your theory. I cannot imagine a CMA teacher teaching anyone the higher end stuff first, let alone a non-Chinese.
Based on your theory, what I would guess is that they were taught in a less linear fashion but saw the seniors using more linear moves (smaller circles). Then when they went away to practice they decided that the linear moves were more advanced and so copied them, but possibly missing out on the interim steps of making the circular moves smaller, and just doing linear moves.
good thing about theories is they can’t be proven;)
it was just a thought.
mostly based on the idea that I can’t believe that the okinawan islands were devoid of martial arts prior to the infusion of cma.
Based on your theory, what I would guess is that they were taught in a less linear fashion but saw the seniors using more linear moves (smaller circles). Then when they went away to practice they decided that the linear moves were more advanced and so copied them, but possibly missing out on the interim steps of making the circular moves smaller, and just doing linear moves.
but, ime, most basic karate stuff is very linear but graduates to larger circles, not big circles mind you but larger than the straight line stuff.
to follow your line of logic above they would be teaching the more linear/smaller circle stuff as advanced material and the larger circle stuff they first learned as basics.
I think.
(there is this little Mexican place 3 doors down from the school. Monday nights is margarita night after class.)
For the Japanese karate/Okinawan toudi; the Japanese styles of karate were a purposefully modified version of Shorinryu, heavily influenced by the arts already present (kendo, etc). The heavy “linear” content of these (I am only thinking of Shotokan and Japanese Goju-ryu here) was probably caused by the nigh-militaristic method of instruction common to Japan (please don’t flame me; it’s late, I’m not trying to make generalizations. I’ve had my arse handed to me by a Ni Dan Shotokanka [35yrs in the style]).
The Okinawan toudi seems to be a modifcation to the already present di (or te) by way of the White Crane and Monk Fist systems.
As for the lack of internal work, heck if I know. Most of the Okinawan instructors of note were a bit higher up on the social ladder, so “lack of opportunity” or it being “unnecessary” make bad excuses.
But, what do I know? This is all just conjecture, anyways.
