Descendents of Shushiwa

[Stryke]

I hope you dont mean my post Bill


whats you opinion on Itosu conforming kata ? , do you think that a viable explanation ?

There's a lot of good information making it into the thread, and it may serve to motivate some to dig deeper. And there most certainly is no reason for anyone to get worked up over good questioning and an honest attempt to enlighten.

motivation is not the problem Bill .

What do you think of Sensei Toyama`s comments on Mr Laileys (I hope the spellings right ? ) version of Superenpai ?

the most constuctive points and questions really to surface must be IMHO

Have any schools/lineages from this time period that did not conform to Kanei's standardization survived to today? For example what happened to the group that "resigned in protest"? And I'm not talking about the more recent 'breakaway' organizations like Pangainoon/Konan/Kobu Ryu that broke away from Uechi Ryu in 1978 and the Okikukai/Shohei Ryu that broke away around 1990, I'm talking about older non-mainstream lineages.

and Jims observation

The question IMO is if it is even the same system or style after this transition was made and IMO it probably can't be if the "DNA" was changed sufficiently. Meanwhile folks wonder why they can't find "accurate" historical matches to this material which has been radically transformed more than once in recent history.

If verification of this form can be established (or even on an intuitive basis) It provides an oppurtunity greater than its Individual worth , but an indication to possible changes and variations on the Pangainuun theme .

The differences between Your version Bill , Mr Laileys performance when originally done , and the later version more Uechified by Toyama Sensei could all offer insight . I hope this is all recorded for posterity

Interesting topic .

[Rick Wilson]

The article is interesting and I found it fun to roll the concepts around but the fact is that forms have been around (as Jim said) for along time. That alone blows the credibility of the article for me.

[John Giacoletti]

That there were multiple variations of the Uechi kata taught by Kanbun Uechi and his seniors is evident by GEM's firsthand observations:

At the meeting, each of the representatives demonstrated kata as they remembered it being taught by their teacher (or Kanbun) and the group made comments. Not much was accomplished though, because every group very strongly believed that what they were doing was correct and what others were doing was modified and not something to be adopted by the group. Following the meeting, at least one group resigned in protest.

I believe the situation described above by Mattson Sensei is consistent with the variations of Kata presented by the students of Gokenkai and Miyagi. These are the two examples I posted from the Durbin article.

Seizen isn't able to refute them. His own research materials document Sensei Mattson's obsevations. If he is not forthright and willing to address that multiple versions of Uechi forms existed and were taught by Kanbun Uechi's senior students, then I find him in the position of one who has seen the light but understands it not.

[gmattson]

"different" forms, rather, "forms with different 'expressions'". What may seem to be an "exact" replica of an earlier expressed form, will, in my opinion not look the same to a other individuals exposed to that same earlier form.

In my opinion, as our bodies change, (Strength, flexibility, etc) subtle yet noticeable performance modifications will take place. I also agree that with the advent of the video it is now possible to "freeze" a form in a way that wasn't possible and I might add, necessary, in earlier times.

I compare this to the gradual and almost imperceptible changes that take place in one's body that are only noticed by the individual when photographs are compared. (at least in my case! )

[Glenn]

In my opinion, as our bodies change, (Strength, flexibility, etc) subtle yet noticeable performance modifications will take place. I also agree that with the advent of the video it is now possible to "freeze" a form in a way that wasn't possible and I might add, necessary, in earlier times.

I compare this to the gradual and almost imperceptible changes that take place in one's body that are only noticed by the individual when photographs are compared. (at least in my case! )

It would take some digging to find it again, but a while back I came across a quote by a Tai Chi master in his elderly years who was lamenting how the young students he was teaching at that time were only trying to copy the way an old man (himself) did the form and not attempting to learn the way they should be doing the form.

It was that standard 'worship' mentality of "I must do it exactly as teacher does it", which as this teacher recognized can be detrimental to true learning.

And now we have video to make this 'worship training' even easier to do. We can use the slow motion and pause buttons as we work to mimic what we see until we exactly copy that one single performance captured at a single point in the performer's martial-art's career.

Now think about all the performances that you have done of any given kata...including the variations in presentation and the outright mistakes that occur. Imagine just one of those performances being taped and thus frozen in time, and becoming what people see as the only way you do that kata. Then in subsequent years viewers of the tape work hard to copy your every move as presented in that one video and claim they are learning the "true style".

Scary, isn't it!

[benzocaine]

It would take some digging to find it again, but a while back I came across a quote by a Tai Chi master in his elderly years who was lamenting how the young students he was teaching at that time were only trying to copy the way an old man (himself) did the form and not attempting to learn the way they should be doing the form.

Wow That makes sense!

Look at Aikido. Alot of folks today are doing the style of the old man O'Sensei Ueshiba.. but if you look at footage of O'Sensie in his younger years, it was rough stuff.

[Stryke]

I think video can be a tool to also prevent such mimicry .

By having enough versions of peoples interpretations , folks may learn that diversity is normal natural , and positive .

It`s all about how the tools can be used .

just a thought .

[Glenn]

Definitely agreed Stryke, that is a more educational way to use multimedia resources in my opinion...sample the diversity rather than copy an individual. Ultimately I have to figure out through ptraining and practice what specifically works for me anyway. Multimedia cannot teach me that, but it can show me what others are doing.

[JimHawkins]

"different" forms, rather, "forms with different 'expressions'". What may seem to be an "exact" replica of an earlier expressed form, will, in my opinion not look the same to a other individuals exposed to that same earlier form.

It would take some digging to find it again, but a while back I came across a quote by a Tai Chi master in his elderly years who was lamenting how the young students he was teaching at that time were only trying to copy the way an old man (himself) did the form and not attempting to learn the way they should be doing the form.

Well does the form or kata in question contain several or dozens of generations of hard work and refinement of the system? Does it not contain the blood, sweat and perhaps the very lives of those who helped make the sacrifices needed to develop the system in question? Did these same people not spend a dozen lifetimes encoding the system into a highly efficient set of movements for the benefit of their posterity? Is this not the reason why so many would give their left ### to go back in time and train with the founders?

Would it make sense to take such a thing and toss it into a meat grinder and then put it back together to suit what "Sensei Smith" wants in the kata?

What have you got left?

What was lost?

IMO you can't compare the two no matter how "good" Sensei Smith is. The very nature of hacking apart such a thing is to reveal either one's complete lack of understanding if it or desire to conceal the original information.

The way I was taught is that there is how one may *express* a form and how a form is *taught*. The way the form is taught is at the very heart of the how the system is taught, good, bad or indifferent. The true disciples will know not just the form but exactly how it is correctly taught in order to allow the movements contained therein to manifest later on and be passed correctly later as a complete and accurate system "DNA" component.

In his later years Ip Man was noted not for performing the forms any differently per se. Rather he was noted for performing them with such great speed, even as he neared death. His ability to turn like a pinwheel in the second form was always noted by observers. Still, the way he performed the form was not the text book version, it was more laid back. But that doesn't mean you should then teach it that way--there is a right way to pass a form and IMO that method does not and should not involve using a meat grinder.

[MikeK]

Well does the form or kata in question contain several or dozens of generations of hard work and refinement of the system?

I think kata at thier best reflect how the art was practiced by a single person or a small group at a certain point in time and are evolutionary. They're not sacred things never to be modified to meet the individuals needs. So they may contain the hard work of many but I'd stop short of saying that any of them are a refinement, and what is a refinement to one person may be wrong for someone else.

[JimHawkins]

I think kata at their best reflect how the art was practiced by a single person or a small group at a certain point in time and are evolutionary.

I guess it depends of the kata or form.. How long and how many have trained the Yang Tai Chi form as most train it today? How many and for how long have folks trained the Siu Lim Tao in it's present form? Although there may be slight differences in how each family expresses the movements these and many other forms have been around for a long time in their present form.

What is the value of a form?

Did a single individual create them one day when he or she had nothing better to do? Or did many highly experienced warriors work together to create something truly unique, intended to be passed on to many others, that they might benefit from their vast knowledge and survive in combat?

In a real sense the only point to me in learning a form is if it contains this kind of martial knowledge of the ages--something that I doubt any single person, now or of the past would be up to regardless of skill. Forms and their systems have been around for hundreds of years--they have a depth of historical martial brilliance and information that IMO surpasses any single individual's ability.

Many or all of these forms with a long history represent what I believe to be a vast body of martial knowledge put together by some of the best martial minds over the last several hundred years.. These forms represent some of what many would call "core truths" in combat and allowed many of their followers to survive in battle over some of the most bloody times of close range armed and unarmed combat.

I agree they are evolutionary as all things are but legitimate change comes by slow and careful changes by qualified masters over generations. Those who make rash changes, IMO do not fully grasp the cleverness built into these forms and IMO are at best going to reinvent the wheel and at worst headed full-speed in reverse on the cleverness scale. Ancient or very old forms that form the basis of strong systems often designed to help warriors retake an empire were as carefully designed as any modern weapon of war. Take it apart and you better be skilled enough to build a better one or you just tossed hundreds of years of R&D out the window.

They're not sacred things never to be modified to meet the individuals needs.

Forms can and are modified based on the needs of the individual, indeed they can be adjusted and are for each person. However the formula the messages contained there in are to be preserved, otherwise the message is lost. While the forms are there for US it is up to us not to ruin the hard won information contained therein because we do not understand it.. If you do then you are no longer teaching that form or system as it was intended.

I'd stop short of saying that any of them are a refinement,
and what is a refinement to one person may be wrong for someone else.

The forms in WCK have been changed ever so slightly over the decades. IMO forms are a product of the efforts of many and over the generations forms are a product of slow change and refinement. If you reject this kind of preserved knowledge in favor of your own creation, so be it.

Minor changes will always be made by those in the know and those not in the know. There is the real stuff out there and there is crap. The really good stuff IMO is passed accurately and with great care by those in the know. Those in the know who teach forms and either pass with or without any changes will be able to explain in great detail and *show you* the whys and why nots.

All forms have undergone change, which in small doses I call refinement. The refinements are there to improve the system, if the system is adequate for one or many to study then the change is made with the hope of benefiting the folks training it. A system is a system, you can see it as either something you can benefit from or not. The whole idea of training a system is to benefit from the knowledge contained therein.

If folks reject this process of kata/form information storage and training, and reject the immense value of the knowledge contained in the original forms then clearly the original and encoded DNA value has been lost. In this case, I agree, there is little of the original value left and no real point in training it anymore--change away--but say goodbye to the martial wisdom of the ages..

[Rick Wilson]

How many variations are there of forms?

As many as the people doing them.

I think George nailed this one with his last post.

To think that you will perform a form the same 30 years from now as you do today says you have no intention of learning anything in the next thirty years.

To think that you will perform a form the same 30 years from now as you do today says you can prevent any changes from happening to your body over the next thirty years.

I know some think you cannot learn martial arts from reading books or watching video but you sure can learn “about” martial arts. If you read the histories you see how the real teachers who understood the comments that martial arts are personal often taught the forms and the art differently based on the student.

So when two people argue saying that is how the Master taught me – they are often both right.

My opinion is that if you wish to be a preservationist and wrap a form in plastic then you have every right to do so but if you read the history of martial arts those who mastered the art did the opposite. Simple difference in intent I guess.

Forms change.

Some day we may have video of forms with 30 years difference and then those who think they do it the same as they did may be in for a rather large surprise – probably a pleasant one though.

[Stryke]

Definition of stupidity

doing the same thing and expecting a different result

While I agree there is a template , I think in it`s basic form kata are very basic

the beauty is exploring them in variation , always having a basic template to reference from .

exploring the mechanics and the lines of force , and how the body generates them .

drifitng from the original and alway being able to return compare and start again .

always exploring and reinforcing said basics ....

this is kata , this is karate IMHO

notice all the cool smileys , thats how much I enjoy this method

thats my interpretation of alls in Sanchin

[JimHawkins]

My opinion is that if you wish to be a preservationist and wrap a form in plastic then you have every right to do so but if you read the history of martial arts those who mastered the art did the opposite. Simple difference in intent I guess.

Forms change.

Who said they don't change? I didn't. Perhaps you missed it in my post? The questions are what, when who and why.

Ip Man taught the same forms to everyone, with the exception of William Cheung who is the only one of his students to claim to have learned a completely different set. Aside from William all of his other students were taught the same forms. Ip Man did make slight changes for different students who had "issues" with some of the movements, were particularly tall or short, stiff, or he may have allowed some jerks he didn't like to learn them incorrectly etc, but all the same forms that he himself trained is what he taught. Should I now change the forms around? Is that the "in" thing?

Over the years as I mentioned Ip also made a few subtle changes here and there to the forms but again these were minor changes. In the history of the system these kinds of small changes and additions of other forms such as the long staff were added to the system--that is evolution.

Still, these forms have been passed over several generations and indeed preserve the very core of the system. Even totally different families have ostensibly the same movement components in them that are clearly of the same origin--WCK.

If Ip Man taught you the forms and how to teach them are you going to go out of your way to change them Rick? Are we to take radical changes made now with a grain of salt? Major changes is certainly not something I am going to do without a damn good reason. Seems to me you teach essentially the same three Uechi kata everyone else does--not the same as in the Wakayama days though..

I was taught from one of Ip's students how the forms are played and how they are taught--I have no reason to make any changes today. These forms were put together and handed down with great care and represents generations of WCK knowledge--should they be changed for the sake of change?

To what purpose?

I would not be so arrogant to claim to offer a superior vision or understanding of the WCK system than is already offered in the cumulative knowledge that exists. Those who would do otherwise without many years of valid study and thought I would consider incompetent and rather presumptuous.

What is the long history of change is say the Chen Tai Chi form? Seems to me it looks pretty standard across the board--it was preserved I would assume because it is thought to contain valuble information.. How about Long Fist? The Five Animal Snake form? Lots of radical changes there? I don't think so... I'll take the original Shaolin versions and teachings that go with them anytime...

doing the same thing and expecting a different result

Who is expecting a different result?

Folks who want to learn WCK expect to learn THAT.

There is another saying--If it aint broke don't fix it..

Now if it is broken, then by all means fix it.

While I agree there is a template , I think in it`s basic form kata are very basic

Basic is as basic understands. I can only speak for the forms I know and I assure you they are multileveled and far from basic. They take years of study to fully grasp and if you only see what's on the surface that's all you get.

the beauty is exploring them in variation

For me the study and grasping all the ideas and lessons contained therein to deepen one's understanding of the system is what it's all about--that is if you're interested in learning that system--otherwise no there is no point to preserving and deepening one's understanding and value of the existing forms if there are any.

[Stryke]

I dont think were polls apart Jim , just approaching from different perspectives .

Basic is deep .

we obviously differ on many things but no worrys , Your position is very rational and sound .

just another method . Good thoughts even if I dont agree 100 %