JudoForum.com: Syd Hoare's Go-no-Kata comments - JudoForum.com

Jump to content

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Syd Hoare's Go-no-Kata comments Rate Topic: ***** 1 Votes

#1 User is offline   ipponmaster 

  • Judo Forum Rokkyu
  • Icon
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 29-November 07

Posted 22 February 2010 - 07:30 PM

I have just noticed an interesting article by Syd Hoare on the topic of Go-no-Kata.

You can read it here: http://www.sydhoare.com/Judo.html

Enjoy.
0

#2 User is offline   Sir Harry Flashman 

  • Judo Forum Shodan
  • Icon
  • View blog
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 831
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 23 February 2010 - 01:38 PM

It's a shame that he dismisses its potential, predicting its study will lapse as the result of its unsatisfactory aspects.
I found the weeks we spent on it on our club to be quite satisfactory, and I wrote about it extensively in my blog, beginning with this entry:

http://judoforum.com...?showentry=1288

I highly recommend the Go No kata to anybody with sufficient courage and independence. Have fun. Get it as wrong as we did. It's a tremendous resource that should not be ignored.
0

#3 User is offline   NBK 

  • Just happy to be here....
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 2,239
  • Joined: 14-January 07

Posted 23 February 2010 - 07:27 PM

He also seems to believe that the study of go no kata did not survive into the current day without a break, and that all instruction today is a reconstruction. This would seem to disregard a couple of pockets that seem to have preserved the original kata.


柔能制剛 - 弱能制強
黄石公三略 上略
0

#4 User is offline   Jonesy 

  • Judo Forum Godan
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 4,351
  • Joined: 02-July 05

Posted 23 February 2010 - 08:09 PM

Below is Syd's article. I will respond to it when I am so motivated:

GO NO KATA (The kata of resistance)

There seems to be a certain amount of agitation among the cyber-senseis about the long abandoned Go no Kata of Jigoro Kano. It is said that he constructed it in contrast to the kata of yielding (Ju no Kata). The kata is often written Go Ju no Kata in Japanese books. Basically one side pushes or pulls, the other side resists (go) then the initial attacker adapts his attack (ju) to overcome the other which sounds pretty much like everyday judo. It reminds me of world champion Sugai’s description of judo as ‘skilful adaptation under stress’.

According to the authoritative biography Kano Jigoro published by the Kodokan in 1964 the Go no Kata was devised and taught by Kano in the early days but its usage lapsed because Kano thought it had some ‘unsatisfactory’ aspects (i ni mitanai) which required improvement (ichidan no kairyo ga hitsuyo….). What they were he never spelled out. (see p. 381)

Now some work by various diligent researchers has unearthed a version of the kata which may well be the kata as originally taught by Kano a long time ago. This is just possible because some may remember what their teachers (not Kano) taught them of it. There is nobody now alive who would have experienced it first hand from Kano.

The same biography quoted above also has a long section (p. 324 – 332) on the development of a new principle beyond the principle of Ju. It is entitled (Ju no Ri kara shingenri e no hatten). In other words Kano did not regard the principle of Ju as the final one. He thought Seiryoku Zenyo was and here he is interpreting it as a technical (not moral) principle akin to the idea of maximum efficiency minimum effort/best use of mind and body.

At this point I concede that it is probably about time I revisited Japan to scour the book shops and libraries and talk to old friends there. Information can come from odd sources which paradoxically may be more credible than orthodox ones. It is even possible that Kano contradicts himself. Most of what he had to say about judo was in lectures/talks which were subsequently produced in various magazines. . How correctly we may never know He wrote extremely little in book form. More translations of his work are required.

The undeniable fact is that the teaching and practice of the Go no kata lapsed a long time ago. So where does that leave us now? I suspect that the current revival of the kata will take the same course it took many years ago when Kano was alive. It will lapse again because of its ‘unsatisfactory’ aspects.

The big question which is never touched on in the great cyber dojo is who has the authority to decide on the ‘unsatisfactory’ aspects and how they can be improved. Anybody who presumes to revive and/or improve the kata is asserting a knowledge of judo greater than that of Kano. The current 10th Dans do not have that authority. The tragedy of Kodokan judo is that Kano did not have a son who was good enough at judo to be able enough to move it out of a purely Japanese context to fit a more international one.

From a Japanese point of view judo froze in time in 1938 when Kano died. He created Kodokan Judo which ipso facto made him the master or Shihan) of the school. What he created could of course be changed by him while he was still alive but not after his death. This is known as the iemoto (master of the school) in Japan and it has created many problems in other ‘schools’. One rare exception is the father and son Kanami and Zeami and their schools of Noh theatre and art. Kanami stood on the shoulders of his father. Attempts to create new kata in Kodokan judo have always foundered on this iemoto point. Goshinjitsu is an example. Is it a kata or not and why?

Apart from all the considerations above one can perhaps understand why Kano had reservations about the Kata. The kata, as available on the internet, does not flow that well and the responding techniques do not especially ‘click’. For example there are a number of times where tori moves behind uke and does a rear daki-age/uranage-like move which as it stand is virtually unworkable. See how wrestlers do it. Also the tension that is created with the pushing and pulling is either handled by turning on the periphery of it or is simply converted with a ju yielding motion. Some of the techniques look like sumo and taichi especially its ‘pushing hands’ exercise (tsui-shu). Finally some of the jigotai postures cry out for a ko-uchi-gari. If you can’t go through the arms attack the legs!

The Go no kata is a very interesting historical relic of judo. I do not think it holds any answers to the prevalent muscular style of judo. Sumo is much better at dealing with resistance than judo especially with its technical use of doshin (concentricity) and its hiraku and soto/uchi muso techniques (. The pushing hands practice of Taichi, however, could be worth doing on a regular basis. Perhaps the go ju no kata also owes something to the Chinese martial arts practice of strong (go) breath out and soft (ju) breath in. Maybe there is more to this than meets the eye.

But don’t forget Kano stopped using it!

Dr Llyr C Jones
0

#5 User is offline   Cichorei Kano 

  • Judo Forum Hachidan
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 19,252
  • Joined: 29-January 06

Posted 23 February 2010 - 08:34 PM

View PostJonesy, on Feb 24 2010, 05:09 AM, said:

Now some work by various diligent researchers has unearthed a version of the kata which may well be the kata as originally taught by Kano a long time ago. This is just possible because some may remember what their teachers (not Kano) taught them of it. There is nobody now alive who would have experienced it first hand from Kano.


Keiko Fukuda told me in person she actually saw with her own eyes gô-no-kata being performed a long, long time ago, but was never taught the kata herself. This was presumably by Sakamoto Fusatarô, 9th dan, who did learn from Kanô personally. Sakamoto was not only an adept of gô-no-kata, but had some involvement with the Joshi-bu, as he was also instrumental in the development of Joshi goshinhô. His experience as a menkyo kaiden of Tenjin Shinyô-ryû was likely related to him being chosen as an expert in the development of Joshi Goshinhô. He also was the jûjutsu mentor of Toshihirô Kubota, current shihanke of TSYR.
"The world is a republic of mediocrities, and always was." (Thomas Carlyle)
"Nothing is as approved as mediocrity, the majority has established it and it fixes it fangs on whatever gets beyond it either way." (Blaise Pascal)
"Quand on essaie, c'est difficile. Quand on n'essaie pas, c'est impossible" (Guess Who ?)
"I am never wrong. Once I thought I was, and that was a mistake."
0

#6 User is offline   johan smits 

  • Judo Forum Ikkyu
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 558
  • Joined: 22-June 05

Posted 24 February 2010 - 10:17 AM

First of all.
The fact that I come from Holland authorises me to write about these matters without sufficient background information (a custom among Dutch authors) -_-

I feel particularly nasty today but I am also confused. :blink:

Kano created Kodokan Judo?
I always understood he came up with the original idea and then he had heaps of jujutsuteachers to help him create Kodokan judo. Him not being The Creator (Kano was human after all) it seems to me that - in theory at least - other people should be abel to think and create likewise. Are such people among us today? Yes and they are all from Holland.

The question of Goshinjutsu being a kata or not is beyond me?
It is almost pure aikido from that perspective it may not be a Kodokan judo kata. Kata is prearranged training? Then it is kata. It is however created in a very different time, so I expect the feel to be different (by the way in my experience the feel of judo is really different from the feel of aikido.

Go no kata practice willl lapse again?
I do not not think so because the goal of practicing Go no kata today is very different. Kano created Go no kata as a young teacher of jujutsu who was searching for answers and at that age he himself was still developing.
It seems to me there are many more reasons to practice Go no kata today than there were in Kano's days.

Come to think of it I never found much 'flow'in the idori section of Kime no kata either - but maybe that's just me. :unsure:

Happy landings,

Johan Smits

This post has been edited by johan smits: 24 February 2010 - 10:18 AM

0

#7 User is offline   NBK 

  • Just happy to be here....
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 2,239
  • Joined: 14-January 07

Posted 24 February 2010 - 10:05 PM

View Postjohan smits, on Feb 24 2010, 07:17 PM, said:

First of all.
The fact that I come from Holland authorises me to write about these matters without sufficient background information (a custom among Dutch authors) -_-

I feel particularly nasty today but I am also confused. :blink:

Kano created Kodokan Judo?
I always understood he came up with the original idea and then he had heaps of jujutsuteachers to help him create Kodokan judo. Him not being The Creator (Kano was human after all) it seems to me that - in theory at least - other people should be abel to think and create likewise. Are such people among us today? Yes and they are all from Holland.

The question of Goshinjutsu being a kata or not is beyond me?
It is almost pure aikido from that perspective it may not be a Kodokan judo kata. Kata is prearranged training? Then it is kata. It is however created in a very different time, so I expect the feel to be different (by the way in my experience the feel of judo is really different from the feel of aikido.

Go no kata practice willl lapse again?
I do not not think so because the goal of practicing Go no kata today is very different. Kano created Go no kata as a young teacher of jujutsu who was searching for answers and at that age he himself was still developing.
It seems to me there are many more reasons to practice Go no kata today than there were in Kano's days.

Come to think of it I never found much 'flow'in the idori section of Kime no kata either - but maybe that's just me. :unsure:

Happy landings,

Johan Smits

'Kime no kata' is pretty tough to do well, and the idori section has some very tough moves. You do not see many older judoka practicing it, but rather younger folks.

I think it is rather raw, unpolished, myself. It looks like a grab bag from a number of different jujutsu styles, but I have no real idea of which styles.

The 1906 Butokukai Committee that accepted Nage no Kata had a significant disagreement over Kime no Kata; perhaps CK knows why. I have not researched that yet, but think there is a place to look. However, there is no discussion in the committee report, which I have. Did they disagree on the 'flow'? Choice of techniques? Number? I do not know, but I do not find it so enjoyable.

But I agree with Johan - I do not think that Go no Kata will disappear again. Maybe it will become more polished as more people tinker with it.


柔能制剛 - 弱能制強
黄石公三略 上略
0

#8 User is offline   Cichorei Kano 

  • Judo Forum Hachidan
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 19,252
  • Joined: 29-January 06

Posted 25 February 2010 - 02:26 AM

View PostNBK, on Feb 25 2010, 07:05 AM, said:

'Kime no kata' is pretty tough to do well, and the idori section has some very tough moves. You do not see many older judoka practicing it, but rather younger folks.

I think it is rather raw, unpolished, myself. It looks like a grab bag from a number of different jujutsu styles, but I have no real idea of which styles.

The 1906 Butokukai Committee that accepted Nage no Kata had a significant disagreement over Kime no Kata; perhaps CK knows why. I have not researched that yet, but think there is a place to look. However, there is no discussion in the committee report, which I have. Did they disagree on the 'flow'? Choice of techniques? Number? I do not know, but I do not find it so enjoyable.

But I agree with Johan - I do not think that Go no Kata will disappear again. Maybe it will become more polished as more people tinker with it.


The disagreement had to do mostly with the techniques in terms of effectiveness, but also there was at least an unspoken expectation of some sort of recognition of other schools present by choice of techniques; after all, the committee considered of various koryû masters and choosing the techniques all from a single school would suggest a superiority of that school and a slap in the face to most of those masters. Also, note that there seems to be a general misunderstanding that the kata were to serve as 'just' Kôdôkan jûdô kata. Various Butokukai sources suggest that those kata were to become kata of much more than just the Kôdôkan ...
"The world is a republic of mediocrities, and always was." (Thomas Carlyle)
"Nothing is as approved as mediocrity, the majority has established it and it fixes it fangs on whatever gets beyond it either way." (Blaise Pascal)
"Quand on essaie, c'est difficile. Quand on n'essaie pas, c'est impossible" (Guess Who ?)
"I am never wrong. Once I thought I was, and that was a mistake."
0

#9 User is offline   johan smits 

  • Judo Forum Ikkyu
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 558
  • Joined: 22-June 05

Posted 25 February 2010 - 06:42 PM

View PostCichorei Kano, on Feb 25 2010, 03:26 AM, said:

The disagreement had to do mostly with the techniques in terms of effectiveness, but also there was at least an unspoken expectation of some sort of recognition of other schools present by choice of techniques; after all, the committee considered of various koryû masters and choosing the techniques all from a single school would suggest a superiority of that school and a slap in the face to most of those masters. Also, note that there seems to be a general misunderstanding that the kata were to serve as 'just' Kôdôkan jûdô kata. Various Butokukai sources suggest that those kata were to become kata of much more than just the Kôdôkan ...


Could this mean that Butokukai influence on forming these kata was greater than what we - as unsuspecting onlookers - are usually led to believe? Or maybe Butokukai itself was working hard to unite (let's say all) of Japan's ryu?
If the isssue was effectiveness of techniques than Butokukai must have had a very different agenda than Kano had.

This is getting difficult :huh:

Happy landings,

Johan Smits
0

#10 User is offline   Cichorei Kano 

  • Judo Forum Hachidan
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 19,252
  • Joined: 29-January 06

Posted 25 February 2010 - 09:40 PM

View Postjohan smits, on Feb 26 2010, 03:42 AM, said:

Could this mean that Butokukai influence on forming these kata was greater than what we - as unsuspecting onlookers - are usually led to believe? Or maybe Butokukai itself was working hard to unite (let's say all) of Japan's ryu?
If the isssue was effectiveness of techniques than Butokukai must have had a very different agenda than Kano had.

This is getting difficult :huh:

Happy landings,

Johan Smits


Various historic sources talk about those kata becoming the standardized 'jûjutsu' kata almost to the extent that it is suggested that those koryû schools too would enrich their curriculum with the new Kanô kata. I must admit that I have no idea how that would happen and if that is in any way realistic. After all, the koryû schools rigorously follow the catalogues of techniques as they are usually contained in their transmitted scrolls, thus simply the idea that they would be willing to change hundreds of years of traditions and the written word by adding some 'weird' modern techniques that may not even share the origins of their schools, is odd, and something that has puzzled me for a long time. For some time, I though, maybe the term 'jûjutsu' is just used to refer to the early Kanô school, namely as Kanô-ryû jûjutsu, yet that is clearly not true. The other alternative would be that such view are just from the hand of naive authors. That too is hard to believe as I have read those suggestions in various sources not linked to each other.
"The world is a republic of mediocrities, and always was." (Thomas Carlyle)
"Nothing is as approved as mediocrity, the majority has established it and it fixes it fangs on whatever gets beyond it either way." (Blaise Pascal)
"Quand on essaie, c'est difficile. Quand on n'essaie pas, c'est impossible" (Guess Who ?)
"I am never wrong. Once I thought I was, and that was a mistake."
0

#11 User is offline   Jonesy 

  • Judo Forum Godan
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 4,351
  • Joined: 02-July 05

Posted 25 February 2010 - 10:37 PM

Quote

GO NO KATA (The kata of resistance)

There seems to be a certain amount of agitation among the cyber-senseis about the long abandoned Go no Kata of Jigoro Kano.

No agitation at all - just the recent publication of a trilogy of paper that represent the most comprehensive research on the Go-no-Kata ever performed.

Quote

It is said that he constructed it in contrast to the kata of yielding (Ju no Kata). The kata is often written Go Ju no Kata in Japanese books. Basically one side pushes or pulls, the other side resists (go) then the initial attacker adapts his attack (ju) to overcome the other which sounds pretty much like everyday judo. It reminds me of world champion Sugai’s description of judo as ‘skilful adaptation under stress’.

This is correct

Quote

According to the authoritative biography Kano Jigoro published by the Kodokan in 1964 the Go no Kata was devised and taught by Kano in the early days but its usage lapsed because Kano thought it had some ‘unsatisfactory’ aspects (i ni mitanai) which required improvement (ichidan no kairyo ga hitsuyo….). What they were he never spelled out. (see p. 381)

This is correct.

Quote

Now some work by various diligent researchers has unearthed a version of the kata which may well be the kata as originally taught by Kano a long time ago. This is just possible because some may remember what their teachers (not Kano) taught them of it. There is nobody now alive who would have experienced it first hand from Kano.

See comment by CK.

Quote

The same biography quoted above also has a long section (p. 324 – 332) on the development of a new principle beyond the principle of Ju. It is entitled (Ju no Ri kara shingenri e no hatten). In other words Kano did not regard the principle of Ju as the final one. He thought Seiryoku Zenyo was and here he is interpreting it as a technical (not moral) principle akin to the idea of maximum efficiency minimum effort/best use of mind and body.

Interesting

Quote

At this point I concede that it is probably about time I revisited Japan to scour the book shops and libraries and talk to old friends there. Information can come from odd sources which paradoxically may be more credible than orthodox ones. It is even possible that Kano contradicts himself. Most of what he had to say about judo was in lectures/talks which were subsequently produced in various magazines. . How correctly we may never know He wrote extremely little in book form. More translations of his work are required.

Accurate reliable translations of Kano’s work are always welcome.

Quote

The undeniable fact is that the teaching and practice of the Go no kata lapsed a long time ago. So where does that leave us now? I suspect that the current revival of the kata will take the same course it took many years ago when Kano was alive. It will lapse again because of its ‘unsatisfactory’ aspects.

Reading De Cree and Jones will confirm that this is incorrect. The teaching of the Go-no-Kata did not lapse – it was kept alive by Nagaoka, Sakamoto, Sato, Kuhara, Ochiai and the Doyukai.

Quote

The big question which is never touched on in the great cyber dojo is who has the authority to decide on the ‘unsatisfactory’ aspects and how they can be improved. Anybody who presumes to revive and/or improve the kata is asserting a knowledge of judo greater than that of Kano. The current 10th Dans do not have that authority. The tragedy of Kodokan judo is that Kano did not have a son who was good enough at judo to be able enough to move it out of a purely Japanese context to fit a more international one.

The appointment of Uemura as Kancho of the Kodokan essentially ends the “soke” system in the Kodokan. A “panel” of experts could have the authority, but it is probably unlikely. Judo is now more international that it has ever been. The IJF have seen to that. It is way removed from a Japanese context and that is a bad thing in my view.

Quote

From a Japanese point of view judo froze in time in 1938 when Kano died. He created Kodokan Judo which ipso facto made him the master or Shihan) of the school. What he created could of course be changed by him while he was still alive but not after his death. This is known as the iemoto (master of the school) in Japan and it has created many problems in other ‘schools’. One rare exception is the father and son Kanami and Zeami and their schools of Noh theatre and art. Kanami stood on the shoulders of his father. Attempts to create new kata in Kodokan judo have always foundered on this iemoto point. Goshinjitsu is an example. Is it a kata or not and why?

Goshin jutsu is an interesting one – it is a relatively informal kata and is not a “something”-no-kata.

Quote

Apart from all the considerations above one can perhaps understand why Kano had reservations about the Kata. The kata, as available on the internet, does not flow that well and the responding techniques do not especially ‘click’. For example there are a number of times where tori moves behind uke and does a rear daki-age/uranage-like move which as it stand is virtually unworkable. See how wrestlers do it. Also the tension that is created with the pushing and pulling is either handled by turning on the periphery of it or is simply converted with a ju yielding motion. Some of the techniques look like sumo and taichi especially its ‘pushing hands’ exercise (tsui-shu). Finally some of the jigotai postures cry out for a ko-uchi-gari. If you can’t go through the arms attack the legs!

It is just conjecture and speculation as to which aspects Kano found unsatisfactory

Quote

The Go no kata is a very interesting historical relic of judo. I do not think it holds any answers to the prevalent muscular style of judo. Sumo is much better at dealing with resistance than judo especially with its technical use of doshin (concentricity) and its hiraku and soto/uchi muso techniques (. The pushing hands practice of Taichi, however, could be worth doing on a regular basis. Perhaps the go ju no kata also owes something to the Chinese martial arts practice of strong (go) breath out and soft (ju) breath in. Maybe there is more to this than meets the eye.

The Go-no-Kata was a physical conditioning exercise as well as a judo kata. It does provide a very effective “warm up”

Quote

But don’t forget Kano stopped using it!

Yes – but he never said “do not practice it.” In his writings he said “I leave that up to you.”
Dr Llyr C Jones
0

#12 User is offline   Hanon 

  • Judo Forum Shichidan
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 7,667
  • Joined: 19-February 07

Posted 26 February 2010 - 01:32 AM

View PostNBK, on Feb 24 2010, 10:05 PM, said:

'Kime no kata' is pretty tough to do well, and the idori section has some very tough moves. You do not see many older judoka practicing it, but rather younger folks.

I think it is rather raw, unpolished, myself. It looks like a grab bag from a number of different jujutsu styles, but I have no real idea of which styles.

The 1906 Butokukai Committee that accepted Nage no Kata had a significant disagreement over Kime no Kata; perhaps CK knows why. I have not researched that yet, but think there is a place to look. However, there is no discussion in the committee report, which I have. Did they disagree on the 'flow'? Choice of techniques? Number? I do not know, but I do not find it so enjoyable.

But I agree with Johan - I do not think that Go no Kata will disappear again. Maybe it will become more polished as more people tinker with it.



My dear friend if you ever have the chance to see two 'genuine' experts (in particular Butokukai trained) perform the Kime no kata it will teach you by pure visualisation just how action-reaction work in a fluid way with calm mind and definitive reaction for a tori. The Kime no kata when performed by such said experts flows like water and is devastatingly effective. If you ever travel to France I suggest you look up Monducci sensei (sp?) Gave me a very very respectful completion in this kata. Kime shiki, wonderful, just wonderful.

How are you?

Mike
0

#13 User is offline   NBK 

  • Just happy to be here....
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 2,239
  • Joined: 14-January 07

Posted 26 February 2010 - 07:57 AM

View PostHanon, on Feb 26 2010, 10:32 AM, said:

My dear friend if you ever have the chance to see two 'genuine' experts (in particular Butokukai trained) perform the Kime no kata it will teach you by pure visualisation just how action-reaction work in a fluid way with calm mind and definitive reaction for a tori. The Kime no kata when performed by such said experts flows like water and is devastatingly effective. If you ever travel to France I suggest you look up Monducci sensei (sp?) Gave me a very very respectful completion in this kata. Kime shiki, wonderful, just wonderful.

How are you?

Mike

Hi, Hanon sensei.

I am not saying that the kata are ineffective, but rather that overall it seems a bit unpolished, like a grab bag of techniques from different schools, or sampling of portions of other kata - which it probably is. Witness the single 'short sword technique'. There are certainly very effective moves within it.

I am 'down in the back', as they say in my neck of the woods, from over-indulgence in some koryu jujutsu after 2 weeks of largely sedentary business and business groups in Tokyo, out every night. In particular a move in which uke stabs and tori takes his wrist and launches self and uke into the floor, face first, I felt it the next day, and the day after that, etc.....

So, tomorrow I refrain from practicing myself and take up the long-anticipated offer of a session of kengaku from another koryu jujutsu group in Tokyo, this one more closely related to Kodokan judo than most.

Quote

Various historic sources talk about those kata becoming the standardized 'jûjutsu' kata almost to the extent that it is suggested that those koryû schools too would enrich their curriculum with the new Kanô kata. I must admit that I have no idea how that would happen and if that is in any way realistic. After all, the koryû schools rigorously follow the catalogues of techniques as they are usually contained in their transmitted scrolls, thus simply the idea that they would be willing to change hundreds of years of traditions and the written word by adding some 'weird' modern techniques that may not even share the origins of their schools, is odd, and something that has puzzled me for a long time. For some time, I though, maybe the term 'jûjutsu' is just used to refer to the early Kanô school, namely as Kanô-ryû jûjutsu, yet that is clearly not true. The other alternative would be that such view are just from the hand of naive authors. That too is hard to believe as I have read those suggestions in various sources not linked to each other.


I wonder if the koryu jujutsu masters were simply exploring some sort of cooperation with Kano - after all, he led the jujutsu division of the Butokukai, was recognized as a jujutsu hanshi or so by the Butokukai, and was seemingly on a roll, putting judo into the public school system (IIRC he got this done by then), and perhaps they thought there was something to be done in cooperation? Prior to this, most of the schools seemed to be on hard times, witness the gekikiken exhibitions, etc.

Quote

Accurate reliable translations of Kano’s work are always welcome.

I just heard about a significant one - it will be interesting to see if it comes to fruition.

Cheers,




柔能制剛 - 弱能制強
黄石公三略 上略
0

#14 User is offline   johan smits 

  • Judo Forum Ikkyu
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 558
  • Joined: 22-June 05

Posted 26 February 2010 - 09:46 AM

View PostCichorei Kano, on Feb 25 2010, 10:40 PM, said:

Various historic sources talk about those kata becoming the standardized 'jûjutsu' kata almost to the extent that it is suggested that those koryû schools too would enrich their curriculum with the new Kanô kata. I must admit that I have no idea how that would happen and if that is in any way realistic. After all, the koryû schools rigorously follow the catalogues of techniques as they are usually contained in their transmitted scrolls, thus simply the idea that they would be willing to change hundreds of years of traditions and the written word by adding some 'weird' modern techniques that may not even share the origins of their schools, is odd, and something that has puzzled me for a long time. For some time, I though, maybe the term 'jûjutsu' is just used to refer to the early Kanô school, namely as Kanô-ryû jûjutsu, yet that is clearly not true. The other alternative would be that such view are just from the hand of naive authors. That too is hard to believe as I have read those suggestions in various sources not linked to each other.


But is that not the answer you are giving now? I mean 'enriching' the tradition is not the same as changing it. Although my experience with koryu is limited, to my knowledge there are several traditions who 'enriched' their traditions when they saw the need to it. Araki-ryu is one of them. Myote was added to their curriculum as an answer to Kodokan judo I think (Ellis Amdur writes about that). Fusen-ryu also has techniques from the outside. Maybe more schools had them.
What they had in common was that those additions to their curriculum were always added by somone of their own ryu.
Maybe that was why the sensei from different ryu were consultated. No so much for their creativity but maybe more as a marketing strategy. To be abel to say the 'enrichment' to their curriculum was (at least partly) their own doing.

Happy landings,

Johan Smits

This post has been edited by johan smits: 26 February 2010 - 09:48 AM

0

#15 User is offline   Cichorei Kano 

  • Judo Forum Hachidan
  • Icon
  • Group: Special Members
  • Posts: 19,252
  • Joined: 29-January 06

Posted 26 February 2010 - 11:47 AM

View Postjohan smits, on Feb 26 2010, 06:46 PM, said:

But is that not the answer you are giving now? I mean 'enriching' the tradition is not the same as changing it. Although my experience with koryu is limited, to my knowledge there are several traditions who 'enriched' their traditions when they saw the need to it. Araki-ryu is one of them. Myote was added to their curriculum as an answer to Kodokan judo I think (Ellis Amdur writes about that). Fusen-ryu also has techniques from the outside. Maybe more schools had them.
What they had in common was that those additions to their curriculum were always added by somone of their own ryu.
Maybe that was why the sensei from different ryu were consultated. No so much for their creativity but maybe more as a marketing strategy. To be abel to say the 'enrichment' to their curriculum was (at least partly) their own doing.

Happy landings,

Johan Smits


I cannot answer these questions beyond speculation. Is it possible ? Perhaps. What we know as Itsutsu-no-kata today, does not appear to have existed yet when Tenjin Shinyô-ryû was first created, and Kitô-ryû too received extra techniques later. Then again, knowing that Kitô-ryû had many different types of kata and over a hundred techniques of which today we no longer know how to perform them, often not even how to properly pronounce the kanji for those techniques, I find it hard to imagine that, let's say Kitô-ryû would absorb nage-no-kata and kime-no-kata as techniques of its own, as they are clearly not Kitô-ryû and differ in principles. For example, Kitô-ryû focuses on throwing, not on katame-waza, which is a core of kime-no-kata.
"The world is a republic of mediocrities, and always was." (Thomas Carlyle)
"Nothing is as approved as mediocrity, the majority has established it and it fixes it fangs on whatever gets beyond it either way." (Blaise Pascal)
"Quand on essaie, c'est difficile. Quand on n'essaie pas, c'est impossible" (Guess Who ?)
"I am never wrong. Once I thought I was, and that was a mistake."
0

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic