Katame no ... beachtlich

[HBt.]

NBK (Lance Gatling) schreibt nach wie vor:

Katame no kata was compiled between 1884 to 1887, and was largely influenced by Tenshin Shin-yo-ryu jujutsu.

Kano (MoM, p.30):
So ca. um 1887 gewannen wir alle Meetings mit unseren Wurftechniken, doch die anderen Schulen waren alle besser in den Griff & Kontrolltechniken, also beschlossen wir uns in den Haltetechniken zu verbessern.

(frei nacherzählt)

I must point out, though, that as we progress in katamewazain the Kodokan, our progress in nagewaza was interrupted. There is a limit to one's energy, and when energy is expended in one area, other areas become neglected - this is unavoidable.

Kano (Syd Hoare, a history of judo, p.61)

... he first created Nage no kata about 1884-86. Kano said about this: I began by creating the Nage no kata witch at first consisted of ten techniques then fifteen which it still is.

weiter lesen wir: the second Kata that was created was Katame no kata. Representative techniques were chosen from osaekomi ... shime ... and kansetsu-waza to illustrate the principles of groundwork. To start with the Kata consisted of ten techniques in total. This was later increased to fifteen in 1906.

Brian N. Watson in Judo Memoirs of Jigoro Kano, p.79 & 80:

In 1906,
when I was finalizing the compilation of Katame no kata and Kime no kata,
I received advice and co-operation from a number of jujustu masters. They were all members of the Dai Nippon Butokukai, ...
the general consensus was that only one set of Judo katas be standardized by the Dai Nippon Butokukai. After discussions ..., I devised judo katas that were based on jujutsu artistry. Theses judo katas were, upon the aproval of a committee of jujutsu masters, finally sanctioned by the Butokukai for use nationwide.

...

My original Katame no Kata was conceived for the Butokukai and it contained ten techniques, but I later added five more and this revised version eventually gained ... I also considered Katame no Kata a suitable practice for Kodokan students. Since Nage no kata was passed by the Butokukai committee without any recommendations for changes, it is today in all respects the original Kodokan Nage no Kata.

#
Ist Kano Jigoro nun der MACHER der Katame no kata oder ist er es nicht? Hatte er Hilfe, hat er sich die Katame no kata basteln lassen, als Auftragsarbeit ???

Im Grunde genommen existierten alle Kata schon vor 1887++.
Das sie bearbeitet und besprochen werden, ist ganz klar. Will ich etwas unterrichten (auch kulturell erhalten), dann muss unweigerlich beschlossen und besprochen werden ... das ist heute so und das war auch 1900++ so.

Zum Findungsprozess (der Auswahl) existiert also wahrscheinlich keine Primärquelle - auch nicht in den berühmten und geheimnisumwitterten Tagebüchern unseres Shihan (?) !

##

Katame-no-kata likely was not created by Kanô himself contrary to what is commonly claimed.

Diese Aussage macht die ganze Angelegenheit nur noch spannender .

Das Kano irgendetwas ganz alleine gemacht hat (oder hätte), habe ich noch nie geglaubt. Wer macht das schon?

Gruß,
HBt.

[HBt.]

Fragen wir (Lern & Lehrenden) uns, warum die Katame no kata die unbeliebteste Judokata Deutschlands ist!

Wie kommst Du darauf, dass sie die unbeliebteste Kata Deutschlands sei? Quantifizierbar wären ja z.B. Teilnehmer an Katameisterschaften.
(...)

Quantifizierbar sind auch Stimmen aus (und von) der BASIS.

Als Reisender gebe ich kurz die aktuellste Evaluierung wieder:

Von 15 TLN meines jüngsten Angebotes (Nachfrage = Order = an mich herangetretender Wunsch),
sind
5 TLN begeistert vom Formalen Lernen & Lehren (der Katame no kata),
5 TLN sind unschlüssig, ob sie diese Form mögen dürfen oder nicht,
weitere
5 TLN finden das saudoof und wollen sich lieber ordentlich kloppen.

Auch an derlei Stimmen mache ich meine Schlussfolgerungen (und manchmal provozierenden Bemerkungen) fest.

Übrigens möchte das Drittel, das Kata allgemein als Stundeninhalt doof findet, im Gegenzug lieber eine Einheit mit folgender Aufteilung:

1) konditionelle Vorbelastung (nicht judospezifisch) bis zum Brechreiz (gerne auch als Kraftzirkel)
2) im direkten Anschluss "ein anspruchsvolles Judotechniktraining" mit neuen koordinativen Mustern
3) Randori im Shiai-Stil zum restlichen "Auspowern"
4) noch schnell ein Kraftzirkel hinterher, pumpen ...

Wo liegt der Fehler ?!

@Stefan,
deshalb macht mir Judo (sowohl als auch: als TLN oder als verantwortlicher Gestalter) seit vielen Jahren nur noch bedingt Freude.
Im Verlauf eines Lebens erlebt man viel zu häufig Enttäuschungen im Verhältnis zu den positiven und progressiven Rückmeldungen.

Legt man der Basis nahe, doch einmal eine offizielle Ausbildung anzunehmen und über den eigenen Horizont hinaus zu blicken, erntest du (man) oftmals Unverständnis ---> weil man (wir) alle es eh immer besser wissen.

Traurig.

Ist das bei Euch in Baden Württemberg anders?

Um Judo zu lernen, benötigt man die Kodokan-Kata tatsächlich nicht, doch man bleibt unvollständig und auf einer stark limitierten Ebene stecken, ein Leben lang.

Katame no kata
wird immer wieder nur als ein notwendiges Übel für den 2.Dan angesehen, die Kata mit dem blöden Rutschen ... und man hört Fragen (selbst von schon durchgeprüften Danträgern) wie zB.: warum darf ich nicht einfach alle sieben Hebel zeigen und einen Tateshihogatame einbauen ... und und und. Tja, warum darf man nicht einfach eine bestehende Kata nach Gutdünken ändern, warum darf man dieses nicht.
Eine derartige Frage habe ich mir in vierzig Judojahren noch nicht (im Kontext einer Verweigerung) gestellt. Wenn man es erklärt, hört Dir niemand mehr zu, denn die eigentliche Frage will niemand beantwortet haben.

Ach,
vergebliche Liebesmüh. Jeder trainiert für sich alleine



HBt.

PS
Wie bekomme ich alle 15 dazu, begeistert mir zu folgen, sprich' auch einmal dem Instrument Kata eine Chance zu geben? Gar nicht. Aber gezielt /langfristig geplant, so zu trainieren (einen Rahmen zu schaffen), dass sie Landesmeister oder deutscher Meister werden, das wollen sie auch nicht.

Denn alles ist gut, so wie es ist - ohne doofe Kata.

Sinnvollerweise übt man nur mit den 5, die wollen (aus welchen Gründen auch immer). Man muss also eine spezielle Klasse einrichten, immer samstags um 16:00 Uhr ---> um 19:00 Uhr wird dann Abendbrot gegessen.

Shit,
die Sportshow liegt dazwischen. Ok, dann sonntags um 10:00 Uhr ---> ach nee, da muss ich noch schlafen

und wir dürfen eh nicht in unsere Halle.

Warum?

Weil die Halle nur werktags betreten werden darf und auch nicht in den Ferien.

Es ist überall das selbe Theater.

___
Extrapolierende Schlussfolgerungen (vielleicht).

Das Wort "Kraftzirkel" stammt nicht von mir.

[HBt.]

Ergibt es einen Sinn, wenn man im Kyu-Prüfungsprogramm konsequent auch Teile der Katame no kata verankern würde, ebenso wie wir es mit der Nage no kata schon tun ?

[Cichorei Kano]

#
Ist Kano Jigoro nun der MACHER der Katame no kata oder ist er es nicht? Hatte er Hilfe, hat er sich die Katame no kata basteln lassen, als Auftragsarbeit ???

Im Grunde genommen existierten alle Kata schon vor 1887++.
Das sie bearbeitet und besprochen werden, ist ganz klar. Will ich etwas unterrichten (auch kulturell erhalten), dann muss unweigerlich beschlossen und besprochen werden ... das ist heute so und das war auch 1900++ so.

Zum Findungsprozess (der Auswahl) existiert also wahrscheinlich keine Primärquelle - auch nicht in den berühmten und geheimnisumwitterten Tagebüchern unseres Shihan (?) !

##

Katame-no-kata likely was not created by Kanô himself contrary to what is commonly claimed.

Diese Aussage macht die ganze Angelegenheit nur noch spannender .

Das Kano irgendetwas ganz alleine gemacht hat (oder hätte), habe ich noch nie geglaubt. Wer macht das schon?

It would not be professional of me to make use of a public forum to criticize the work of published authors. Depending on the type of publication, the proper way to do this is through either contacting them directly, through a Letter to the Editor, systematic review, scientific conference or peer-reviewed publication. Besides, the rules of this form explicitly say: "Es wird hier im Judoforum keinerlei Diskussionen mehr über Verbände und Personen geben. Themen welche in diese Richtung gehen, werden von uns umgehend kommentarlos geschlossen und archiviert.", and I like to respect these rules. Generally this applies at least to living people, less to "public persons" and generally not to historic and deceased people such as Kanô.

For that reason, really I can only talk directly about Kanô, and perhaps about what the late Sydney Hoare wrote.

Where in a sentence such as, for example "固めお形も、もとは講道館では十本しかなかつたのを、新に五本を加へ、同様の方法で制定したのが今日行はれてるるものである。", about establishing Katame-no-kata as appears in Sakkô, volume 6, issue 12 of December 1927 on page 90, 3rd and 4th line, does Kanô say "I created" ? It doesn't say that and those who read it in there or in the few other original Japanese words from Kanô have a vivid imagination if they read that in there.

What it really says is that originally katame-no-kata at the Kôdôkan consisted of 10 techniques, and later 5 more techniques were added. The "I created" part is nowhere there. One needs to read Kanô literally. He didn't lie. Nothing of what people misunderstand today is Kanô's fault, but of people who came after Kanô and who said or wrote things that Kanô NEVER wrote. Kanô created 4, possibly 5 kata himself, namely nage-no-kata, taisô-no-kata (later jû-no-kata), gôjû-no-kata (later first a combination of jû-no-kata & gô-no-kata, then referring to gô-no-kata), probably shinken shôbu-no-kata (however, as very little is known about the original shôbu-no-kata that preceded the later kime-no-kata, it is very difficult to extablish for certain), and sei-ryoku zen'yô kokumin taiiku. Kanô did not create itsutsu-no-kata, Kitô-ryû-o-kata (both of which already existed and were absorbed from respectively the Tenjin Shin'yô-ryû and Kitô-ryû schools of jûjutsu with the latter kata later renamed Koshiki-no-kata), joshi jûdô goshinhô and Kôdôkan goshinjutsu (both of which were established only around the middle of the 20tht century after his death by two committees of Kôdôkan experts, even though joshi jûdô goshinhô also often appears misleadingly under the name of the Kôdôkan kanchô at the time, Nangô Jirô).

I am not responsible for the historic reinvention that took place after the death of Kanô or for the dozens or hundreds of popular books where one author simply copied from another one, but the amount of misinformation that has become common good is extensive. There are many other similar examples, where common knowledge is completely wrong. Kanô did not himself establish the first gokyô either ... How did people write judo books in the West ? It's a combination of what they heard and what others wrote down after what they heard combined with doses of fantasy and ignorance.

I also do not see any problem with my findings either. It isn't a case of Kanô saying something that is not true; it is a case of others, for whatever reason or motive, later saying something that Kanô never said and unfortunately that becoming common understanding ...

Kanô's expertise was a pedagogue, as a moralist, a physical educationalist and a compiler, he was not some ferocious, invincible fighter who went from dôjô to dôjô defeating the leaders of other schools in this way establishing the superiority of Kôdôkan. It would have sounded nice, but it never took place. Kanô had a number of devoted student, some of whom who really were fighters. In both Chinese and Japanese language the distinction often is not made between "compiling" and "authoring" either. In our modern Germanic languages the difference between both term is very clear though. An author is someone who writes something new, something that requires substantial creative thought. A compiler though is someone who looks for pieces and material authored and created by others and who puts this together in a specific context in this way often making a systematic series of things. Many big names from Chinese and Japanese literature were not authors but compilers, the famous Chinese historiographer Ssu-ma Ch'ien (in PinyinSima Qian) 司馬遷 probably the most well known due to his monumental historic encyclopedia in 130 volumes. Compilers aren't plagiaristsor incompetent, they are generally the same as "editors" of academic books today. The editors did not write themselves every chapter ! They put it together and bear the end responsibility and oversight.

Consider that 80 years after the death of Kanô and almost 160 years after his birth, there still does not exist even a single critical biography of Kanô. If you know Japan a little bit, do you think that EVER anyone employed and paid for by the Kôdôkan will do so ?

That is really all I want to say about this at this point in time. If you want to know more about this, you'll have to wait until my book appears.

[HBt.]

auch immer wieder regelmäßig, die Stimme aus den Reihen der Üblinge, die da lautet:

ich (oder man) kann mir (oder sich) das ja alles gar nicht merken. Also einem 'Zuviel an Informationen', einer Überforderung, einer mangelnden Reduktion - könnte man denken.
Doch es geht nicht darum, sich alles merken zu können und es liegt auch keine Überflutung vor, sondern man könnte doch (im Gegenzug einmal) davon ausgehen, dass sich eine Gruppe fortgeschrittener Üblinge (auch eine nicht unbedeutende Menge an Dan-Trägern), sich so etwas Minimales wie Kuzure-Kesa-gatame gefolgt von Kata-gatame merken können. Oder die Folge: Hadaka-jime, Okuri-eri-jime gefolgt von Kataha-jime. Ein anderes Beispiel könnte sein: Wie nähere ich mich dem wartenden Partner.

Ein ganz, ganz kleines Bisschen an Merkfähigkeit sollte man schon erwarten können. Einen winzigen Teil nur, ein wenig, ganz wenig ... a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z damit fangen wir an (wir sind alle schon weit fortgeschritten - und doch): Bitte nur ein a oder ein o, bloß kein Wort, bloß nicht.

So unterschiedlich kann man ein "wer soll sich das denn alles merken" verstehen.

Scheiße,
der Partner muss sich hinlegen und das darf auch nicht einfach so tun wie er das möchte, Scheiße ... damit fängt es oftmals schon an.

Äußerst interessant ist dann noch die Tatsache, dass niemand in der Lage ist, eine einzige Befreiungsaktion zu starten ... wenn man sie hält, auch ohne Beton.

#
Wann und wo fängt die Überforderung an?

Früher war alles so schön:


heute gibt es Arbeitsaufträge, zum Beispiel:
finde drei aufeinander aufbauende Aktionen (suche Lücken), um dich aus dem momentanen Haltegriff zu befreien, gehe dabei so weit, dass ... und nicht weiter.
oder andere Formulierungen, je nach Zielvorstellung.
u.s.w.

Sollte man besser keine Arbeitsaufträge formulieren ?

Wie nähert man sich dem Untrerrichten mit Hilfe der Kodokan-Kata ?

#
Heimatland
couragiert mit Herz und Hand,
alles ist zu schwer,
jede Herausforderung eine unüberwindbare Hürde.

HBt.

PS
Leider bekomme ich auf Nachfrage nach dem Problem des Nichtmerkenkönnens, auch auf gezielte Fragen, nie brauchbare Antworten.

Vor dieser Herausforderung stehen ehrenamtliche ÜL doch häufiger.

[HBt.]

@CK,
ich kann Dein Post leider erst morgen (richtig) lesen.

It would not be professional of me to make use of a public forum to criticize the work of published authors. Depending on the type of publication, the proper way to do this is through either contacting them directly, through a Letter to the Editor, systematic review, scientific conference or peer-reviewed publication. Besides, the rules of this form explicitly say: "Es wird hier im Judoforum keinerlei Diskussionen mehr über Verbände und Personen geben. Themen welche in diese Richtung gehen, werden von uns umgehend kommentarlos geschlossen und archiviert.", and I like to respect these rules. Generally this applies at least to living people, less to "public persons" and generally not to historic and deceased people such as Kanô.

For that reason, really I can only talk directly about Kanô, and perhaps about what the late Sydney Hoare wrote.

Where in a sentence such as, for example "固めお形も、もとは講道館では十本しかなかつたのを、新に五本を加へ、同様の方法で制定したのが今日行はれてるるものである。", about establishing Katame-no-kata as appears in Sakkô, volume 6, issue 12 of December 1927 on page 90, 3rd and 4th line, does Kanô say "I created" ? It doesn't say that and those who read it in there or in the few other original Japanese words from Kanô have a vivid imagination if they read that in there.

What it really says is that originally katame-no-kata at the Kôdôkan consisted of 10 techniques, and later 5 more techniques were added. The "I created" part is nowhere there. One needs to read Kanô literally. He didn't lie. Nothing of what people misunderstand today is Kanô's fault, but of people who came after Kanô and who said or wrote things that Kanô NEVER wrote. Kanô created 4, possibly 5 kata himself, namely nage-no-kata, taisô-no-kata (later jû-no-kata), gôjû-no-kata (later first a combination of jû-no-kata & gô-no-kata, the referring to gô-no-kata), probably shinken shôbu-no-kata (however, as very little is known about the original shôbu-no-kata that preceded the later kime-no-kata, it is very difficult to extablish for certain), and sei-ryoku zen'yô kokumin taiiku. Kanô did not create itsutsu-no-kata, Kitô-ryû-o-kata (both of which already existed and were absorbed from respectively the Tenjin Shin'yô-ryû and Kitô-ryû schools of jûjutsu with the latter kata later renamed Koshiki-no-kata), joshi jûdô goshinhô and Kôdôkan goshinjutsu (both of which were established only around the middle of the 21st century after his death by two committees of Kôdôkan experts, even though joshi jûdô goshinhô also often appears misleadingly under the name of the Kôdôkan kanchô at the time, Nangô Jirô).

I am not responsible for the historic reinvention that took place after the death of Kanô or for the dozes or hundreds of popular books where one author simply copied from another one, but the amount of misinformation that has become common good is extensive. There are many other similar examples, where common knowledge is completely wrong. Kanô did not himself establish the first gokyô either ... How did people write judo books in the West ? It's a combination of what they heard and what others wrote down after what they heard combined with doses of fantasy and ignorance.

I also do not see any problem with my findings either. It isn't a case of Kanô saying something that is not true; it is a case of others, for whatever reason or motive, later saying something that Kanô never said and unfortunately that becoming common understanding ...

Kanô's expertise was a pedagogue, as a moralist, a physical educationalist and a compiler, he was not some ferocious, invincible fighter who went from dôjô to dôjô defeating the leaders of other schools in this way establishing the superiority of Kôdôkan. It would have sounded nice, but it never took place. Kanô had a number of devoted student, some of whom who really were fighters. In both Chinese and Japanese language the distinction often is not made between "compiling" and "authoring" either. In our modern Germanic languages the difference between both term is very clear though. An author is someone who writes something new, something that requires substantial creative thought. A compiler though is someone who looks for pieces and material authored and created by others and who puts this together in a specific context in this way often making a systematic series of things. Many big names from Chinese and Japanese literature were not authors but compilers, the famous Chinese historiographer Ssu-ma Ch'ien (in PinyinSima Qian) 司馬遷 probably the most well known due to his monumental historic encyclopedia in 130 volumes. Compilers aren't plagiaristsor incompetent, they are generally the same as "editors" of academic books today. The editors did not write themselves every chapter ! They put it together and bear the end responsibility and oversight.

Consider that 80 years after the death of Kanô and almost 160 years after his birth, there still does not exist even a single critical biography of Kanô. If you know Japan a little bit, do you think that EVER anyone employed and paid for by the Kôdôkan will do so ?

That is really all I want to say about this at this point in time. If you want to know more about this, you'll have to wait until my book appears.

Vorab schon einmal wieder nur mein Dankeschön, dafür das Du mit uns deutschen Judoka (hier in diesem Forum) Dein Wissen und einen Teil Deiner Recherche teilst.
Ich hoffe,
wir können uns alle dafür einmal revanchieren ... vielleicht mit einer Kiste Bier .

Möglicherweise schickt der DJB einmal eine Einladung aus dem Ressort Kata an CK.

Grüße,
HBt.

[Fritz]

auch immer wieder regelmäßig, die Stimme aus den Reihen der Üblinge, die da lautet:

ich (oder man) kann mir (oder sich) das ja alles gar nicht merken. Also einem 'Zuviel an Informationen', einer Überforderung, einer mangelnden Reduktion - könnte man denken.

Ja das kenne ich auch irgendwie ... Kinder sind da mittlerweile auch recht gut darin, die können teilweise schneller vergessen, als lernen ...

Perfide wird es, wenn sie sich zwar nicht gemerkt haben, aber trotzdem ganz genau wissen,
daß der jeweilige Inhalt schon mal "drankam", oder die Sache aber ganz anders richtig ist usw. usf.

Und wenn man sich emotional mal richtig "abschießen" will, blättert man in alten Unterlagen u. macht man sich bewußt, daß man eigentlich vielmehr können, wissen u. spontan abrufen können müßte,
als einem gerade aktuell noch in den Sinn kommt ...

[HBt.]

It would not be professional of me to make use of a public forum to criticize the work of published authors. Depending on the type of publication, the proper way to do this is through either contacting them directly, through a Letter to the Editor, systematic review, scientific conference or peer-reviewed publication. Besides, the rules of this form explicitly say: "Es wird hier im Judoforum keinerlei Diskussionen mehr über Verbände und Personen geben. Themen welche in diese Richtung gehen, werden von uns umgehend kommentarlos geschlossen und archiviert.", and I like to respect these rules. Generally this applies at least to living people, less to "public persons" and generally not to historic and deceased people such as Kanô.

Jenes verstehe ich gut, doch die potentielle Gefahr besteht meiner Ansicht nicht. Etwas kontrovers zu diskutieren gibt es in diesem Faden schließlich nicht, jemanden zu diskreditieren ebenfalls nicht.

For that reason, really I can only talk directly about Kanô, and perhaps about what the late Sydney Hoare wrote.

Where in a sentence such as, for example "固めお形も、もとは講道館では十本しかなかつたのを、新に五本を加へ、同様の方法で制定したのが今日行はれてるるものである。", about establishing Katame-no-kata as appears in Sakkô, volume 6, issue 12 of December 1927 on page 90, 3rd and 4th line, does Kanô say "I created" ? It doesn't say that and those who read it in there or in the few other original Japanese words from Kanô have a vivid imagination if they read that in there.

Würde ich die japanische Sprache beherrschen, benötigte ich nicht den Umweg über die englische Sprache, die ebenfalls nicht meiner Muttersprache entspricht.

What it really says is that originally katame-no-kata at the Kôdôkan consisted of 10 techniques, and later 5 more techniques were added. The "I created" part is nowhere there. One needs to read Kanô literally. He didn't lie. Nothing of what people misunderstand today is Kanô's fault, but of people who came after Kanô and who said or wrote things that Kanô NEVER wrote. Kanô created 4, possibly 5 kata himself, namely nage-no-kata, taisô-no-kata (later jû-no-kata), gôjû-no-kata (later first a combination of jû-no-kata & gô-no-kata, then referring to gô-no-kata), probably shinken shôbu-no-kata (however, as very little is known about the original shôbu-no-kata that preceded the later kime-no-kata, it is very difficult to extablish for certain), and sei-ryoku zen'yô kokumin taiiku.

Ein kleines bisschen ist es durchaus bedauerlich nicht mehr gesicherte Aussagen treffen zu können und evtl. Rekonstruktionen zu erstellen ---> zu Studienzwecken und zum besseren Verständnis des Zeitgeschehens.

Kanô did not create itsutsu-no-kata, Kitô-ryû-o-kata (both of which already existed and were absorbed from respectively the Tenjin Shin'yô-ryû and Kitô-ryû schools of jûjutsu with the latter kata later renamed Koshiki-no-kata), joshi jûdô goshinhô and Kôdôkan goshinjutsu (both of which were established only around the middle of the 20tht century after his death by two committees of Kôdôkan experts, even though joshi jûdô goshinhô also often appears misleadingly under the name of the Kôdôkan kanchô at the time, Nangô Jirô).

Ich habe Deine Veröffentlichung zu diesem Thema gelesen und fand sie sehr aufschlussreich und wichtig.

I am not responsible for the historic reinvention that took place after the death of Kanô or for the dozens or hundreds of popular books where one author simply copied from another one, but the amount of misinformation that has become common good is extensive. There are many other similar examples, where common knowledge is completely wrong. Kanô did not himself establish the first gokyô either ... How did people write judo books in the West ? It's a combination of what they heard and what others wrote down after what they heard combined with doses of fantasy and ignorance.

Hier packt mich regelmäßig das Entsetzen, weil man "diese Krankheit" nur schwerlich heilen kann.

I also do not see any problem with my findings either. It isn't a case of Kanô saying something that is not true; it is a case of others, for whatever reason or motive, later saying something that Kanô never said and unfortunately that becoming common understanding ...

Konsens.
Mir ging es darum diesen Punkt noch einmal zu verdeutlichen.

Kanô's expertise was a pedagogue, as a moralist, a physical educationalist and a compiler, he was not some ferocious, invincible fighter who went from dôjô to dôjô defeating the leaders of other schools in this way establishing the superiority of Kôdôkan. It would have sounded nice, but it never took place. Kanô had a number of devoted student, some of whom who really were fighters.

Diese (gesicherte) Tatsache bestreitet hoffentlich weltweit niemand mehr.

In both Chinese and Japanese language the distinction often is not made between "compiling" and "authoring" either. In our modern Germanic languages the difference between both term is very clear though. An author is someone who writes something new, something that requires substantial creative thought. A compiler though is someone who looks for pieces and material authored and created by others and who puts this together in a specific context in this way often making a systematic series of things.

Konsens.

Many big names from Chinese and Japanese literature were not authors but compilers, the famous Chinese historiographer Ssu-ma Ch'ien (in Pinyin Sima Qian) 司馬遷 probably the most well known due to his monumental historic encyclopedia in 130 volumes. Compilers aren't plagiaristsor incompetent, they are generally the same as "editors" of academic books today. The editors did not write themselves every chapter ! They put it together and bear the end responsibility and oversight.

Ich hoffe doch, vielen Lesern ist dieser Unterschied bewusst.

Consider that 80 years after the death of Kanô and almost 160 years after his birth, there still does not exist even a single critical biography of Kanô. If you know Japan a little bit, do you think that EVER anyone employed and paid for by the Kôdôkan will do so ?

Davon gehe ich nicht aus - auch wenn ich kritische Auseinandersetzungen schon sehr schätze, sie müssen schließlich nicht zwangsläufig in einem respekt - u. achtungslosen Diskurs gipfeln.

That is really all I want to say about this at this point in time. If you want to know more about this, you'll have to wait until my book appears.

Lieber "CK",
kannst Du denn schon absehen wann Deine Veröffentlichung das Licht der Welt erblickt oder ist dieser Punkt weiterhin ungeklärt und scheitert an der Finanzierung sowie "den üblichen Verdächtigen ..."



Freundliche Grüße,
HBt.

[HBt.]

http://www.ejudo.fr/fr/federation/forma ... -Kata.aspx
Ein weiteres Seminar. Erstaunlich Murata-san, ich finde er erfüllt seine Aufgabe mit Bravur und einer himmlischen Ruhe, herrlich.

Hier noch zum Abschluss des Fadens Thiemann & Goldschmidt, weil die Perspektive einmal nicht (außschließlich) der üblichen Draufsicht entspricht:

[Cichorei Kano]

It is a great joy to share and discuss with people. However, as I am sure you know the Internet is also a medium that opens itself up to a variety of not so nice things. People have personalities, sympathies and antipathies, and these can take extreme forms.

I think that you understand the point I was trying to make in my previous post, basically that virtually none of the writings that most jûdôka in the West generally consult are scholarly works ... hence there are no specific references and virtually all of them are not based on original sources, but simply copied or summarized from other texts that did not use original texts.

Apart from what I wrote in my previous post, I do not like writing about other authors on a public forum. Even when choosing one's words carefully, not much needs to happen for being misinterpreted or being accuses of prejudice or backstabbing others. In the case of the late Sydney Hoare the problem is even more complicated. Hoare was an experienced jûdôka who lived for four years in Japan, training at the Kôdôka kenshûsei (research student) and became more or less fluent in spoken Japanese and later gained an undergraduate degree in Japanese language and history at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London. For many this could suggest that would ensure precised scholarly work. However, let's be honest: if simply possessing a bachelor's degree in a field would make you a scholar, then everyone who obtains a university degree would be a scholar. I do not write this to disgrace or criticize the legacy of the late Mr. Hoare, but because this is simply true. Thanks to his background, Hoare did get access to a number of original sources, and also had a sincere interest in Japanese jûdô history. Hoare's books are interesting, well-readable and bring joy and retain the interest of many jûdôka wishing to learn a little bit more than what they commonly hear on the tatami. However, Hoare's texts are "popularized history" meaning that while the larger context is often correct the lack of accuracy is often stunning, and typical of someone who does have a "limited" academic background, in the sense that it is much deeper and specific than you would expect from a lay person, but completely lacks the accuracy and detail you would expect from a doctorally trained student. I do not write this to be denigrating towards the late Mr. Hoare, but anyone who has ever taught at at university knows well what the difference in quality is between bachelor's level, master's level, PhD level, and professorial level. This is also logical I think, since if bachelor's would be able to produce the same quality of work, why even have master's courses or PhD dissertations ? When you read this work, much of it is built on anecdotes but for the trained eye it becomes quickly visible that many people who write on jûdô lack ever having been taught hermeneutics, historical methods, etc. In the REAL world these problems generally sort themselves out: bachelor level work typically rarely gets published because when in the form of papers it simply is too low in quality to pass the peer reviewing process. When talking about books, most academic publishers will quickly reject it. However, this is entirely different when you have Internet forums and popular books. Everyone can publish a popular book, and everyone can write a post on the Internet, and this is also what happens, completely with ugly personal fights and all sorts of fabricated accusations.

Regarding the problems in the work of the deceased author I mentioned above I will give a couple of specific examples:

1. many of the Japanese names mentioned by Hoare are wrong and are misreadings of the Kanji meaning he read them as he thought they would be pronounced, but he did not put much effort into actually verifying or finding the sources to assure this pronunciation was correct. A scholar, who would have not found such verification would normally have added the various pronounciations in a footnote pointing out he was unsure.

2. Many dates provided by Hoare are wrong, and are often basic mistakes such as for Shôwa 50 concluding that this 1976 (1926 + 50), when in reality Shôwa 50 obviously is 1975 (1926 + 50 - 1) as 1926 was the first year of Shôwa, not the 0th year.

3. Hoare died from complications of Alzheimer's disease. I do not know when it started, but what I can tell you is that from the first time I became acquainted with the work of Hoare, it made me frown as I had great difficulties joining what I read with his education in Japanese. What I am trying to say is that rather than reading my comments here as suggestive that there was a certain degree of "incompetency" in his work, it might very well be possible that his signs of Alzheimer were already present long before it was medically established. In other words, Hoare regularly made basic mistakes against Japanese that not even an undergraduate student of Japanese would make, and this might very well already have been due to his brain disease.

For me, it is not a problem to "use" the work of Hoare because I know its weaknesses and strengths. In other words, I do not "reject" Hoare's work. The work has merit, but when one's objective is scholarly in nature, one must realize that it must be put in the proper context. Really, things such as this is what scholarly work is all about, that is to critically evaluate other sources.

I sometimes quote his work too sometimes simply in a comparison with others, or as a starting point, but I rarely can maintain what he writes as a final conclusion as usually there is not specific reference of what he writes even when sometimes there is general reference that mentions certain books he consulted.

The reason that I mention a Japanese text here obviously is not because I would assume that you or anyone here in the absence of our late friend Dieter Born is knowledgeable of Japanese. What it means is that the things I say or write about jûdô I do not do lightly. My way of working is not copying from other Western popular texts. Instead I go to extreme lengths to find whatever original or historic texts many unknown even to the Kôdôkan or Japanese historians, and I spare no costs or efforts to do so. I provide the original text exactly as it was written and I provide the exact reference so that if someone does not believe me they can go verify it themselves. This is how every decent scholar does it, and you are fortunate in Germany to have some of the best martial arts scholars, such as e.g. Bittmann, Niehaus, and a couple of others who regularly show what the standard of martial arts writing should be. You were also fortunate to have someone such as the late Dieter Born. There exist some excellent Japanese researchers too, but not surprisingly, they generally function outside of the Kôdôkan. I think that this is not so difficult to understand. Organizations such as the Kôdôkan or IJF gently or less gently "force" those who work for them to write only in a propagandist way. This does not necessarily mean that someone will actually say "you have to write this or that", but it does mean that if you do not do that, you will start to "experience problems", such as being "forgotten" for promotions, "accumulate concerns" or other camouflaged ways to prepare getting rid of you. Even in academia today one is hardly free to still totally freely write about topics: most people at universities who today would speak or write in support of extreme right political views, of sexuality for minors, traditional gender roles, is likely to experience serious problems in his job that will go much further than merely intellectual differences. The same applies in jûdô.

This being said, it is also important to not misinterpret what we write. Nothing I or other scholars write is the absolute, definite truth. All we do is to provide the best possible and most thorough work we can do at this moment in time, so that hopefully others who come after us can start where we left and can do better. As everything in science, rather than providing the absolute truth, the objective is for other scholars to see if they can replicate our research and arrive at similar conclusions. Perhaps they won't, perhaps they will find a weakness or a mistake in our work too, and that is OK, as this is what scientific discourse is and who science progresses. However, to get there were must change what has been done and has been common in jûdô for such a long time. We have to stop furthering myths about Kanô, jûdô, kata. For me neither Kanô, Jûdô or kata have to be perfect, but in order to at least understand them, I think that truth is a better starting point than myth.

[HBt.]

(...)
We have to stop furthering myths about Kanô, jûdô, kata. For me neither Kanô, Jûdô or kata have to be perfect, but in order to at least understand them, I think that truth is a better starting point than myth.

Ich stimme Dir in allen Punkten zu - und kann dem schon Gesagtem auch nichts (wirklich) weiter hinzufügen.

Deine Vorgehensweise hast Du schon öfter erläutert, sie ist korrekt, so macht man dieses - und so wünscht man sich dieses auch als wissenschaftlicher Laie.

#
Gerne hier noch ein Link zu Herrn Bittmann
www.bittmann-verlag.com/index.htm , für alle interessierten Leser dieses Forums ...

Prof. Dr. Andreas Niehaus findet man in Gent, an der dortigen Universität ... manchmal auch im beschaulichen Münster und als Zuhörer Yannick S.



Bzgl. der Katame no kata-Hintergrundinformationen warten wir auf zukünftige Veröffentlichungen, ich bin gespannt darauf.

"wdax" bestimmt auch, um nur einen Namen zu nennen.

[Yannick.Schultze]

Prof. Dr. Andreas Niehaus findet man in Gent, an der dortigen Universität ... manchmal auch im beschaulichen Münster und als Zuhörer Yannick S.

Oh ja, ich war damals tatsächlich bei seinem Vortrag in Münster. Der nebenbei äußerst interessant war. Momentan schlage ich mich in Tōkyō durch und verbringe meine Zeit in der Kōdōkan-Bibliothek...

僕は研究外国人だぜー ！！！

[tutor!]

Dann schau Dir die Widmung vun Glasenapp im Exemplar von "Kano Jiu Jitsu" an....

[HBt.]

Hallo Yannick,
ich wünsche Dir eine schöne Zeit in Japan.

Gruß,
HBt.

[Yannick.Schultze]

Dann schau Dir die Widmung vun Glasenapp im Exemplar von "Kano Jiu Jitsu" an....

Hallo tutor!

Ist schon gesichert... die war noch einfach zu finden. Der Rest um einiges schwieriger.

Gruss
Yannick

[Yannick.Schultze]

Hallo Yannick,
ich wünsche Dir eine schöne Zeit in Japan.

Gruß,
HBt.

Danke

[HBt.]

ist doch ein sehr freundlicher Hinweis auf Deiner ID-Card,
diesen Titel hast Du jetzt weg, und das hast Du nun davon

.

Wǒ shì yī míng wàiguó yánjiùyuán

#
Hoffentlich findest Du alle Informationen die Du noch benötigst.

[mifune10dan]

Hallo zusammen,
ich muss da was berichtigen.
Die Befreiungsversuche von Uke sind sehr wohl vorgegeben, siehe Kodokan Textbook.
Die Wiederbelebung der Katame no Kata wurde schon früher von Sebastian und Seikam und ihrem Trainer und Mentor Kurt Teller sehr fachkundig in der Breite durch sehr viele Lehrgänge vermittelt.Immerhin waren die beiden Vizeweltmeister, Europameister und mehrfach deutscher Meister. Auch in naher Zukunft wird ein Lehrgang, den ich jedem Katame no Interessierten wärmstens empfehlen kann, im hohen Norden Deutschlands von Sebastian Frey gegeben.
Gruß Reinhard

[Fritz]

Die Befreiungsversuche von Uke sind sehr wohl vorgegeben, siehe Kodokan Textbook.

Beim letzten Lehrgang mit einem Kodokan-Japaner, den ich mal besucht hatte, hat dieser uns erklärt, er zeigt uns
die Sachen aus dem Text-Buch u. nicht die aus dem Lehrvideo.

Also ich denke, da ist nichts vorgegeben, sondern im Text-Buch stehen lediglich Beispiele u. im Video sieht man halt andere Beispiele ...

[mifune10dan]

Hallo Fritz,
in einer Kodokan-Kata muss logischerweise etwas vorgegeben sein, sonst wäre es keine Kata.
Wie soll man denn etwas üben, wenn man keine Vorgaben hat.
Hier sind die Befreiungsversuche von Uke eindeutig vorgegeben, jedoch die Reaktionen von Tori relativ frei.
Da Toris Reaktionen logisch sein müssen, besteht da aber auch eine gewisse Einschränkung.
Leider hat das Lehrvideo meiner Meinung nach deutliche Schwächen in der Darstellung. Es sind hier einige Kontrollverluste zu sehen.
Ich würde mich da eher auf Leute wie Kurt Teller bzw. deutsche Spitzenathleten verlassen. Die haben die meiste Erfahrung und wissen, was geht oder nicht geht. Die Videos der japanischen Weltmeister sind auch sehr gut bzw. Wenn du mal eins von Seikam und Sebastian ergattern kannst, dann hast du was Gescheites.