Karate, not a Martial Art ?

[shaolin-warrior]

I recently read an article in Black Belt Magazine that sparked some debate between my my wife and I. Heres a quote, tell me what you think.

BLACKBELT JANUARY 2006 "WHAT'S IN A NAME" BY DAVE LOWERY

" Karate wouldn't be considered a martial art because a professional fighting class never used it. There's some evidence that Karate owes much of its original development to a gentrified class of scholars, law enforcement officers and royal guards. Therefore, while you could consider it an Okinawan martial art, it would be stretching things a bit to consider its originators a class of professional fighting men. Karate was an art of non professional warriors. There wasn't a single Okinawan karateka who could be considered a full time fighter. Nor would they have wanted to be. Karate was a civilian combative art, and it remains so today."

[kungfupanda]

im sorry..what's the point?

[shaolin-warrior]

Nothing to deep, just posted it to invoke thought.
I guess that unless you study some form of art passed down from samuri lineage, your not a martial artist.ie. swordsmanship, kenjutsu.

[kungfupanda]

what i meant was...did the author of the article you quoted have a point? does he want us to change what we call karate? stop doing it? kill ourselves for being stupid? what is he trying to accomplish with that rant? I...dont...get...it...??? LOL

[pstevens]

I recently read an article in Black Belt Magazine that sparked some debate between my my wife and I. Heres a quote, tell me what you think.

BLACKBELT JANUARY 2006 "WHAT'S IN A NAME" BY DAVE LOWERY

" Karate wouldn't be considered a martial art because a professional fighting class never used it. There's some evidence that Karate owes much of its original development to a gentrified class of scholars, law enforcement officers and royal guards. Therefore, while you could consider it an Okinawan martial art, it would be stretching things a bit to consider its originators a class of professional fighting men. Karate was an art of non professional warriors. There wasn't a single Okinawan karateka who could be considered a full time fighter. Nor would they have wanted to be. Karate was a civilian combative art, and it remains so today."

Actually, I agree with this notion on a grande scale... Martial arts refers to the "war-related" arts that each civilization employed at the time. There's nothing "martial" about what we do at all today - it's all for the sake of sport, hobby or self-preservation. The REAL martial arts of today would actually be the army, marines, navy etc...

But I think the term "martial art" has stuck because of the mystic it brings, and for marketing purposes. There's really no going back now, since it's already been branded.

[Jamie"Spitfire"]

Definition?

Define a martial art. Define what it means to be a martial artist. Is it a good fighter, a warrior? Is it someone who has had years of field expertise, and knows the workings of both body mechanics and discipline? or is it mearly someone who can rant a load of rubbish, which fuels the ego`s of the men who want to listen?. We need to look at this openly. There are no right or wrong ways, in fact there are no ways at all. We name technique and discipline, but that is only because of the minds folly. In actual fact they do not exist(non-physical). How can we brand a movement?. The term art relates to the free creative expression of soul. Without hinderance or without predetermined moutcome, the movements of martial arts could be seen. They like art have no desired, or predetermined outcome(at least proper art, other art may be described as decoration(fancy pish)), Proper art is free, abstract thought. Fighting however can not be art, as it has a decisive outcome(1 way), to live or die. I explain these philosophies in a short book, called "The Art Of Movement, The Way Of Conflict." Would be interesting to hear what you would define a good martial artist to be (hard one) or what a good fighter should be. If we can define it we can surpass it respect

[shaolin-warrior]

Great posts!
A good practitioner is just that , but does that make him an artist. i think not. I've met great stylist and know men who posess great knowledge about their style of art. This is impressive, and rightfully so. But I know very few true martial artists. It's not in the definition of the name, or the lineage of the style, but it's in the humility of the heart. It is appreciating everyone who has gone before you every time you tie on your black belt. It's in the 30sec. Kata that you can perform with little or no thought, or with the realizationand appreciation that this was passed on with pride, from generation to generation for the preservation of blood line. It is how you carry yourself in and out of the dojo, It is how you respect yourself and others. It is in your head, heart, blood that runs through your veins and the air that you breath. It's how you respect your style with your actions and it's how you respect the art or style of others. It's knowing how to empty yourself so that you may become full.

[Toudiyama[NL]]

Ok, In Japan you have Bu-jitsu and Budo, Bu-jitsu=Martial Arts, Budo=Martial way.
Where Bu-jitsu is meant to train for the battle fields, Budo is using the techniques of Martial arts to better yourself physically and mentally

Karate is Neither, it is a personal defence art, though it was practices by Okinawan Bushi (warriors) this was alway on an individual basis

Another aproach is warrior art vs fighting arts, the latter being arts geared to fighting in matches like MT or boxing. But again Karate doesn't fit either, competition is part of it but not the goal and it is instructed that it is better to avoid a fight

Martial Art has become e generic term for anything having to do with fighting ( but oddly enough less with firearms and such)