The semantics of Martial Arts

[isshinryu5toforever]

This is a bit of a rant coupled with a question. Sorry, but it's going to be a bit long.

I read a news article about a Karate tournament in Pennsylvania. In the news article, the journalist said that the most popular forms of Karate in the United States are Korean.

This struck a nerve with me. I know in the 1960s and 70s, everything was Karate or Kung Fu, maybe Judo (sorry I wasn't alive then, you can correct me if you were). When Bruce Lee was at his peak popularity, EVERYTHING was Kung Fu. When the Karate Kid became a hit in the 1980s, everything became Karate. It didn't matter where it was from. Then the 90s hit, and people became more aware that things existed outside the realm of just simple Karate and Kung Fu. Then the 2000 Sydney Olympics rolled around, and a new sport, Taekwondo, was introduced. This sport was announced as a decidedly Korean sport. Taekwondo wasn't Karate, it was its own martial art, under its own banner, finally. Not to mention the birth of MMA into the public eye with the UFC. People are more aware that there are things like BJJ and Muay Thai. They're more familiar with the language of martial arts.

Now, in university, I was taught that language matters. It matters a lot, because it governs the way we exist, the way we interact with one another. It governs our ideas of civility, morality, and the way society should be run. This is why his labeling of all Korean martial arts as simply Karate bothered me. He is basically saying that all martial arts are the same. We all know that while all martial arts do share similarities, grappling, striking, etc., they are not all one in the same.

I have had a lot to reconcile as a person and a martial artist. I was adopted from Korea, raised by a white family in Wisconsin, grew up doing Karate (still do it, 18 years in August), got my dan certification through the kukkiwon as a university student at NYU, and am now living in Korea (trust me, I thought I'd have a martial arts identity crisis for a while). That's why all these distinctions of language become important, to me. Me being the key word in that sentence.

My question to all of you is, how important do you find the distinction between martial arts? Do you care about the semantics involved (we've all had someone see us in uniform, make a sound like he's trying to be Bruce Lee, and say something about some Kung Fu man)? So, what do you think, and why?

[sensei8]

First of all...great post! I thank you for it!

how important do you find the distinction between martial arts?

It's not important to me! Why? Because after all of the many differences, it's still just the martial arts. Distinctions are nothing more than labels, imho! We can be compassionate about the distinctions but we shouldn't allow this to blind us to what it is that we all are doing...the martial arts!

Do you care about the semantics involved (we've all had someone see us in uniform, make a sound like he's trying to be Bruce Lee, and say something about some Kung Fu man)?

I don't care about the semantics because semantics are just that. They [semantics] muddle a conversation about the martial arts, therefore, they serve no valuable purpose. Am I guilty of it? Yes, from time to time, but, aren't we all from time to time! Let us not be worried about this and that because the this and that will take care of itself...just train!

[Kempohands]

As an individual who spends a lot of time worrying about and studying language and who is going to school at the moment to study English, semantics, in reference to any subject, bother me.

Words are sounds with ascribed meaning. They are meant to be used in the context of their accepted meanings. When we start lazily throwing words around and using them for purposes other than what they are meant to be used for, language itself is de-valued and reality itself becomes blurred. From here we can get into a whole philosophical discussion about the nature of reality, but I believe that it is, to a great extent, a construction by individuals collectively perceiving and describing their existence. In that case, language is the root of reality. Therefore, semantics are definitely important. I also get sort of annoyed when people dismiss an argument over which word should be used as "just semantics" as if semantics can be neglected because of triviality. That's absurd.

Words matter. If I call an apple an orange, you'd say I was wrong, not say it was ok because they're both just fruit anyway, and if you did, then I'd say no, they're not fruit, but dogs. Again, we could keep going, but the bottom line is, we need words (or at the most basic and fundamental level, language, which is simply the ability to communicate meaning, be it through words, signs, symbols, math, or music, etc.) to ground our descriptions of what is and what is not.

So in short, yes, it bothers me when people incorrectly call a martial art karate or kung-fu or anything else because it is simply incorrect. Yes, we all practice "martial arts," but what's stopping someone from saying that we just practice polo?

A final point: I understand where the attitude "it's all just martial arts in the end" comes from. It's similar to the attitude "we're all just people." This kind of thinking, however, de-values individuality and denies the distinctness of identity afforded by correct use of precise language. It is important to remember the big picture, to acknowledge that all martial arts fall under the same big category so as to reconcile prejudices for or against certain types within the big category, just as it is important to remember that all human beings fall into the same big category so as to eliminate prejudice, racism, and ignorant hatred. It is equally important to acknowledge difference. Diversity is a beautiful thing, not to be brushed aside and dismissed with discussions in the vein of "it's really all the same thing." We can celebrate diversity and learn the most from it by acknowledging it and talking about it, and recognizing its importance and significance. So while we all practice martial arts, it is imperative that we use our language (whichever medium we may so choose) precisely and correctly in order to ensure that the distinctness of the particular arts which we practice remains intact.

Some good readings on the power of language in constructing reality and the possible effects of changing how words are used, either ignorantly or purposefully, include many works by George Orwell (especially his novel 1984 and his essay "Politics and the English Language"), and Benjamin Whorf.

All of this is simply my opinion of course, but as you can probably tell it is very strong. This is an issue that extends beyond the realm of martial arts for me, and has been the subject of a great amount of mental effort.

Take it for what it is, one man's opinion.

With respect, ouss.

[JohnASE]

I don't know how it is in the rest of the world, but here in the US, it seems that "karate" has become a generic term for stand-up striking types of martial arts. As I see it, language changes over time, and that's just a new use for an old word.

Yes, that inaccuracy does bother me a little, but it's like people using brand names to represent a category of product. Kleenex and Google come to mind. If you ask someone for a Kleenex, no one ever answers "Sorry, I don't have a Kleenex. Would a Kirkland facial tissue do?"

I don't blame TKD or TSD schools for calling themselves karate. Strictly speaking, they're not karate, but what's the difference beside country of origin. There are things that make them different from any Japanese karate, but there are vast differences between Japanese karate styles as well, especially if you include Okinawan styles. If a dojang wants to market itself as a karate school, I don't mind... much.

I would hope a journalist would be more accurate, but in college, I was taught to write to your anticipated audience. If the journalist's audience thinks all striking arts are karate, is it his responsibility to enlighten them? I tend to think so, but my wife, who IS a journalist, would probably disagree. She'd probably say that the distinction isn't pertinent to the story.

I guess what I'm saying is that it depends on the context. There are times when the correct word would be important, and times where the less accurate but widely accepted word would work better. I understand that not everyone is as anal as I am, and if they want to fly fast and loose with their word choices, I can roll with it.

[tallgeese]

I'm not too worried about it. Yes, the term "karate" has kind of become the generic term for training in any sort of Asian system of fighting. To people who don't know, it's kind of all inclusive.

MMA has become kind of a catch all to define training for that sort of competitive aspiration, but I still hear it referred to as karate from time to time. Since those competitions are heavily popular right now, you hear more distinction with them currently.

So, either people will be interested and figure out the difference or they won't and it doesn't matter. Either way, it doesn't bother me when I get lumped into "karate".

[isshinryu5toforever]

I know journalists write to their intended audience, but I think most people out there know that something called Taekwondo exists. Also, it is pretty easy to use the words "martial arts" instead of using Karate. Had the line read, "The most popular martial arts in the country are from Korea." then there's no problem. Martial arts come from all over the world. We tend to forget the western ones, but that's another post.

I don't expect a journalist to write me a dissertation on the difference between Okinawan Karate and Taekwondo, but I do think it's easy to use an accurate, but still widely known, word rather than a widely known, but completely inaccurate one. In this case, using the word martial arts rather than Karate would have taken little more than a half second more to type, but would have changed the tone of the entire sentence, and created a sentence that is far more acceptable and accurate.

Also, as far as differences between Karate and Taekwondo, there may not be many when you boil them down to what they practice, striking, but the spiritual gulf between the two is gigantic, and if you want to go that route, then we'd be lumping Muay Thai, Savate, and other striking arts from around the world into the term "karate." I don't think we'd ever call something Thai Karate or French Karate. People are allowed to get away with it when it comes to East Asian martial arts because of the proximity of the countries involved, their common ancestry, and their cultural and financial links to one another historically.

Another point here is that the kind of ignorance shown by calling something from Korea, Karate, or telling Korean people to show up in Kimonos for a casting call (the casting director for the movie the Avatar said this one), is that it extends into every day life. It says that it's ok to mix and match the customs, the people, the cultures. It's not directly stated, but this is why language is so important. The words you use indirectly show your attitude toward the world, diversity included in that.

[tallgeese]

People from here in the states can't even get wrestling right in context. Folk, freestyle, greco-roman; it really doesn't matter what competitive venue it is people just call it "wrestling", alot of them don't even know there is supposed to be a difference.

It's not a cultural war, it's just that we as martial artist, can't expect an unfamiliar public to speak our sub-cultural language. Not any more than I can be expected to care about or know who won Survivor last season.

It's about what one's into. And most of the public just won't care enough to listen to a dissertation between what they consider to be unimportant facts. And let's face it, to anyone who doesn't practice, they are unimportant. There is no reason they should care.

That's our job.

[joesteph]

I don't blame TKD or TSD schools for calling themselves karate. Strictly speaking, they're not karate, but what's the difference beside country of origin. There are things that make them different from any Japanese karate, but there are vast differences between Japanese karate styles as well, especially if you include Okinawan styles. If a dojang wants to market itself as a karate school, I don't mind... much.

I understand referring to Tae Kwon Do as a sport martial art (my apologies to those who are familiar with the non-sport content of TKD [like joint locks] that is often not emphasized), or else it wouldn't (couldn't?) have been accepted by the Olympics, but Tang Soo Do, and my art, Soo Bahk Do, specifically separate themselves from Tae Kwon Do. As martial arts, how are they not karate, since there's been such a heavy Japanese influence on them? Even the Pinan/Heian, or Pyung Ahn to the Soo Bahk Do-ist, series is incorporated in them. I do see that you mentioned country of origin, John, but how are they not another of the many facets of "empty hand" (originally "China hand")?

[bushido_man96]

My question to all of you is, how important do you find the distinction between martial arts? Do you care about the semantics involved (we've all had someone see us in uniform, make a sound like he's trying to be Bruce Lee, and say something about some Kung Fu man)? So, what do you think, and why?

I think that making the distinction between styles of Martial Arts is important, but it is moreso to those of us who have put a lot more time and energy into it than those who have not. So naturally, this kind of generalizing will strike a cord with us.

I would think that by now, with the kind of exposure that the Martial Arts gets as a whole, that we would be far beyond this kind of classifiaction. There was a time when much of what came out of Korea was called Korean Karate, but as you said, much has changed since then, and even if TKD and TSD do carry Karate heritage, these styles have differentiated themselves from that.

When discussing the semantics of Martial Arts, I don't take offense when someone refers to what I do as something that it is not because of some superiority complex. If someone mistakes what I do as Karate, I would not be upset because they called it Karate. I would just politely inform them what it is that I do, and perhaps what it does entail, should they inquire further. To be called Karate I don't view as an insult, just a mistake.

I do think that it is tough to get too frustrated with the layperson when it comes to these things. However, as a journalist, I would expect that they might dig a little deeper into the research, so as not to cause this kind of misinformation to be presented.

Why would this be important? Well, anytime you put that kind of time and effort into acquiring skill in some area, then you tend to become partial to what you do, and you like it to be recognized for what it is, and not generalized too much.

[sensei8]

My question to all of you is, how important do you find the distinction between martial arts? Do you care about the semantics involved (we've all had someone see us in uniform, make a sound like he's trying to be Bruce Lee, and say something about some Kung Fu man)? So, what do you think, and why?

I think that making the distinction between styles of Martial Arts is important, but it is moreso to those of us who have put a lot more time and energy into it than those who have not. So naturally, this kind of generalizing will strike a cord with us.

I would think that by now, with the kind of exposure that the Martial Arts gets as a whole, that we would be far beyond this kind of classifiaction. There was a time when much of what came out of Korea was called Korean Karate, but as you said, much has changed since then, and even if TKD and TSD do carry Karate heritage, these styles have differentiated themselves from that.

When discussing the semantics of Martial Arts, I don't take offense when someone refers to what I do as something that it is not because of some superiority complex. If someone mistakes what I do as Karate, I would not be upset because they called it Karate. I would just politely inform them what it is that I do, and perhaps what it does entail, should they inquire further. To be called Karate I don't view as an insult, just a mistake.

I do think that it is tough to get too frustrated with the layperson when it comes to these things. However, as a journalist, I would expect that they might dig a little deeper into the research, so as not to cause this kind of misinformation to be presented.

Why would this be important? Well, anytime you put that kind of time and effort into acquiring skill in some area, then you tend to become partial to what you do, and you like it to be recognized for what it is, and not generalized too much.

Have I ever told you Brian...you're my hero! Thanks for untying my tongue and saying what I wanted to say...but more clearer.