Goju-Ryu v.s. Shotokan, enlighten me pls

Discussion in 'Karate' started by matessi, Aug 13, 2004.

  1. greebo_1

    greebo_1 New Member

    Shotokan looks like it is more tense and ridged, only because most people don't understand the kime point. You are only meant to tense at the very last minute and the kime last a split second not even that. My self i still haven't got the technique at all, but i know what I’m looking for. Shotokan looks ridged but really in a real fight its impossible to be ridged and still come away alive.
  2. kickass

    kickass I AM THE 11th COMMANDMENT

    does it really matter which style is used as long as it gets the job done, i.e. survival?
  3. MartialArtsSnob

    MartialArtsSnob New Member

    I would agree that it is who is teaching it. My observations about the differences in movement style are only from the Goju I have seen. I think that Goju utilizes the vertical more than Shotokan. What I mean is that in the Goju forms that I have done there is a lot of techniques that go from Sanshin to a low Shikodachi, the power generated from the dropping of the center is exploited. This is done to a lessor degree with Shotokan. Shotokan seems to have the edge with regard to mobility and single pointedness of force delivery. Goju seem to have the edge with regard to subtlety of technique and the almighty counterpunch. I have thoroughly enjoyed them both.

  4. Goju

    Goju Yellow Belt

    Not only generating power from dropping into lower stances, but also rising back into taller ones. This also goes for the use of the hips to create torque, generating a lot of power in a technique. There are other ways we do it such as the pendulum movement, thrust etc
  5. MartialArtsSnob

    MartialArtsSnob New Member

    Indeed, all very true. Both systems incorporate these ideas. The difference seems to be one of emphasis.
  6. lifestudent1

    lifestudent1 New Member

    different styles

    Well, the main difference is the development. Shotokan was developed to present the Art's to Japan (life long enemy of Okinawans), as a reconized for of fitness and training. Many of the Kata's in it was altered over time, and as Japanese often do did changes over time to make it their own. Goju-ryu was taken the mix of the three "tribes" of okinawa (as did Shotokan) to form and train as it was more traditionally done in technique as some other Okinawan arts.

    To understand the history of Okinawa is to understand the development of Karate as we know it. Okinawa which was a major trading between China and Japan (both enemy's). They had influence from both, China Arts and Japanese Jiu-Jitsu arts. they was forbid to have any form of weapons, so they must perfect ways to defend their king from invaders. Which led to the development of Kata, to master the destructive powers.

    It wasn't until the 20th century, early. That the students of the great masters came together to decide on what to present to Japan (their ruler) for recognition. After they came together it was decided and the founder of ShotoKan took his Karate to Japan. Years later, the other modern masters, did not see the recognition, so they decided to form there own success around similar forms. Thus you see similarity, but vast differences.
  7. melbgoju

    melbgoju Valued Member

    So just to check, you know the post prior to yours is around 12 years old?

    I can see how you came to parts of your explanation (for instance, Okinawa being invaded by the Satsumas in the 17th century, the annexation of the Ryukyus by Japan in 1879 following the Meiji Restoration), but it is not correct to say for instance that Japan was/is a lifelong enemy of Okinawa. The Ryukyu king was a vassal of the Satsuma clan, but the kingdom traded with and paid tribute to both China and Japan - hardly the practice of a life-long enemy. Friction with mainland Japan arose after the Meiji Restoration with the compulsory teaching of the Japanese language in schools, but post the Sino-Japanese and Russo-Japanese Wars and with the increasing nationalistic environment existing in the 1920s and 1930s Japan, this was not a uniform or overwhelming sentiment.

    Weapons were not forbidden to the ruling classes, nor was karate necessarily developed as a way to defend the king; the nobles had access to arms including swords and halberds (see Andreas Quast's excellent site for more detail and primary and secondary resources on this such as http://ryukyu-bugei.com/?p=3857 and http://ryukyu-bugei.com/?p=5726).

    I am not sure what you are referring to with the formation of Goju-ryu as "the mix of the three "tribes" of Okinawa". Do you mean it was comprised of elements of Naha-te, Shuri-te and Tomari-te? If so, do you have any evidence or sources to back this up? Goju-ryu to my understanding was a formalisation of Chojun Miyagi's training with Kanryo Higashionna (where his training came from is itself uncertain in many respects, but it is generally accepted that an important part of his training was in mainland China) and his own experiences training in China all in the first two decades of the 20th century. There is almost no direct influence from the Shuri-based arts (unless you are considering his collaboration in the 1930s with Shoshin Nagamine in creating portions of the gekisai kata, or his training with Arakaki at the age of 11?), and none recorded from the Tomari schools. When we talk of "Naha" schools, goju is given as the exemplar, not as a school that is only partially from the area.
  8. lifestudent1

    lifestudent1 New Member

    Well, I did not look, but don't see anything wrong with breathing life into the thread. I meant mine as a general understanding not as the over all history, to stimulate "one" to further research on there own. There are some points that we agree on and few other's we don't.

Share This Page