Friday Academic Review Tome: The Japanisation of Karate?: Placing an Intangible Cultural Practice.

This week I offer an paper with which I would take some exception to regarding assertions and conclusions. Nevertheless, it does, IMHO prove a framework aroudn which purposeful discourse could take place and one, so often missing in "fan-boy articles on book son the subject.

Bibliographic Information

Johnson, Noah C.G. "The Japanisation of Karate?: Placing an Intangible Cultural Practice." Journal of Contemporary Anthropology*, vol. 3, no. 1, 2012, pp. 62-78. ISSN 2150-3311.

Detailed Synopsis
Noah C.G. Johnson's article, "The Japanisation of Karate?: Placing an Intangible Cultural Practice," explores the cultural transformation of karate as it transitioned from Okinawa to mainland Japan. Johnson, a PhD candidate in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Iowa, examines how this martial art, deeply rooted in Okinawan culture, was adapted and integrated into Japanese society. The article delves into the historical, cultural, and social factors that influenced this transformation, highlighting the negotiation between Okinawan and Japanese cultural elements.

Introduction
Johnson begins by contextualising Okinawa's unique cultural identity, influenced by Chinese, Japanese, and American dominations. Karate, originating in Okinawa, reflects a blend of these cultural influences. The practice of karate, initially known as "te" or "hand," evolved through cultural exchanges with China and Japan, forming a distinct martial art by the early 20th century. This article investigates the modifications karate underwent as it was introduced to mainland Japan and how these changes reflect broader cultural dynamics.

Historical Context and Origins
The origins of karate are traced back to the Ryukyu Kingdom, where it developed from indigenous fighting techniques and influences from China and Japan. Johnson notes, "Karate is a creole of practices that were combined together on the island of Okinawa" (p. 64). This blending of practices resulted from Okinawa's strategic position between China and Japan and its extensive trade networks.

The early 20th century marked the introduction of karate to mainland Japan, where it became perceived as a Japanese martial art. Johnson outlines the contested nature of karate's identity among practitioners, who variously describe it as Okinawan, Japanese, or a Japanese art with Okinawan origins.

Cultural Translation and Modification
Johnson explores the cultural translation of karate from Okinawa to Japan, emphasising the modifications necessary for its acceptance. He explains that karate had to shift from its Okinawan cultural context to align with Japanese traditions. This process involved incorporating elements from the Japanese martial tradition and reducing cultural differences between Okinawan and Japanese practices.

The Japanese government's role in promoting a homogeneous national identity included assimilating Okinawan cultural practices like karate. Johnson asserts, "The active agency of both parties reveals that this interaction was a negotiation between the samurai core-subculture of Japan and the karate practitioners of Okinawa" (p. 62).

Negotiation and Agency
The article highlights the agency of Okinawan karate masters in adapting their art to fit Japanese cultural norms. Figures like Funakoshi Gichin played pivotal roles in modifying karate, introducing standardised techniques, uniforms, and ranking systems. These changes facilitated karate's integration into Japanese educational institutions and its recognition as a legitimate martial art.

Johnson underscores the dynamic nature of this cultural negotiation, stating, "This process was not merely the appropriation of a cultural tradition by an invading and dominating foreign presence in the form of the Japanese government" (p. 63). Instead, it involved active participation and adaptation by Okinawan practitioners.

Structural and Procedural Differences
Johnson examines the structural and procedural differences between Okinawan and Japanese martial arts practices. In Okinawa, karate was taught informally, with no ranking system or standardised uniforms. In contrast, Japanese martial arts were highly structured, with formalised training methods and hierarchical ranking systems.

These differences posed challenges for karate's acceptance in Japan. Johnson notes, "The individualism [of Okinawan karate] was alien to the Japanese concept of wa (harmony)" (p. 66). The adaptation of karate to fit Japanese norms required significant changes in its teaching methods and organisational structure.

Cultural Framing and Symbolism
The article delves into the symbolic and cultural framing of karate within Japanese society. Johnson argues that karate's acceptance in Japan involved not only procedural changes but also shifts in cultural symbolism. The adoption of uniforms, formalised training, and the introduction of Japanese philosophical concepts helped align karate with Japanese martial traditions.

Johnson discusses the importance of cultural framing, stating, "An intangible cultural item like karate is not created by a certain culture (in this case the Okinawans) out of whole cloth, but is rather drawn from sources both in that culture's history and in the exposure that particular culture has to other ways of doing" (p. 65).

Impact of Modernisation
The modernisation of Japan during the Meiji Restoration influenced the transformation of karate. The incorporation of standardised curricula, ranking systems, and uniforms mirrored broader societal changes aimed at industrialisation and modernisation. Johnson notes that these changes were not unique to karate but were part of a larger trend affecting various aspects of Japanese culture.

Closing Thoughts.
Johnson concludes that the process of karate's integration into Japanese society was a complex negotiation rather than a simple assimilation. This negotiation involved structural influences, individual agency, and cultural adaptation. The successful incorporation of karate into Japanese culture highlights the dynamic nature of cultural practices and their ability to evolve and adapt to new contexts.

The article raises important questions about the identity of cultural practices and their relationship to their origins. Johnson suggests that karate, while rooted in Okinawan culture, has become a practice that interacts with and adapts to different cultural settings. This ongoing negotiation shapes karate's identity and its place within various cultural contexts.

Direct Quotes from the Author.

1. "Karate is a creole of practices that were combined together on the island of Okinawa" (p. 64).
2. "The active agency of both parties reveals that this interaction was a negotiation between the samurai core-subculture of Japan and the karate practitioners of Okinawa" (p. 62).
3. "This process was not merely the appropriation of a cultural tradition by an invading and dominating foreign presence in the form of the Japanese government" (p. 63).
4. "The individualism [of Okinawan karate] was alien to the Japanese concept of wa (harmony)" (p. 66).
5. "An intangible cultural item like karate is not created by a certain culture (in this case the Okinawans) out of whole cloth, but is rather drawn from sources both in that culture's history and in the exposure that particular culture has to other ways of doing" (p. 65).

In summary, Johnson's article provides a comprehensive analysis of the cultural transformation of karate from its Okinawan origins to its integration into Japanese society. The negotiation between Okinawan and Japanese cultural elements, influenced by historical, social, and structural factors, highlights the dynamic nature of cultural practices and their ability to adapt and evolve.

---