武道学研究 46―（3） : 161―183, 2014〈日本武道学会第 46 回大会，第 1 回国際武道会議 報告〉 日本武道学会第 46 回大会，第 1 回国際武道会議 空手道専門分科会企画 報告 Karate Specialist Subcommittee Meeting 世界の空手道事情 Karate in the World 日時：平成 25 年 9 月 12 日（木） Date & Time：September 12, 2013 15：40-17：30 場所：筑波大学 武道館第1 多目的道場および 5C416 教室 Venue：Multi-purpose Dojo No.1(Budokan) and 5C416 総合司会：奈蔵稔久（国際武道大学） General Chairperson：Toshihisa NAGURA, International Budo Univ. 報告 Report 司会 アレキサンダー ベネット（関西大学） ◦小山正辰（森ノ宮医療大学） Chairperson Alexander BENNETT, Kansai Masashi KOYAMA, Morinomiya University of University Medical Sciences 中学校武道必修化の現状 特別講演 「空手道を上達させるためのスキル」 Status quo of budo becoming compulsory in Special Address “Three Skills to Improve junior high school Karate” 司会 谷木龍男（清和大学） ◦豊嶋建広（麗澤大学） Chairperson Tatsuo YAGI, Seiwa Universitay Tatehiro TOYOSHIMA, Reitaku University エクササイズから長期プランにまで渡る多面的ト シンポジウム 「世界の空手道事情」 レーニングの応用と要因 Symposium “Karate in the World” ◦Abel FIGUEIREDO, Polytechnique Institute ◦Wojciech J. CYNARSKI, University of Rzeszów, of Viseu, Portugal Rzeszów, Poland Dialogue regarding intrinsic challenges for ヨーロッパの空手事情： karatedo teaching and practice: Multidimensional 「空手道は礼に始まり礼に終わることを忘れるな」 training variables and factors from exercise to Karate in Europe – Institutional development macrocycles planning and changes: “Karatedo wa rei ni hajimari, rei 司会 嘉手苅 徹（早稲田大学大学院） ni owaru koto wo wasuruna” Chairperson Toru KADEKARU, Graduate ◦浜崎鈴子（米国オレンジ郡空手道場） School of Waseda University Suzuko HAMASAKI, US Orange County Karatedo Dojo, United States ＊ 当日，時間の関係で小山正辰氏の報告及び豊嶋 アメリカの空手事情 建広氏の特別講演はキャンセルとなりました。 Karate in America ― ―161 武道学研究 46―（3） : 161―183, 2014 Karate in Europe – Institutional development and changes / Karate w Europie – instytucjonalizacja i zmiany: “Karatedo wa rei ni hajimari, rei ni owaru koto wo wasuruna” Wojciech J. CYNARSKI Faculty of Physical Education, University of Rzeszów, Rzeszów (Poland) Abstract Aim From the perspective of the “humanistic theory of martial arts” [Cynarski 2004, 2006a] and the “general theory of fighting arts” [Cynarski and Sieber 2012] the author tackles the problem of the main directions of changes and institutional development of karate in Europe. He puts forward a hypothesis that sportification is not a dominant direction of changes in karate. Method Three complementary test methods for qualitative analysis were used: an analysis of subject matter literature; long-term participatory observation and the method of expert courts (competent judges). There were five questions to karate Experts (prepared in 3 languages). 1. What is the main purpose of the karatedo? 2. What are the trends in karate (in Europe)? 3. How is karate spreading – how many people are participating in different countries? 4. What is the percentage of people participating in sports karate (for competitions)? 5. How compatible is the karate now practiced in your country with its Japanese and Okinawan origins? There were answers from 8 experts from Europe, all holders of the highest ranks 8-10 dan in different varieties of karate. Results The institutionalization of karate includes the creation of: organizations, new schools and regulations (e.g. concerning sports, fighting and arbitration), the teaching methods adopted and promotion through the ranks, the granting of licenses to instructors and referees, promotion to higher sports classes, etc. This leads to the establishment of new schools, most of which are inauthentic or eclectic. Many experts point out that sports rivalry is contrary to the spirit of karatedo. Some emphasize the teaching of real self-defense, whereas others stress the educational meaning of participation. Karate has been known in Europe for approximately 60 years and its sports formula, for the different varieties, has been developing alongside its practice. There is a large organizational breakdown, even within the framework of the same styles and also a clear trend to modernize “old” karate. Sportification of karate is not the only nor the most important change in European karate. It covers only a part of that area. Other trends in change concern the cultivation of old traditions, the modification of teaching and the progressive commercialization (in recreational karate and services related to it). Generally, we can distinguish: 1) a “pedagogical” or “humanistic” approach, where karatedo is a way of improving one’s personality; 2) the recreational treatment of practicing karate, and 3) a concentration on the utilitarian values of karate and the fight as an expression of the cult of power. Key words: European karate, Sport, Martial art, Aims, Changes ＊ Wojciech J. CYNARSKI 氏の全文を最終ページに掲載 ― ―162 空手道専門分科会企画 報告：世界の空手道事情 アメリカの空手事情 渡 米（1950 年 代 か ら 1970 年 代 ま で ） Karate in America 以前は，USANKF（全米空手連盟）に 浜崎鈴子（米国オレンジ郡空手道道場） 技術顧問などで関わっていたが，現在 は 5 名の役員に 1 人のみとなる。 はじめに：“ 空手道 (Karate-do)” vs “ 空手・カラ 日本人指導者会の結成＝ 1994 年，北米 テ (Karate)” 空手道師範会設立（約 40 名の会員） 空手道の定義（1） 沖縄空手術が日本本土で既存の 各道場で指導の他，文化交流会などで 武道文化を受け，技術・精神的 模範演武をし，親善活動を目指す。 で独自の発展を遂げたもの。 B．アメリカ人指導者：アメリカで日 （2） 全日本空手道連盟所属系の流 本人指導者に習った 2 世軍 派・会派道場で修行した指導者 Karate”do” 修 行 へ の 繋 が り を 持 ち つ が指導する空手。 つ，指導に当たる者。 日本人との関係を切り捨て，自分で活 1．アメリカの Karate の一般的（アメリカ人が持 動する者。 つ）イメージ “あくまで karate ＝ Gi とベルトを着用し，練習 ＊USANKF：WKF 傘下の公認全米連盟組織：地 する東洋武術” 域選抜大会―州大会―全国大会（通常 7 月） 理由：（1）映画やテレビの影響 （2）チェーン店的， Cash Prizeを出す試合が増える傾向 Karate Studio のイメージ ＊ 空手のイメージに関しては，アメリカ人だけで 3．国際化の問題点・考慮点 なく，一般の日本人に関しても定かではないこ 分化差の考慮：（1）縦社会と横社会 とに注意。 （2） 過去（伝統継承）志向と未来（開 発）志向 2．アメリカにおける，日本からの空手 “道” 事情 （3）文化圏独自のスポーツ文化 方法：（1） 日系コミュニティー：日系人の伝承文 共通点： 健康な心身，自己練磨，人格形成，困難 化として の克服，協力，努力， （柔道・剣道・花道・茶道・書道などと 特異性：アメリカ＝チームワーク 共に） （個性をチームで生かし，自分のポジショ 指導者は主に永住日本人や日系米人 ンで全力を尽くし，チームに貢献し，勝 利を得る。） （2） 大学機関でのレクレーション・コース 武道＝技と人間性を磨くため，生涯修行 やクラブ・スポーツとして を続けること。 UCLA の 例：(Japanese Martial Arts: Karate, Judo, Aikido, etc.) 4．空手道の将来と役割とは？ Caltech の 例：Japanese Karate Club as a traditional karate training (Shoto-kan karate club founded by Tsutomu Oshima in 1957) （3）町道場 A．日本人指導者：殆どが空手指導で ― ―163 武道学研究 46―（3） : 161―183, 2014 ― ―164 空手道専門分科会企画 報告：世界の空手道事情 Dialogue regarding intrinsic challenges for karatedo teaching and practice: Multidimensional training variables and factors from exercise to macrocycles planning Abel FIGUEIREDO Polytechnique Institute of Viseu – Portugal / CI&DETS; National Adviser of Coach Education Department of Portuguese Karatedo Federation; President on Portuguese Karate Coach Association; Vice-President of IMACSSS. Abstract Karate is a martial art and combat sport present on the Combat Games developed by Sportaccord, and a recognized sport by International Olympic Committee, demonstrating its actual worldwide dimension of competitive format. This specialized format is linked with other sportive practice purposes such as recreational, fitness and self-defense. Education is the basic value from budo mainstream to Olympic principles. From Okinawan dream construction based on human ancient self-defense practices, this budo-sport achieve a worldwide institutionalization based on democratic principles and continue to maintain basic values supported on sundome requiring at same time, respect to other’s integrity while performing fighting techniques on a partner. The fighting body movements of karate include striking techniques delivered with special parts of the body to specific body targets, and actions must be realized in a fast, precise and powerful mode, respecting rules such as sundome norm in karate kumite and practice. This ruled principles also applied to throwing, immobilizing, locking and strangling techniques that, even not all used in institutionalized competitive kumite format, they are practiced and developed in karatedo. Concretization is very linked with pattern evaluation of action, not only physical and cinematic but also strategic, linking tactic with psycho-social dimensions. Concretization of the technique must also be pure as required in kata and kumite rules. Kihon and bunkai are exercising dimensions also evaluated in various scholar (kaiha) kyu/dan grading, providing finalities to training planning. But kumite and kata constitute wide standards tasks to performance improvement in institutionalized competition and grading. Planning and periodization on training variables on a multidimensional way are difficult to establish unless we can make measurements to evaluate the way the practice conduct the performance to required marks and targets. In this paper we will centre the analysis on the multidimensional interpretation of the fighting motricity that characterize karatedo, and more on its intrinsic nature than on extrinsic structure, because they are these motrice actions that from utilitarian to non-utilitarian activities, transforms on contexts such as art and sport. From the fight concept based on others body as target and objective (Figueiredo, 1997) of actions, we conclude that the fighting actions in sport and art transcend the utilitarian action of fight (idem, 2009). Even if not unanimously recognized (Reid and Croucher, 1983) this fighting utility is there, but surpassed. From real to symbolic body as target, if you miss the basics of the action, it’s because you’re not fighting but “dancing” or ― ―165 武道学研究 46―（3） : 161―183, 2014 only moving even in “perfection” when compared to a pattern or a measure of time and space. And competitive karate rules in kumite and kata tend to maintain alive this invented contradiction between martial spirit and educational purposes. Starting from Human Motricity concept (Sergio, 1979; 1987), and focusing on the concept of motrice action (Figueiredo, 2006) based on Eugénia Trigo (1999) and Paul Ricoeur (1977), the development