11 posts / 0 new
Last post
Anf
Anf's picture
Uke - to block, or to receive?

I've encountered two different interpretations of the term uke. Most common one is block. Less common but still far from uncommon is to receive.

For me personally, the latter makes much more sense. Formal 'blocks' are far too slow to be useful for anything. If a punch is inbound, you'd have to be superhuman to extend your left hand, then bring the right hand across while chambering the left, all fast enough to block the punch. I'd love to see someone demonstrate that at full speed in a free sparring setting.

Now if we consider the very same technique, but with the emphasis being on the latter interpretation, to receive, I feel it makes much more sense. Then you are receiving the offering of your opponents arm. The exact same technique applies, only this time the lefts hand intercepts and catches, pulls down to chamber, while the right arm, backed up by the full power of the hips, drives into the elbow or makes an arm bar.

I feel like the formal blocks are primarily grappling techniques. But then I'm not black belt, so I'm not qualified to make that judgement. What are folks thoughts?

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

Hi Anf

For me it is to receive, I tend to use "blocks" as joint locks or throws or holds with the aim to strike.

Also if you look how the word Uke is used in other arts it is mostly in relation to partner who receives the technique, not the one who blocks it.

Kind regards

Les

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

One thing to note is that the terminology commonly used today is relatively new. It is a newer terminology layered onto the much older kata. We therefore need to accept that the names, however we interpret them, can tell us nothing about the original intent of the motions within the kata.

Anf wrote:
I've encountered two different interpretations of the term uke. Most common one is block. Less common but still far from uncommon is to receive.

The character in question is 受 which translates as “accept” or “receive”. As Les points out, it is commonly used to refer to the recipient of a technique too.

All the best,

Iain

Anf
Anf's picture

Les Bubka wrote:
For me it is to receive, I tend to use "blocks" as joint locks or throws or holds with the aim to strike ...

Excellent video. That's exactly the kind of thing that interests me. I'd love to practice like that but alas, most folks I know personally and locally that train, are more into the modern Way of the Next Coloured Belt style of karate.

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

Anf I'm sure that some of your training partners would like to try this, just ask and start exploring.

I'm using simple three layer system in relation to all techniwues:

1) can it be used as a strike,

2) can it be used as a joint lock and

3) can I use it as a throw. Hope that will help in exploration.

Kind regards

Les

Anf
Anf's picture

Les Bubka wrote:
Anf I'm sure that some of your training partners would like to try this, just ask and start exploring. I'm using simple three layer system in relation to all techniwues: 1) can it be used as a strike, 2) can it be used as a joint lock and 3) can I use it as a throw. Hope that will help in exploration. Kind regards Les
I like your 3 layer system. I have similar thoughts myself but hasn't refined it as such.

Chris R
Chris R's picture

I think the most believable interpretation is that "uke" refers to the person receiving the technique, as Les mentioned. If you view kata as a collection of two person fighting drills, then use of the term "uke" would make sense. But this is a modern term, and that explanation is also modern, so this might have nothing to do with the original purpose behind the kata. I think it's fine to use the term "uke" if you find it beneficial and have a way to rationalize using it, but otherwise I find it pointless. For me, kata techniques are just movements which can be interpreted in different ways.

Tau
Tau's picture

Ukemi. Breakfall. "To receive the throw" or something similar.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Tau wrote:
Ukemi. Breakfall. "To receive the throw" or something similar.

Good catch as that term would seem to be a relevant term to this thread!

Ukemi = 受身

受 = “receive”

身 = “body”

However, when put together, my understanding the combined kanji would best be read as “passive”. It therefore refers to the methods of making the body prepared to safety and passively receive the floor. The ground is always victorious when we humans try to fight it ;-)

All the best,

Iain

Ian H
Ian H's picture

Don't forget, we're talking about translation from one language to a very different one.  (Translations between Spanish, French, and Italian can be easier with their common Latin roots, but not between Japanese and English!)  Sometimes the translation is doomed to "get it wrong" no matter what (just a question of "how wrong?") and sometimes the result of the translation can cause needless confusion and create distinctions that don't exist in the original. If you can get a translation that is closer to the original intent, so much the better. 

Neil Babbage
Neil Babbage's picture

A very good point. The same issue bedevils people translating the bible. It isn't that we don't understand the original text, but that the other language doesn't contain a single word or short phrase that adequately captures the meaning. Charity is a well known example (in originally meant something like "showing compasssion towards the needy") or if you like wine "terroir" has its own problems. Therefore we rely on the interpretation of the translator which may well change over time.