PDA

View Full Version : Respond to Guy Power



Joss
13th February 2001, 17:44
Hi Guy,

Reading your post, I can't help but think about how isolationist doctrines have systematically failed during history - see the Roman Empire, 1930's Europe and 1940's America, and Japan before Perry's Black Ships. Those strategies have never succeeded in helping anything survive - they just run contrary to evolutionary principles.

We should remember that swordsmanship is not only an art - it's a set of techniques used in combat. As such, they've had to evolve in the past, if only due to technology changes (e.g., riding vs. on-foot engagements, tachi vs. katana, armor changes,...) To want to "preserve" swordsmanship and protect it from any external influence is delusional. If anything, I personally find that many schools are getting further away from the brutal practicalities of swordsmanship. Some kata or flourishes I've seen seem suicidal and impractical. (Note that I am not commenting on the underlying virtues of the way of the sword here, nor on how sincere practictioneers are.)

Trying to take out of Japanese swordsmanship those elements of Japanese culture that we despise (e.g., dango) and replacing them by Western style fair play and meritocratie doesn't mean that any or even most Japanese cultural aspects of Japanese swordsmanship should disappear. To the contrary, we are all committed to preserving most part of both traditions (in clothing, ceremonials, etc) and moral virtues. However, there are some "moral virtues" of samurai that I, as a Westerner, have to reject (loyalty to a lord / organization / sensei vs. to my personal principles on what is Right or Wrong, for exemple.)

You seem to live in a black & white world, where any innovation coming from the US will lead to the total Americanization of Japanese swordsmanship and the McDojo phenomenon. For exemple, you say: "...I am not going to change "Culture." Talking of "changing culture" equals "Americanization" to me". Once again, and with all due respect, I find this a conservative, negative, pessimistic, defeatist, and isolationist attitude.

By the way, it is my understanding that Judo and Kendo were sports in Japan before their internationalization. One might regret this or not, but you can't put the fault on their popularity. Taking that into consideration, I would argue that internationalizations of those sports was beneficial to them - it provided good humored competition, a fixed set of rules, and impartial referring,... (By the way, I would think that it is because they were sports that they became popular globally, and that because Japanese swordsmanship is not a sport, it will remain a fairly confidential - elitist - discipline.)

As a side note, I think that by "elitist" you mean high standard - you're not talking about a class system. I think we're all committed to that.

You said that "the sad part is that not everyone who wants to train will be able to train", and Mr. Svinth added that "the folks did say they would do anything, and necessary sacrifices may include moving out of Mom's house and getting a real job." This is all well and good for practitioneers who are committed to the core, and train several days a week, etc. A very small % of today's practictioneers fit that description. I can understand how true artists feel about their way, and that you would want all practitioneers to be real, hard core practitioneers. This is unrealistic, because even those hard core people have started by being + or - casually interested. There has to be an offering (i.e., dojos open to anyone meeting standards of good presentation, respect, politeness, personal hygiene, etc) for those casually interested people. Else, there is no opportunity for true artists to be able to arise. (In truth, some of them would be lucky enough to be discovered, or will seek a sensei. But many wouldn't have the opportunity to ever discover their vocation.)


Senbongiri:

Reg. your comments on Senbongiri showmanship, I would have to ask you if you would put Obata-soke's Kabutowari in the same category? Also, I persist in seeing a contradiction between your saying that Ishi Yama Ryu is not a proper Japanese swordsmanship technique, and your admission that McCartney-soke's technique was solid enough to resist the fatigue of Senbongiri.

Cheers,

JD

Nathan Scott
14th February 2001, 00:43
Mr. Delage,

You wrote in your reply to Guy-san:


"your comments on Senbongiri showmanship, I would have to ask you if you would put Obata-soke's Kabutowari in the same category?"

I can't speak for how others will categorize kabutowari, but I'd like to offer information about this subject for all interested to consider.

In brief, kabutowari is a formal sword testing technique used by sword testers, not a stunt or trick. Obata Toshishiro Kaiso is a sword tester, and performed this test at the request of Paul Champagne, a swordsmith he was working with at the time for the purpose of testing the strength of his blade.

This is not a "performance" that the majority of swordsman should be experimenting with. In fact, targets harder than bamboo are not tests most swordsman should or even have need to perform. These kinds of tests are intended to be performed for the purpose of testing the sword or a piece or armor, and should be performed by a qualified tester. Sword testing should not become a part of the curriculum of bugei ryu-ha because it looks flashy or impressive - it's a sure way to get injured.

This particular test was set up and performed rather conservatively; especially in comparison to the dry-ice performance Mr. Saruta used when cutting a replica.

The Kabutowari was an important test, and one that Obata Kaiso did not want to repeat if possible, so care was taken to make sure the test was documented properly. This test has been included at the end of our "Shinkendo" video tape for others to benefit from. The video taping was not hyped up, and was recorded for purposes of documentation.

And by the way, the Guinness Book of World Records was not contacted to submit the test in hopes of claiming a new record.

FWIW, our school employs tameshigiri as only 1/5th of our curriculum. When we do cut, it is for the purpose of testing the techniques that are being taught. During demonstrations this is usually included, along with the other four areas of study in Shinkendo, since using the sword to cut properly prepared targets seems to be of interest to others.

The fact is, cutting is just cutting. There is nothing magical about it, and it is not more difficult (if taught correctly) than any other aspect of swordsmanship.



[Edited by Nathan Scott on 02-13-2001 at 06:48 PM]

Joss
14th February 2001, 01:24
Mr. Scott,

Thank you for this information. I'd like to quote you how Mr. Champagne is presented on Shinkendo's - *NOT* Mr. Champagne's - company link web-page (at http://www.shinkendo.com/company.html):

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Paul Champagne Swords

Swords made by Paul Champagne, maker of the sword used by Obata Sensei on February 16, 1994 to split a 16th century Japanese war helmet, are now available.

Please contact:
yada, yada, yada...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I personally think that this phrasing is a marketing use of Mr. Obata's kabutowari. I don't have too much of a problem with that, note - we all have to work. (I do have a problem with destroying a 16th century artifact for marketing purposes, but that's a separate issue.)

Elsewhere on the Shinkendo site it is said "On February 16, 1994 master swordsman and Shinkendo founder Obata Toshishiro performed a rare, *record setting* helmet splitting test using a sword created in the ancient japanese fashion by american swordsmith, Paul Champagne." And lower: "This is a *record* length cut, made all the more impressive in that there wasn't a testing hilt on the sword, so nylon rope was wrapped around the tang to provide a grip for testing." Two mentions of record setting... (at: http://www.shinkendo.com/kabuto.html).

Nevertheless, my post was actually refering to the Kabutowari that is performed in the video "Molten Fire", with a different sword. Thanks for pointing out another example I was unaware of.

The cover picture of "Molten Fire" represents the helmet, post-kabutowari, and was clearly done to emphasize the dramatic aspect of the demonstration. But which kabutowari performed by Soke Obata we're talking about here is of little importance.

I understand and new that a kabutowari is a traditionally performed test. It is also my strong belief that there are more sophisticated, modern ways to test pure metalic and structural strength (Rockwell hardness tests, more comprehensive cutting tests, tension and torsion tests, a vast battery of destructive tests, cristalographic analysis of the blade, etc...)

(One issue I would have with the Kabutowari is that it is as much or more a test of strength and skill of the swordsman as a test of skill of the smith - and this is in no way meant as a critic of either Mr. Obata's or Mr. Champagne's respective abilities.)

In short, I think that kabutowari as purely a scientific test is totally ineffective (i.e., the information it provides is suboptimal compared to what would have been available with another test.) Hence, if it is chosen rather than more effective techniques, it has to be for other reasons than its scientific effectiveness. Indeed, there may be a spiritual dimension to it, a ceremonial one, and there may be something more dramatic that some could conceivably call showmanship. This was the reason for my question. At no point did I state that kabutowari was a trick or a stunt.

Sincerely,

Joss Delage

[Edited by Joss on 02-13-2001 at 08:04 PM]

Nathan Scott
14th February 2001, 02:02
I was actually thinking of the Kabutowari that is performed in the video "Molten Fire", with a different sword. The video cover is a picture of the helmet post-kabutowari, and was clearly done to emphasize the dramatic aspect of the demonstration. But which kabutowari performed by

It's been some time since I've seen Molten Fire, but as your probably aware, our Federation re-published that historic footage of a famous swordsmith. The kabuto on the cover is in fact the same one used in the Kabutowari test Obata Kaiso performed, and was used for the cover because it is a dramatic representation of what a Japanese katana can do.

The kabutowari that Obata Kaiso performed is on the "Shinkendo" video. If there is a kabutowari on "Moten Fire" as well, I don't recall it.


I understand and [knew] that a kabutowari is a traditionally performed test. It is also my strong belief that there are more sophisticated, modern ways to test pure metalic and structural strength (Rockwell hardness tests, more comprehensive cutting tests, tension and torsion tests, a vast battery of destructive tests, cristalographic analysis of the blade, etc...)

That is correct. But Japanese swordsmithing is a traditional art, just as sword testing is. There is nothing wrong with using modern process' to test a sword. That is a logical and safe path to take in modern times. But Obata Kaiso was following the traditions of this profession, and regardless of how many metallurgical tests you do, there is no substitute for physically testing the blade on what it was intended to be used against. There are many other factors to be considered besides the steel composition and integrity.


(One issue I would have with the Kabutowari is that it is as much or more a test of strength and skill of the swordsman as a test of skill of the smith - and this is in no way meant as a critic of either Mr. Obata's or Mr. Champagne's respective abilities.)

That is also correct. It is a test of the sword, of the sword smith, of the physical skill of the sword tester, and of the experience level of the sword tester. These are all major elements. However, the point of kabutowari is to either test the sword, or test the helm. At least, that is what the point is if the test is performed by a sword tester.

Obata Kaiso's exceptional skill with a sword is only part of the reason he was successful in his attempt, IMHO.


In short, I think that kabutowari as purely a scientific test is totally ineffective

I would be very interested to know more of your experience and background in swordtesting. I was not aware that you were trained or experienced in this area.

From what I've learned, a test such as that is paramount to establishing the performance parameters and limitations of a given blade.

Perhaps I'm just not clear on what kind of scientific test your referring to that would better qualify a sword as capable of splitting armor (in this case).

I anticipate your response on this, since I am not aware of such a process and would very much like to learn more about it.

Regards,







[Edited by Nathan Scott on 02-13-2001 at 08:07 PM]

Joss
14th February 2001, 02:36
Mr. Scott,

Maybe I should endeavor to lower the emotional charge of the thread. At no point in my message am I attacking Mr. Obata's skill, his dedication to developing Japanese swordsmanship, or his quality as a human being. I am also not trying to say that Kabutowari is easy. Finally, I am not implying that kabutowari is a stunt or a trick. What I am indeed implying is that Mr. Obata's kabutowari had some level of what *I think* Mr. Power would call showmanship.

What I was trying to convey is that Kabutowari is more than testing (and I believe that as a testing method it is ineffective.) It is my opinion that if one was to repproach some showmanship in senbongiri, one would have to do the same with Mr. Obata's kabutowari.


[quote]I would be very interested to know more of your experience and background in swordtesting. I was not aware that you were trained or experienced in this area.
I am not, and at no point am I claiming that kabutowari is easy, just a stunt, or a trick. I am just saying that as a scientific test, it is sub-optimal.



[quote]Perhaps I'm just not clear on what kind of scientific test your referring to that would better qualify a sword as capable of splitting armor (in this case).

I anticipate your response on this, since I am not aware of such a process and would very much like to learn more about it.
Well... That's actually a superb subject for the SwordForum, but let's try to list a few things (I'm sure that someone like Howard Clark would have much to say...)

As far as I'm concerned, a sword can have:
- Artistic value: this should be determined by a shinza team, or experienced nihonto collectors;
- Balance: this can be assessed by an experienced swordsman through kata and light cutting;
- Mecanical strength and cutting ability: Again, Rockwell hardness test, microscopic examination of the metal and its cristalic structure, torsion tests, flexion / torque tests, impact and cutting tests (mecanized, repeatable, and measurable.)

I'm sure I am missing a ton... But I'm also sure that those would yield a better result at a lower cost than splitting a 16th century antique.

Sincerely,

Joss Delage

Ken Allgeier
14th February 2001, 05:00
To Quote Joss--

"
Reading your post, I can't help but think about how isolation doctrines have systematically failed during history - see the Roman Empire,,,, - they just run contrary to evolutionary principle."


The end of the western Roman empire was not caused by isolation doctrines.In the fifth century A.D the consequences of ancient pejudeices,policies and errors of the Roman people.The causes for the collapse were largly internal,The Western Romans idealization of agriculture and land tenure,repeatedly led the Roman upper classes to invest almost exclusiely in it,and their acquistions forced the peasantry either to the towns, where they became a semi idle proletariat lacking in opportunites,except to sell their vote to the highest bider.There were also some external contingencies that had staggering consequences, the revages of epidemic disease and the attack of the Goths and barbarians on almost all fronts.When Rome's internal problems were most troubling,barbarian neighors also were hard pressed by forces at their backs that made them desperate for new homes.

The disorders of the third century A.D sealed the Roman Empire fate,for it started a spiral of social and economic movements that paralyzed Roman society with a caste system created by Dioclrtion.The Roman army no longer reflected the ideals and opinions of the civilians because the reduced popuation of the more civilized interior could no longer find the necessary recruits for it and the emperors had been forced to turn for recuits to more virile but less Romananized areas.The expedients found by the emperors to buttress the failing fabic of the Roman state, mercenary armies, the settlements of barbarian federates, the dependence on vigorous barbarian generals assured her end.The Rome that fell in 476 A.D was not the Rome of the Republic or the Principate.


My rant & 2 cents for the day.












ken allgeier

[Edited by Ken Allgeier on 02-14-2001 at 04:40 PM]

Joseph Svinth
14th February 2001, 11:05
You’re right, one doesn’t have to train full-time to do martial arts. Nevertheless, a proper program shouldn't change its standards to fit a student’s schedule: go fast or slow, everyone should take the same steps to get there.

For example, if you train 8 hours per day, 5-6 days per week, then it will probably take you 6-12 months to reach shodan. Meanwhile, if you train 2 hours per day, 3-4 days per week, then it will probably take you 5-7 years to reach shodan. And, if you devote just 1 day per week to the effort, no problem, it just takes longer. At 100 hours per year (we assume you take a vacation or get sick), it takes 12-15 years to reach shodan. No matter how you did it, you still did 1200-1500 hours of training.

Meanwhile, if you train one day per week and expect to reach shodan in three years, well, then be sure to buy some fries to go with that belt.

Rob
14th February 2001, 12:19
One of the issues for discussion seems to be this notion of access vs exclusivity regarding the tradional sword arts.

Those who argue that there should be opportunities for all to train I think are missing the point of traditional sword arts.

The majority of authentic Japanese sword arts still stick closely to the Ryu system which we generally think in the west as meaning school. I think if you substitute the term private club or family perhaps you get closer to the issue.

Each Ryu and in particular it's head wants the teachings of the founder to survive and to that end they will acccept students and teach them to the best of their ability.. However they have no moral imperitive to teach. Some Ryu have died out simply because the head either refused or was unable to pass on the teachings. My point being just becuase I really want to learn an art there is no obligation on anyone to teach it to me.

I have never seen any evidence that any of the traditional Ryu or even more modern schools such as Shinkendo are desperate to spread across the world. Rather dedicated individuals seek them out and train and then teach and the arts grow if at all slowly and organically.

Judo, Karate and to an extend Iai-do were 'modernised' and 'sportified' specifically to make it easier to popularise these arts.. There's nothing wrong with that approach but if a Ryu does not want to open it's doors to all and sundry they don't have to..

And regarding the comments about if you really want to train you can I have to concur. I personally desperately want to learn traditional Japanese swordsmanship. However, I'm a happily married man with a career and a home and these things are more important to me.

If I find a teacher close enough that I can train regularly the I am prepared to invest time, money and most likely give up the art I have spent 11 years studying. I think of myself as a pretty dedicated guy. BUT As far as I am aware there is no teacher close enough so I content myself with e-budo and books and that's it. I don't try and teach myself from videos and I wouldn't train under someone who's training and lineage I couldn't verify. I would rather never learn than learn the wrong thing.

In my opinion the 'casual' students who would learn swordsmanship from whoever opened a dojo nearby without research are no credit to a Ryu and precisely why those who have dedicated a large portion of their lives to a Ryu are so wary of the notion of 'opening' up the arts !!

And a final note on this elitism leading to fakes etc being set up. Authentic Karate has been available in most urban areas of the Europe and the USA for at least 15 - 20 years and yet people still set up mickey mouse McDojo schools and still get students...

Just my thoughts..

Dan Harden
14th February 2001, 12:56
As far as I'm concerned, a sword can have:
- Artistic value: this should be determined by a shinza team, or experienced nihonto collectors;
- Balance: this can be assessed by an experienced swordsman through kata and light cutting;
- Mecanical strength and cutting ability: Again, Rockwell hardness test, microscopic examination of the metal and its cristalic structure, torsion tests, flexion / torque tests, impact and cutting tests (mecanized, repeatable, and measurable.)

I'm sure I am missing a ton... But I'm also sure that those would yield a better result at a lower cost than splitting a 16th century antique.

Sincerely,

Joss Delage

***************************


Can't say that I exactly agree with you here Joss. You arguement against "wasting" a Kabuto for the test has merit. But you lost me when you started saying that the feat was not a good or even valid test


qoute:
What I was trying to convey is that Kabutowari is more than testing (and I believe that as a testing method it is ineffective.) It is my opinion that if one was to repproach some showmanship in senbongiri, one would have to do the same with Mr. Obata's kabutowari.

you went on to say that as a test it was "sub-optimal"

**********************************

Your statement that it has a bit of showmanship does disservice to Mr. Obata. This type of test cutting is a traditional "feat" to prove both the sword and the swordsmans skill.
Now, your alegations as to whether it proves a swords merits or your statements that it is sub-optimal as a test; are without merit. In order to perform this feat the sword must demonstrate the makers exquisit control over;

heat treat AND tempering both in the edge and the body
edge geometry and angle of grind
blade geometry
use of materials and methods of manufacture
solidity of welds

Your statemnts that scientific testing can produce results equal to the helmut test by testing the sword for crystaline structure (grain growth or refinement) heat treatment torsion tests, flexion / torque tests, impact and cutting tests (mecanized, repeatable, and measurable.) is in fact MORE doubtful than the Kabutowari test
I could make a blade tailored to your test, just as I could make a blade tailored to this test. Edge geometry, and the ways to manipulate them for cutting metal as opposed to soft targets are known among smiths.
You may devise any manner of tests to try to duplicate the exteme stress this test puts the blade under but you are only duplicating it. As a test it has much merit. And as I stated as a test it measures both the mans skill and the material.

As to this other fellow creating his own style and teaching. Don't bother defending him. You don't have to.
It is what it is

Look, TSKSR was "invented" by a Japanese guy after a dream and he supposedly woke up with a "god written" scroll in his hand. Takenouchi ryu was "invented" by a guy who met a mountain "goblin"
People need a reality check. Japanophiles not withstanding, Everything was invented by someone at sometime in someplace
I have no problem with anyone creating anything. No Japanese who ever lived has any more claim over valid sword technique then any Canadian or Fiji islander. Your technique works or it doesn't. But the Japanese arts are simply...Japanese.

This Americans idea of trying to create an impartial judging medium for sword work are going to fall flat on its face. He will not interest the very men who could be there in the first place. In the fullness of time it will attract the "bottom players." They will rise in prominance in this type of venue and be fustrated that they are not accepted in the japanese arts (Gee, what else is new). They will be looked at in amusement just like the Gaijins whi enter Japanese held NHB events as well as the notion of American Sokes.
That said, his idea is not unique. It was done in Japan for years. It was a bit ridicuous then, just as it is now. This sort of "judging by commitee" or "ranking by commitee" (can anyone spell Iaido seitei) is as empty as anything else done by a commitee. A camel is a horse *designed* by a commitee.

Rank is relative
Someone telling you "Your technique is excellent" is as valid and meaningful as the qualifications of the people judging you and telling you so.
And these judged are all American Yes? So it will not be judged as having ANY merit. And I am not sure it should either. Ever heard of the (American) International Sokeship council?
Sorry. It is, what it is and will not be accepted.


I for one, still like the Japanese arts to remain Japanese. And further, to remain in Japanese hands. Even though the world is full of equal or better fighters


Dan

[Edited by Dan Harden on 02-14-2001 at 10:06 PM]

Nathan Scott
14th February 2001, 18:31
Maybe I should endeavor to lower the emotional charge of the thread. (snip) What I am indeed implying is that Mr. Obata's kabutowari had some level of what *I think* Mr. Power would call showmanship.

If the emotional charge is in reference to my reponses to you, then yes, I am emotionally charged.

You have gone on a public forum and given your opinion that someone who is a respected, hightly experienced and ranked swordsman (as well as a sword tester) does not know what he's doing, and that you think it could be done better.

However, this is not the problem. The problem is that you have not offered any background or experience to support your opinion - let alone background or experience that exceeds that of Obata Kaiso of whom your questioning.

If you have an opinion that you justify to yourself "just because", it might be best to keep it private. But if your going to second guess someone who has professional experience in a field which you clearly do not have knowledge or background in, you WILL be asked to support your opinion with facts, background, experience, credentials and/or references.

I wouldn't think of coming on a BBS and saying: "You know, *I think* Yagyu Sensei is teaching a week grip to hold the sword. I've seen grips that seem like they would work better." I'm SURE Yagyu Sensei knows alot more about his system and methodology than I do, and I would get reamed since I don't have credentials, experience or background.


What I was trying to convey is that Kabutowari is
more than testing (and I believe that as a testing method it is ineffective.) It is my opinion that if one was to repproach some showmanship in senbongiri, one would have to do the same with Mr. Obata's kabutowari.

What is your opinion based on? Dan-san has already answered this question as I would have, so I won't waste bandwidth saying the same thing.

As far as the Kabutowari incorporating "showmanship", please explain which part of it was showy. What I saw was Obata Kaiso in a plain white gi and black hakama, cutting a helm that was resting on a tree stump. The background was black, and there were no special effects, save for a slow motion replay of the cut afterwards.


I am not, and at no point am I claiming that kabutowari is easy, just a stunt, or a trick. I am just saying that as a scientific test, it is sub-optimal.

That wasn't the question I asked. I asked what your background was in sword testing, so that we may place some value on your educated opinion. If your opinion is not "educated", then perhaps it would be best not to state it publicly or re-state it as a question or discussion. No disrespect intended, but an uneducated opinion is really of no value and is often times wrong.


As far as I'm concerned, a sword can have:

- Artistic value:
- Balance:
- Mecanical strength and cutting ability:

Artisic value pretty much of no concern to a sword tester to begin with. His job is to evaluate the sharpness and performance of a blade.

Balance can be judged easily through simulated use, as you pointed out. Evaluating the balance if part of sword testing, but has some significance in kabutowari as well.

Mechanical strength and cutting ability can only be guessed using the methods you have listed; at least in regards to the mechanical strength and cutting ability as on materials that the tool was designed to be used against.

While the tests you mentioned are useful, and would surely aid in testing the blade, the blade cannot be properly evaluated for performance without testing it for performance.


I'm sure I am missing a ton... But I'm also sure that those would yield a better result at a lower cost than splitting a 16th century antique.

If your planning on discussing this topic, you might consider doing some research on it before developing opinions. Kabutowari is a test that has been performed and recorded by sword tester's for centuries. Sword testing can be thought of as a tradition, just as swordsmithing, polishing and carpentry are traditions. Would you tell a polisher to use only synthetic stones because it seems like it would be more effective?

A short article on Kabutowari has been re-printed on our web page for those interested in the subject:

http://www.shinkendo.com/kabutowari.html

Tony Peters
14th February 2001, 21:30
Reading this I am reminded of a great hooplah that errupted when the US Army took over the administrative control of all the special forces in the military. It seems that they had a problem with the 50%-75% washout rate in the BUDS (Basic Underwater Demolition School) SEAL training program. It wasn't Politically Correct to have so many people "FAIL" out. Resistance from the Navy SEALS was immense. Not one SEAL felt that a reduction in the criteria work make a better SEAL rather it would weaken the TEAMS and make their job harder even with an increased number of "qualified" personel. Their feeling, rightly so, is that the Teams aren't for everyone those that it is for make the sacrifices to become SEALs. The same can be was for Koryu and Japanese swordsmanship. If you truely want to learn the ART then put yourself where you can. You either practice the real deal or you play at it. If you happy playing fine but don't call what you do real.
At for testing a sword on a helmet Dan has given the smiths POV which I agree with. Weapons are one of the few things that has to destroy something to prove that it works. This can be as simple as punching holes in paper or as complex as shooting a airplane out of the air. All the "testing" in the wolrd will only tell you if it will work in theory. In the end you have to know if it will work as advertised and that requires using it in the manner it was intended. Until then one never knows if it will work, just that it should

14th February 2001, 22:48
Mr Joss,

I am reminded of an oblique analogy that might apply here.

Scientists and craftsman have for years been trying to replicate Stradivarius musical instruments, especially violins. They have been measured, prodded, poked, scrutinized, marveled over and imitated using the best scientific info available but.......no new Strads.

Every once in a while someone claims to have discovered the "secret" and claims that he will now make a superior instrument only to fail, usually miserably. Will anyone ever surpass a Strad. Probably but he will not be just a scientist, he will have to also be a musician and craftsman of the highest order.

You see a Strad is designed to make music. All the scientific testing and scrutiny man can amass cannot ultimately tell us what makes a Strad a Strad. Only the educated ear,the music and the musician can!

Food for thought

Tobs

MarkF
15th February 2001, 09:07
originally posted by Toby Threadgill


Every once in a while someone claims to have discovered the "secret" and claims that he will now make a superior instrument only to fail, usually miserably. Will anyone ever surpass a Strad. Probably but he will not be just a scientist, he will have to also be a musician and craftsman of the highest order.



Hi, Toby,
Actually, there are better violins than an original Strad (don't forget that the Stradivarius family continued making their violins/violas for generaltions), and probably in the same time frame. Venirius is one, and the cost is so much less, about, say, only 500,000 today.

But sure, lots do try to make one "as good" as a Strad, and recently, one violin maker, actually did, by using the same wood, the same powdered stain and varnish mixed at exactly the same recipe (Rx), and asked local and distant violin/violists, to include names we all know, to try them, some of whom owned original Strads. None would go so far as to trade their instrument, but the same comments were sent back to this family. Basically, they said they could not hear, feel, or smell any difference in the new violins, made in the same old style, from the original recipe. He set out to copy, not better, the Strad, and people were lining up around the proverbial block to buy these instruments, at the time, priced from eight-thousand to fifteen thousand dollars.

I doubt anyone could make a better one, but a copy? Sure, just don't tell anyone. The problem is, that people will always try to "win" with the better style, better training methods, etc., but if you set out not to better someone, but just to break even, some will be quite surprised at the quality of your play/training/music making, etc., and the chess player, the champion, who expects to win all the time against all comers, will be so distracted by your approach just to stay even, he may just quit, and in that way, you have bettered the better man.

I haven't decided what to do with my late uncle's Venirius, but one-million isn't far off, since there are just too many willing to pay as much as three-million for a Stradivarius, the original maker.

On the other hand, I think I would be embarrassed to even put it up for auction, but penniless is not the word I want followed after my name when its my turn, either.:)

Mark

15th February 2001, 18:12
Hey Mark F.,

The copy of the Strad you mentioned. Are you talking about the Curtain/Alf that recently sold for $42,000. I hear it is one of the best copies to date but several who have played it said it still did not quite match the tonal clarity of an original Strad such as a Harrison or Lark (?)

A friends father who owned a Strad was involved in an study conducted by an engineering team who examined original Strads at MIT and later at Cambridge in the 1980's. They examined no other violin that matched the accoustical clarity of several original Strads. Several of these Strads had newer necks but this did not seem to effect the overall performance. At that time the future of CT scanning technology was expected to help modern violin makers more accurately understand the Strad and replicate it's amazing traits.

I'm sure the day will come when a Strad is matched and even surpassed but bringing this back to the point of the discussion, it will be the musician and the music that decides the success or failure of the violin makers attempt instead of scientific measurments no matter how illuminating because violins are after all "musical" instruments.

BTW. Mark , I hear you might be in Seattle for the Bluming venue. I might be there and it would be great to put a face with the name and your wonderful musings.

Tobs

[Edited by Toby Threadgill on 02-15-2001 at 12:14 PM]

Russell McCartney
15th February 2001, 21:41
Nathan,
You've made some excellent points concerning Kabutowari and its relative benefits, well stated. As for sarutas attempt, showmanship is part of his character yet some underscore the demands of of a public exibition. If the act is blown everybody sees it happen. To have a discussion between both Obata and Saruta stating the differences and especially similarities they share via that common experience would be facinating. Few realize the rare and unique quality of these types of events. Few in the history of the art form have successfully attempted any thing like this. I know from my own experience with senbongiri there are qualities of the activity that only one other person has experienced. The human psycology yearns as Mr. Obata and even Saruta must, to share the feelings associated and intimacies of the experience with another who can relate. Sadly, I doubt any of us should hold our breath for that to happen. How does it go?: the phrase, 'the best things can't be spoken, the second best are those things we talk about'.
I appologize for my students over zealous sounding comments concerning the dynamics of tests like Kabutowari. Joss is a very diligent and dedicated student who's somewhat knee-jerk reaction was in response to the slant toward me from G.P. Last month we instituted conversation/history nights and to examine the difficulty associated with events like this as well. Not to lessen to lessen the importance of Mr. Obatas accomlishment in the least, we simply hadn't gotten round to it yet. Rest assured we will look at it in detail as a group to clear any misgivings about the why and how of this sword related activity. Any other information you could provide would be appreciated.
Sincerely,
Russell McCartney

MarkF
16th February 2001, 11:14
Excuse me, everyone while I answer Toby's post concerning violins and seminars (sounds like the making of a good book, doesn't it?)

Hi, Toby,
No, I don't think it was that far back, but probably middle 1990s this one smith who went public with his instruments.

Those who tested the violins and viola, were Pinchas Zuckerman, Itsahk Perlman, and that other guy who gives his name as "that other violinist. You know, the American one?"

I have perfect pitch and I can tell you no two instruments sound the same, much as no two swords are the same. They can be mass produced and a decent technician could make it sound or feel right, but it isn't the same. I have two trumpets (well, three, but only two I play much), the first being a student model English Besson which had been modified by a guy in LA who was the last of the "by hand" trumpet makers, though many musicians make their own (Winton Marsalis). And an "Eterna" made by Getzen and tested by Doc Severinsen. The Getzen is strictly a jazz horm, but I could get by in a symphony classical orchaestra, but the Besson-Coliccio, is stricly for the classics, but could pass for a "fat" cornet in a Jazz orchestra.

Of course there is something these violins had that the newer scientifically tested and made instruments do not have, but I doubt if it is in the ingredients.

Most of the violinists testing them said the could not tell you what the difference was, but that there was one. None neither traded the strad or venirius they had, either. Although this smith had gone by the exact written instructions of the original strad family, and collected the wood from the exact (as possible) location of the wood in the strads, there was something different about them, but none could say what it was. Testing both (Zuckerman was involved in this since he play both instruments) under the most scientific of tuning instruments, which were virtually identical, it still was not a Strad. However, they were better than some of the later strads made by that family.

The finest horn I've owned is the Coliccio-English Besson, and that began life as as a student model trumpet E. Besson, made tough to absorb punishment, but got pretty good results with the action and sound, as well. Coliccio, who is long dead, and certainly was a maestro what he did, was not all that popular, when it came to making them from scratch, but just making the leader pipe and bell for it turned it into a unique instrument, and my teacher, one who babied his prewar Benge, wanted to trade straight-across for it years later. He had originally told me not to waste the eighty bucks I ended up paying Maestro Dominic "Dom" Coliccio.

So swords and violins, I would go pretty well together, I think, as there just are no two alike. But this (I wish I could remember his name) guy who believed he had caught the tone and temper of the wood, stain, varnish, neck, pegs, and neck, did get it, at least pretty close. But something was missing from it. Not nearly enough music had been played through it, and while my teacher's Benge Trumpet had, he thought I had innocently collected a masterpiece. Still, I would have traded it for the Benge, if I had had it with me when the offer was made. When brought up in LA in the early eighties again, he begged off, and I didn't blame him.

Sometimes, probably pretty rarely, does an intrument, or sword, have so much intrinsic value, that even one as good, even better, comes along, the original still is the better one.
*****

BTW: Yes, I just tonight made arrangements to be at the Seminar in Seattle, so I hope you can make it. I'll be in on Thursday of that week, till Monday.

See ya there, copper.

Mark

Joss
16th February 2001, 17:06
Hey, this is really interesting... Do you know if the violins were tested using some kind of blind method? Because I would expect that if not, the results are not *totally* reliable. The reason why is twofold:
1) Most people would probably have a bias in favor of the "established" name - Stradivarius.
2) Also, most people who paid a fortune for an authentic Stradivarius would hate having to admit that they could have had as good quality for a 10th or a 100th of the price.

Like, if one claims to have replicated the Pierced Hocho Masamune perfectly, what is the chance that a Japanese Shinza team agree to this?

Still, very interesting.... Thanks.

JD

ben johanson
16th February 2001, 19:07
I've always believed that the day traditional Japanese swordsmanship (or any art) is totally taken out from under the auspices of the Japanese (or, the day a "ryu" of Japanese swordsmanship is founded in the West by a Westerner) will be the beginning of the steepest and farthest-reaching decline in quality that kenjutsu has ever suffered, much worse than the one that occured during the Tokugawa period. One may call a desire to keep traditional Japanese swordsmanship within its cultural and geographical boundries an isolationist additude, but I would counter by calling the need to extract a delicate and completely unique cultural phenomenon from its original and proper place a highly arrogant and destructive endeavor. Or, in other words, a typical "American" pursuit.

The traditional Japanese martial arts are a product of the centuries of Japan's cultural, political, and economic development. They are, as I said, completely unique in this world and to attempt to remove them from the original context in which they have flourished and developed all this time is a travesty of which only an American could be arrogant and thoughtless enough to commit.

The real problem is that, being a product of Japanese thought and culture, the traditional arts are based on and have been endowed throughout with the ethos and outlook of the Japanese. These things constitute the essence of Japanese martial art and they are things which can never be copied or reproduced by a foreign culture. In removing them from their bithplace, from the only place on Earth in which they could have developed the way that they did, the essence cannot but be lost. And without the essence, what do you have? A shameless, Americanized, fraudulent copy.

The proper study of Koryu requires too much of its practitioners, in the form of dedication, patience, desire, etc. to be studied by the masses. In fact, the very challenge that finding a koryu dojo in which to study presents should be regarded not as unfortunate, but as a test of one's mettle, of one's seriousness in his or her desire to learn. If a "traditional" swordsmanship dojo, founded by westerners, is located on every block in every town or city, the quality of technique and level of cultural purity can only decline.

ben johanson
17th February 2001, 05:15
Actually, now that I've stepped back for a minute from this whole debate and looked at it alittle more objectively, I can't help but feel alittle sorry for Mr. McCartney. He is a brand new member here on e-budo, but we existing members have wasted no time in jumping down his throat for doing something with which we do not agree. Don't get me wrong, I still stand by every thing I said in my last post, but I'm beginning to think that this full-on assault that has been carried out against Mr. McCartney, to which I have regretfully contributed, is rather uncalled for. I think we should stop this bickering and extend to Mr. McCartney the consideration and respect he deserves as a new e-budo member and as a fellow martial artist; a martial artist who, in fact, probably has alot more knowledge and experience than do many of us who have been so critical of him.

I especially am alittle ashamed for my contribution to this battle of words as I am totally unfamiliar with both NABA and IYR (although I'm still firmly against the idea of the Americanization of traditional Japanese arts no matter what the circumstances). I for one would like to offer an apology to Mr. McCartney, not because I now think that I and everyone else are wrong and he is right per se, but because I think this "witch hunt" has gotten alittle out of hand, and I now regret adding to it in the rather inflamed manner that I did.

Welcome to e-budo, sir!

arioch
18th February 2001, 04:02
I guess there are two different ideas in there:

1) increasing availability is the cause of poor quality.

A simple matter of systematic thinking and being able to seperate cause and effect, or being able to do a root cause analysis...tons of books and classes and people educated in troubleshooting complex systems to help out here. BTW - this sounds snottier that I wish it did...please understand I mean absolutely no disrespect...honestly.

From a purely logical standpoint, increasing availability can not be the root cause in the decline of quality...it can be the impetus, but it can not be the root cause.

Take swordsmanship out of it: if I had a factory producing bolts...simplying increasing the number of bolts I produce will not cause quality to slip unless I: overrun the ability of the machines to produce quality bolts, overrun the ability of my inspectors to assure the quality of the bolts, I use cheaper materials, I hire less skilled people, or any number of other things. But basically, I have to mess up somewhere else. Increasing availability itself is not the cause...even if it is impetus.

2) the art of Japanese swordsmanship, outside of the total ownership of the Japanese is "bad"

If your goal is simply to preserve an art form in its purest form possible, yes you are dead on 100% correct - no question about it.


Rob Lowry

P.S. (can you PS a post in a public forum????)

I remember hearing that the meaning of the word sensei is something like "he who goes first" (I'm not positive if this is correct though). I also remember a proverb (just not the person who said it) that goes something like "everybody except you is your teacher".

In every facet of life, we are obligated to educate and teach those that come behind us, and if we refuse this obligation WE are directly responsible for the problems that follow.