As to a point that was made concerning claims of studying at a particular institution, I believe that the analogy is at best, a straw man, and at worst, false. Saying that you studied TSKSR under Sugino Sensei is not analogous to claiming you studied at Harvard, when in fact what you did was train under a Harvard trained professor.
If that were the case, then ALL Sugino students would say they studied Sugino-style Katori Shinto Ryu, or Sugino-ha Katori Shinto Ryu, or any other usage to clearly differentiate that they learned from a source other than the mainline, which itself has no obligation to qualify its name, since it is the global standard of the art and always has been. But this is not how the name is used, now IS IT Mr. McCarthy? When we find announcements online where teachers of the Kawasaki dojo or their branches hold seminars, at least from my and colleague?fs copious scouring of the Internet, I have YET to find an instance where they qualified the usage so that people would know it was not the mainline, or that there was even an alternative form of KSR. Nor have I found the equivalent qualification on homepages of Sugino students, but rather, because they start discussing Sugino Sensei, informed folks like myself can connect the dots. The reason the analogy of Harvard still stands as exemplar is because it involves a recognized institution, with a recognized and protected name, and which has the right to selectively award certificates of graduation and other documents to people who the governing bodies decide have met their criteria. While Sugino Sensei may have graduated from one of the programs of Harvard (and I do say ONE, since the odds of him having received the full densho from a bunch of dispatched mid-level teachers who were likely NOT initiated into the okuden (since they WERE NOT SHIHAN) is doubtful), and while he has a right to sign his name with whatever title he was awarded from that institution, he does not have the right to pass his degree on to anyone he pleases. THAT right lies solely with the Harvard institution, right?
Anyway, the fact that so many foreign students ARE NOT qualifying their statements when using the name is as much the fault of the Kawasaki dojo as anybody?fs, since they are the one in the know when understandably ignorant foreign students join the school (and shouldn?ft be expected to know the who background). If the heads of that school were very clear with their students and very strict about making sure everybody qualified it as Sugino-ha, or whatever, and equally strict about punishing those who fail to do so, then I don?ft think there would be such an issue. If they, in fact, made a concerted effort to make sure ALL students qualified the use of KSR, I don?ft think ANYBODY would give a rat?fs !!! about this issue. But they don?ft now do they?
Indeed, the correct analogy would be to say that you trained in the Harvard technique of a particular discipline. For instance, one need not necessarily speak German and have been physically located in Frankfurt to be considered a part of the Frankfurt School of thought, and one can teach this school of thought anywhere around the world and be recognized as a Frankfurt scholar. I would like to ask why this is different from the situation that we are discussing.
Alright. Let?fs get to the meat n?f potatoes. I have already displayed why the Harvard analogy is apt. While I am sure scholars such as Friday and Bodiford could come up with better ones, knowing the topics more intimately and thoroughly, since the analogy is in line with the gist of their arguments in their articles, I think most of us agree that the Harvard analogy is VASTLY more apt than your ?gschool of thought analogy.?h And now I will tell you why.
American Heritage defines ?gschool of thought?h as: ?gThe point of view held by a particular group.?h Here we have a martial tradition that is the oldest extant systemized ryu in Japan, barring the kyubajutsu schools of Takeda and Ogasawara. As so accurately described in the articles by the two scholars above (which I will encourage you to read again if you haven?ft yet), Katori Shinto Ryu, like other schools, slowly formed its organizational structure into something in which access was restricted and in which a family head had sole rights to define the use, dissemination and other facets of the school?fs name and curriculum. This structure was continued for many generations (albeit when the ?giemoto?h style was begun, I don?ft think we can say yet).
Now, you equate this whole structure and tradition, (which emphasized complete deference to a family head and which restricted access, etc.) to that of a ?gschool of thought??!!?h A mere ?gpoint of view??!!?h Hahahahaha! A point of view is something that is open to debate, that can be published in public or specialist circles and easily modified or strengthened to weather attacks by different ?gschools of thought.?h In other words, schools of thought are usually decentralized, the point of view CAN IN FACT change over time to accommodate the latest evidence or arguments, and in general, is malleable. If you think the mainline and Sugino issue is about mere differing schools of thought, then I urgently beg you to read the articles I have mentioned repeatedly, by two scholars who are BOTH fluent in Japanese AND well-read in the historical texts on the issue. If you find fault with their conclusions, I am most definitely all ears. If you don?ft, you can?ft POSSIBLY equate the mainline of KSR with a mere ?gschool of thought.?h I am all ears.
Harvard, Frankfurt or the Izasa family may well be the historical home of a particular tradition, but unless they can demonstrate that someone is misrepresenting their traditions by either possessing an incomplete or inaccurate set of skills, then I can't see much of a case to answer.
First of all, I have blown your analogy out of the water. You?fre going to have to do some serious explaining before I need demonstrate ANYTHING. Even so, I find it interesting that you think that the Sugino family has the full set of skills found within the Katori Shinto Ryu curriculum. Especially considering the full set of skills, as a practice, was only handed down within the Soke?fs family, or in this case, by the teaching lineage representative, which is Otake Sensei. While I have no proof, the odds are pretty friggin low of some Tokyo-based judoist and aikido man being given the full densho, when he refused to trek out to Narita on a regular bases, or better yet, relocate there permanent, and when he was taught by exponents who, barring further evidence, were of little consequence to the teaching lineage. Ockham?fs razor was it? Yea. Nice rule. I?fll invoke that here. But then, maybe there was something special about this occasion, huh? Something so special that the Soke and his trusted supporters would just give away a traditional and every last secret that had been proximally located near Katori Shrine for HUNDREDS OF YEARS to some ?greal nice guy?h in Tokyo, cause it was the right thing to do. Hmmmmmm. Maybe.
I believe this was addressed by someone else, but while I am on a roll?c
Yes, as my fellow e-budoer mentioned, the grandfather CAN MOST CERTAINLY disinherit the little booger if he wants to, so that he is entitled to NONE of the grandfather?fs heirlooms or assets. If he is a craftsman, he can also restrict the use of his shop name if the little runt decides to cash in on renowned reputation of his grandfather as a craftsman by opening a shop under the exact same name.
But regardless, this doesn?ft analogy, as well doesn?ft apply. Why? Because it wasn?ft a matter of a split of equals, like in a family, where EVERYONE is at least entitled to the family name. Sugino was outside the iemoto system to begin with. He never gained the confidence of the Soke, was never adopted into the Iizasa family or penetrated that system to such an extent to where, if he decided to break away, it would be difficult to decide who was the authentic torch-bearer. He was just a ranked student who practiced from afar. In that sense, he has no entitlement to the name and rank other than what Soke granted him.
.
And ultimately, to quote WH Auden, "The words of a dead man Are modified in the guts of the living".
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean, but I doubt it will help you here.
You have all but admitted that you have an axe to grind regarding this matter. I wonder whether you are honest enough within yourself to recognize your own bias and complicity in this?
I think everybody and there pet monkey knows where I come down on this issue. The question is whether that matters or not. Even if my allegiances and biases were not clear to everybody, and you?fd have to be pretty thick, that has no bearing on the soundness of my arguments, which you STILL have yet to address. Like I said, the Evangelists may be irritating and bias, but at least they are open about it, and that openness provides a medium for debate, regardless of anyone?fs minds are changed as a consequence. You are just as bias as I am, but I haven?ft mentioned that because it can be assumed. Now that we have cleared that up, can you address my points now please?
As for moral obligation or ethicality (sic), you might well want to explain why this tradition is known as Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu and not Iizasa-Ryu?
Because the Soke?fs great great great great?c. where were we? Anyway, his ancestor named the school such. Kind of like Gates named his company Microsoft rather than Gates Soft. Because he felt like it, and had every right to do so. Nonetheless, among those who know ANYTHING about Japanese history and especially pertaining to koryu, Katori Shinto Ryu and Iizasa ?gare like peas and carrots.?h Let me ask you the first name that comes to mind when you hear Microsoft? Bill Gates, right, just like EVERYBODY else. Disregard that it is now a publicly traded institution. Just assume KSR is a company that has yet to go public and is still run by Iizasa family. That?fs the only difference.
Let us be honest. This is not a discussion about the legitimacy of one true lineage of a tradition.
Uhhhhh?c.it isn?ft? Well slap my !!! and call me Honey!!! And all this time, I thought I was in the right thread!
It is about the capricious claims of various people who are one (or more) steps away from the lineage (by your definition).
?gCapricious: Characterized by or subject to whim; impulsive and unpredictable.?h
Well, actually, I?fll grant you that. I am unpredictable and impulsive, but you still haven?ft defeated my points yet, have you.
And while I applaud you for being skeptical of information that comes from the "opposition" camp, I would suggest that it would be wise to apply the same level of critique on information you receive from "your" sources. I believe that an application of Occam's Razor is in order.
Skepticism IS a wonderful thing. In which part of my post was I being naive and gullable?
You state that you, "take no issue with students of Sugawara or groups in a similar boat, for reasons that I am not at liberty to divulge". I believe that this is disingenuous, and highlights the fundamental flaw in your argument. You choose not to engage certain parts of the debate that display ethical equivalency as they may simply make it more obvious that what you are arguing is a point of politics and not one of consistent ethical or moral frameworks.
Like I mentioned before, I, unlike yourself, am bound by a blood oath that numerous generations of people have taken before me. If you cannot understand why I can?ft discuss things told to me in confidence, and that have yet to be publicly released by official representatives, then you best return to Japan and brush up on your martial lore, and maybe an ethics class while you?fre at it.
Again, that was a question I was answering by a fellow e-budoer, not something I raised myself. But my keppan and the restrictions it places on me is incomprehensible to you, then we can have the secretary scratch that whole portion from the record and I?fll concede that point to you. Now can you start tackling my points as I have raised them in the previous post?cpretty pleeeaaase!
I am always deeply suspicious of people who bandy about accusations and then refuse to divulge their sources or reasoning. There is no more impetus to believe the assertion than there is the average fairy tale. To my mind, if you cannot say either the source or content the statement is worthless.
All of my accusations AGAINST THE SUGINO SCHOOL rest on matters of public information, as you would know if you had detailed all the points raised rather than skimming my posts looking for chinks in my armor. I have done my best to address each and every point or sentence of yours with a reply, as can be seen in most of my posts. But you consistently raise red herrings or other off-topic issues without dealing fully with the full and complete content of my posts, and end up rebutting NONE or JUST A FEW of my points. If this keeps up, and you refuse to treat my posts as thoroughly as I am obviously treating yours, then you are wasting my time, and your posts will be blocked and invisible to me in the future. I am using precious time to debate with you. If you cannot do the same, then this discussion between you and is over.
Lineage in the martial arts, including koryu traditions, is like any family tree. Just because a grandfather did not approve a marriage of a grandchild does not make the great grand children illegitimate. And ultimately, to quote WH Auden, "The words of a dead man Are modified in the guts of the living".You state that you have been dissatisfied with previous discussions of this issue, where people retreat to their preferred version of the story and agree to disagree. May I suggest that your true cause of your dissatisfaction stems from the inflexibility of a zealot for whom facts are a grab bag to pick from what you wish and reject as heresy that which you disagree with.
Maybe. I?fll ask my shrink this week when I see him. My dissatisfaction with the previous discussion rested with people on ?gyour side?h cowering from the points raised on ?gour side?h and our allies because they obviously had no rebuttal or they were not willing to follow the logical arguments to their natural conclusion and admit that they were members of a group that was acting in a less than ideal way. Or for whatever other reason they were unwilling or incapable of reducing our points to rubble. It is much easier to try to shake hands with someone you can?ft beat before the end of the match and call a ?gtie?h before the audience watches you get KO?fd in round three. Or something like that. You call me a zealot because I want to resume the match and see what?fs what. Fine I?fm a zealot, and a bigot and a puppy killer and I step on worms as they cross the sidewalk. Anything else you want to pile up on that, just have your lawyers write up and I?fll put my John Hancock on it. But for the LOVE OF GOD ASWER MY POINTS WILL YOU? Or is that too much to ask?
It appears that you have a very deep personal attachment to perceiving yourself as being on the side of the righteous.
I AM on the side of the right. I don?ft HAVE to prove it. I am on the side of the right, not because I joined the school and then decided that ?gI am awesome?h and so my school is awesome and better than anybody elses. As I said, logistically and financially, I would have had a MUCH easier time commuting to Kawasaki than Narita. However, knowing that Narita was authentic and Kawasaki WAS NOT, I made the hard choice based on principle and ?gwhat is right?h and joined the real Katori Shinto Ryu. So you bet your !!! I am righteous, and I have a whole government and the vast majority of Japanese koryu scholars on my side, friend. What?fve you got? So, are we through with diversions about my character and my motives, which we all know are base and despicable? Can you tackle my points now?
Let me say that I always find it puzzling that so many martial arts practitioners have such a naive and uncritical approach to the political realities at the heart of *any* organization. I find it particularly baffling that individuals retain this naivety even after years of immersion at the heart of these organizations.
The ?gpolitical realities??h Hahahahaha! How about the political reality that Otake Sensei was chosen teaching heir and Sugino wasn?ft. Boy, I bet that?fs a hard one to swallow. A bit naïve yourself Mr. McCarthy? Thinking in ideals (?gMy sensei SHOULD have been the Shihan?h) and not in realities (?gHe wasn?ft and never will be?h)? I find it baffling that people remain naïve of the real dark side of politics and power struggles, too. Pretty sad aren?ft they?
To clarify the point of my invitation to front up at my dojo, it was not to invite a round of "gentlemanly fisticuffs". Instead, it was an invitation extended to you and any other who might wish to actively see my work, my students and discuss the matter in person.
Then why didn?ft you word it in just such a fashion, being sure to state that you were merely interested in discussion?
Additionally, would anyone want to come all the way to your dojo in person to discuss something we are discussing right here, or that they could do over mail or phone? The only reason anyone would need to go to your dojo, it is safe to assume, is if they need to resolve something that can?ft be resolved through mere talking. Given the history of forums like this, it is also safe to assume, unless you clarify yourself to meaning a mere ?gtalk,?h that such an invitation could THEN only be one of a ?gnon-verbal?h variety, shall we say?
On this forum, as with many where manly men hang out, when you post something like:
?gIf you or anyone else here has a problem with that, you're welcome to come to my dojo where we can sort it out in person.?h
More often than not, we are safe in assuming it is a challenge. Reread your post there Mr. McCarthy. I don?ft see anything in there about discussions, and you even use the standard beginning, ?gIf you or anyone else here has a problem with that?c(fill in your expletive of choice here)?h
Clarity in word choice is very important. You ?ggoofed?h in this thread before about the Phil Relnick thing, as your apology was proof of. Fair enough. Let?fs try to avoid goofing any more.
I am always willing to welcome visitors and enjoy a robust exchange of ideas. Personally, I think that it speaks more of you than I that you assume an invitation is a challenge or a threat.
Uh, no. It speaks of your inability to write clearly and to express your ideas fully, especially with phrases that are traditionally associated with challenges, like ?gIf you or anyone else here has a problem with that, you're welcome to come to my dojo where we can sort it out in person.?h
To be blunt, we do not live in Edo period Japan (or the Wild West for that matter), so what makes you assume that I was talking about inviting you (or anyone for that matter) to face off with our favorite 3 foot razor blades?
Because you used a standard opening line that is very frequently associated with a subsequent insult or challenge like ?ggo screw yourself?h or ?gthen say it to my face.?h Maybe I misread your posts, but you sure didn?ft make it easier for me.
May I suggest that your tactics in this thread, which you explicitly state were meant to be insulting, certainly do not hold you in good stead.
Excellent. I accept that. I got what I wanted, well almost (if you will address my points fully rather than changing the topic), so I will let you take the high road and be lauded as a paragon of virtue and myself, as a big meany trouble-maker.
Provocative can be fine, but the addition on insult simply highlights arrogance and an immaturity of argument.
More of that ?gbudo seishin?h again. Arrogance or confidence tinted with impatience, I cannot say, but then at least I can address your points in full, rather than constantly relying on NOTHING BUT red herrings. As for immaturity of argument, you have yet to even begin addressing my argument, so get to it soldier! Only time and a little elbow grease on your part will decide how immature my arguments are.
I would also like to disabuse you of your notion that I react like a proverbial "bull in a china shop". Please know that while I will not back away from such obvious a personal bait, my response will always be measured.
Measured? Like your words? Like dropping Phil?fs name as a gossip hound and subversive or ?gIf you or anyone else here has a problem with that, you're welcome to come to my dojo where we can sort it out in person.?h??? Gotcha.
And while you are rolling out the clichés, do not be so sure that you can both possess and consume the cake you seem so dreadfully attached to. If I were the Izasa family I certainly would not want as indiscrete, immoderate and ill considered "advocate" pursuing their own agenda in public fora.
Good thing I don?ft represent the Iizasa family then isn?ft it. But then I made that clear in my pervious post. Or had you missed that part? Probably if your responses are any indication. I don?ft need to represent the family in order to discuss matters of public record, which is why I am. I argue this (AGAIN, like I said before (wink wink nudge)) out of principle and to set the record straight, and to be honest, for a little entertainment.
Of course, my invitation still stands, especially now knowing that you’re an Otake student, if and when you are ever in Brisbane (Australia) I would most welcome the opportunity to meet and extend a hand in friendship should you wish to be colleagues?Ecommunication not confrontation.
Invitation accepted. If I am ever in Brisbane I will look you up. I'm sure we will get along smashingly.
Ok, now I am getting confused. Was not Sugawara a student of Sugino???
Mr. Thomas. As Sugino Sensei?fs students would openly point out to you (and as I have found mentioned on public homepages before), Sugawara Sensei was a student of Otake Sensei, not Sugino Sensei. Hope this helps.
Mr. Owens,
I will try to address your analogy in time as fully as possible (unlike some people), but this response to Mr. McCarthy has been long, and so I need to take a short break from typing. Hope you understand
Last edited by gmellis; 19th April 2004 at 06:25.
Greg Ellis
I like autumn best of all, because its tone is mellower, its colors are richer and it is tinged with a little sorrow. Its golden richness speaks not of the innocence of spring, nor the power of summer, but of the mellowness and kindly wisdom of approaching age. It knows the limitations of life and it is content.