Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27

Thread: Question of legitimacy

  1. #1
    mdheiler Guest

    Default Question of legitimacy

    The Budokai forum closed up, and the mudslinging, name calling, and nay saing seems to be back on e-budo. Specifically, I noticed the return of legitimacy and history as topics for discussion. You know, people bashing Fred Lovret and company.

    I am not a student of Lovret or his styles of martial arts, but I have had the opportunity on three separate occasions to take classes at one of his student's dojo, including a seminar taught by Lovret. I found their technique to be less effective than some, but more effective than most. I have also found them to be among the nicest, most sincere praticioners of martial arts I've met.

    What strikes me, though, that claims made by Lovert's two schools seem very believable in comparision to those made by the founders and headmasters of many "legitimate" koryu. For example, many ryuha claim divine transmission of principles and techniques from well known warrior kami. Many claim being taught their techniques by tengu. Others claim direct decendency from pre Heian period royalty.

    But, you say, we don't actual believe such things today, and have reasonable hypotheses about the truth of such things. Yeah, sure. Ask your average aikidoka about the history of Daito Ryu. What about people living 400 years ago? Many probably took such stories at face value. So even if Lovret and his students are lying about the history of their ryu, they are being at least as honest as the founders and headmasters of many legitimate ryuha.

    But, you say, Lovret's technique is bad, and it's not koryu. Have you seen Lovret's technique? Have you studied it? And not just at a one day seminar, but for a few year. How many other koryu have you studied to which to compare it? My guess is that Lovret's ryuha are more effective than some systems, and less effective than others. They are probably share similarities with some styles, but are different in other ways. In other words, Lovret's ryuha are unique, just as with all other ryuha.

    But, you say, his concepts on strategy, bushi philosophy and warrior lifestyle are completely wrong. Oh yeah, unlike the myriad of modern and Tokugawa martial artists who are published. Hagakure is venerated by the countless unwashed masses. Have you read it? What a poorely written, internally inconsistant, non-sensical piece of crapola. Even Draeger, whose word has been viewed as law for decades, is considered less than completely correct by many, including those who knew him and studied with him. And he was in the thick of it.

    Have you read most modern publications on martial arts? I've read Lovret's "Way and the Power" and to be honest, I think it stacks up very well. I can't vouch for its accuracy, my PH.D. is in engineering and not Asian studies or cultural anthropology, but it is internally consistant and logical.

    For those of you who wish to start blasting another's martial art tradition, think about your own. What questionable claims does your own martial art push forward? Even the well known martial arts of Judo, Aikido, and Karatedo have their questionable claims. And that doesn't even include the numerous times many of us have streached a story just a little bit, over dinner, to make it tell better. In 20 years, these stories will be gospel as told by your own students, but embellished two fold with every retelling. So next time you want to blast another style, spare the rest of us, and don't.

    My purpose of writting this is not to make disparaging comments about anyone (except maybe the auther of Hagakure, but that was a side effect, not the purpose). I personally have a lot of respect for Draeger, the Skosses and others who have provided us in the west with such a wealth of information. My purpose is to ask those who make disparaging comments about others, to take stock of their own traditions first, and spare the rest of the world from their enlightened and superior wisdom.

    Michael D. Heiler

  2. #2
    Roger Conant Guest

    Default

    Okay, all you out there who wail and rend your garments in frustration at yet one more re-hashing of Lovret; how do we respond to this?

    Every argument here has been refuted or countered successfully on e-budo and elsewhere, several times. My favorite, incidentally, is the “there are origination myths from 400 years ago about koryu; therefore Lovret is justified in lying about a teacher he supposedly had less than 30 years ago.” I suppose we can thank the Clintons for this brilliant line of reasoning. Never defend yourself (especially not with simple facts, since those favorable to you are going to be in mighty short supply), just attack those critical of you and try to smear the reputations of others to make yourself look, if not good, at least no worse. Pretty soon they’ll be teaching this one in law school. “Yes, your Honor, my client did rape that woman. But didn’t the Visigoths get a little out of control on their spring breaks? I don’t see where any of them were put on trial.”

    So, should we ignore this? Refute it? Should we establish a permanent site here to which we can direct contributors like this one, so they can see where tread-worn arguments similar to theirs have already been punctured, deflated, and tossed on the scrap heap?

  3. #3
    mdheiler Guest

    Default

    I do not know if Lovret is lying or not about his history, as I do not have the connections, experience, or time to try to confirm or refute such claims. It is no skin off of my back either way. Nor am I trying to justify any lie that he may or may not be propagating. I am just not sure that anyone on this board is in such a secure position as to justify any attacks they may wage on Lovret. Ask question of his claims, yes. Make statements of fact to refute his claims, yes. But, and this is a big but, they should be statements of facts. Other than the Skosses and company, there are very few who have the actual resourses to determine actual statements of fact to refute the claims of Lovret and others.

    Michael D. Heiler

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Outside of Phila.
    Posts
    1,492
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    What makes you think we *haven't* "taken stock" of our own traditions?

    Look, we aren't the ones who keep bringing this back up. People come in and ask questions, people try to give them honest answers (and opinions). I personally, and most of the others I see, try to refer them to authoritative sources, rather than rehash old news.

    But if you don't want to hear this stuff, either stop posting about it, or just don't read it. This constant rehashing is getting old. And its usually instigated by the followers of the man himself. Do you really think we sit around salivating as we wait for the next poor chump to step up to the block? Sheesh.

    Ron Tisdale

  5. #5
    mdheiler Guest

    Default

    I've been reading martial arts bboards and forums since 1991 or 1992, I believe, at a time when we used emacs instead of browers. As you say Mr. Tisdale, people come in and ask questions. Also, new people come in and make statements. However, I am not bringing up the topic. Rather I am following up the mudslinging that just occurred, and asking those involved not to engage in such activities in the future. And though you may have taken stock in your own martial tradition, Mr. Tisdale, are you sure all of the newbies have?

    As for people salivating waiting "for the next poor chump to step up to the block," yes I believe it is true of some people. It seems the Budokai forum was created for just that purpose. I just hope that we can keep such witch hunts off of e-budo. Hence the reason behind my initial post.

    Michael D. Heiler

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    260
    Likes (received)
    0

    Talking

    Hi Michael,

    If I started a kiln shop, using modern western style clay, a modern western style wheel and I turned pots in the general shape and style of Jomon or Yayoi pots with cord pattern markings to boot, and sold them to customers for a tidy profit, would I be a contemporary Jomon or Yayoi period potter?

    My pots would hold water. You could cook in them. They'd have a shape and patterns embossed on them in the style and manner of ancient Japanese pottery, but would they be authentic?

    How would my customers feel if they found out I was a fake? Would only other traditional Japanese potters have the right to complain and take action against me?

    Regards,

    Paul Steadman

    PS: I know there are no Jomon/Yayoi potters around, but for the life of me I can't remember the famous style of Japanese ceramics from Japans feudal era!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    511
    Likes (received)
    3

    Default

    I started the post "westernized jujutsu" in another section of this board in the hope to learn from other people and maybe even come a little bit closer to a solution for a problem from which, I think, jujutsu in Europe is suffering. I can see some things in common with this discussion.

    The main problem, I guess, is honesty.
    Take jujutsu for example as it is usually taught in Europe. Is it authentic? The art has been practised for almost a century and has during these hundred years been changed and developed by those teaching it.
    Should we call this authentic jujutsu, or even more strict do we have the right to name this art jujutsu?
    I think so, the original teachers called it jujutsu and it has been called jujutsu ever since. Nothing wrong with that. Can we start our own organisations (with silly names but who cares almost nobody reads or speaks Japanese overhere)?
    Yes we can and frankly a lot of us do. Please don't get me wrong I am not in favor of this, just stating a fact.

    But I do think that is where we should draw the line.
    We should be honest to our students, the general public and most of all to ourselves.
    When we call ourselves "a master" in a martial art (modern art or koryu) or a craft and publicly claim this before all we better be prepared to give proof of this when asked, no matter who is asking.
    Conclusive proof that is.

    Johan Smits

  8. #8
    Kit LeBlanc Guest

    Default Authenticity

    Guys,

    So what if you call yourself "master" of a combat art yet have never been in a real fight? Are you AUTHENTICALLY a master of a combat art? It could be argued that no, you're not....

    In my opinion, the whole argument is not about "can we call Brazilian or European jujutsu jujutsu." As long as these folks acknowledge where their jujutsu is from, no problem. No one seems to have a problem with Judoka in all manner of countries using Japanese terminology and calling their stuff Judo even though no one in the dojo has been to Japan in several generations even.

    It is when Japanese names/terminology are used, "costumes" worn, masters cited, and a slap dash history of Japanese "koryu" jujutsu is fabricated to lend the art MORE credibility for being Japanese than it would have if it were simply a non-Japanese self defense art that there is a problem of authenticity.

    And how good they are on the mat means nothing. Some totally bogus schools have good technique. Some totally "authentic" schools no longer do.


    Kit

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    511
    Likes (received)
    3

    Default

    Hi Kit,

    Maybe I got it wrong. But so what if you call yourself a soldier yet have never been in a war. Are you authentically a soldier? It could be argued that no,you're not...

    I admit that there is a big difference between a combat proven soldier and one that has not been combat proven, but they are both soldiers.

    Most civilians never see the kind of action soldiers or policemen or security personel have to deal with. No they have to deal with the kind of action in their civilian lives. This does not mean that they can't become masters in a "combat"art, real masters in a real combat art. They will not develop their art beyond a certain point, like others will or they will develop it in a different way. But I guess that is another discussion. What I meant to say was that there is already enough confusion as it is.
    Given all the different influences jujutsu in Europe has been through I think it is a reasonable thing to question its authenticity.
    But then that is my opinion and that is all it is.

    Best Regards,

    Johan Smits

  10. #10
    Kit LeBlanc Guest

    Default

    Johan,

    I don't really see the soldier analogy as the same thing. A soldier is not necessarily skilled in warcraft. By definition a "combat arts expert" is supposed to be skilled at fighting, not just TRAINING for fighting.

    I don't want to get the thread off track, but I disagree that one can be an expert of a "combat art" without fairly extensive "combat" experience. Just as one cannot refer to ones self as an expert at "medical arts" without every having treated anybody.

    Certainly a body of knowledge can be LEARNED, but having learned something and having mastered it are two different things. Mastery in my opinion requires proven ability in the real world.

    Kit

  11. #11
    rbrown Guest

    Default

    I think the soldier analogy is a good one for separating what I consider to be a problem. This is only MY opinion, but here goes:
    I have no problem if you say you are a soldier. As was stated, that can be seen many ways. It is a generic term and doesn't mean any type of specific training or combat action.
    But if you state I was on SEAL Team 6, then you've taken an entirely different stance. Firtst, to be a SEAL you have to go through one (and only one) school, pass, and then be placed on a team. If you didn't do this; if you didn't make it through the training, didn't meet the requirements or quit on your own, then you are not a SEAL. Do the SEAL people get ticked off when somebody claims to be a SEAL and they're not. Of course they do, they consider it fraud and run around trying to insure everyone knows the person is not actually a SEAL and never was one. If you said you were on SEAL Team 142 have you done the same thing. There isn't and never was (at least to my knowlege) a SEAL Team 142, so you could say that you weren't claiming to be something you're not because you just invented SEAL Team 142. But, by using the name SEAL to mislead others you should expect a back-lash.
    Now let's look at the Koryu. It's one thing for someone so say they teach Japanese Sword Arts---but the minute they claim to teach a specific Ryu ---then they should be able to prove that affiliation. And, they should expect people who actually trained in that Ryu to be upset and try to expose them if their claims turn out to be false. To me (again this is me only) each ryu really is a trademark, they should be used only by those authorized to use them. You can't say you're selling Ford Cars if they aren't Ford cars, and if you do, you should expect trouble.
    I don't think anyone should get upset with someone who acknowleges they are teaching something they made up. It's their creation good or bad, so be it. But, when someone claims to teach a specific style, they should be able to prove it, and I'm sorry to say after reading and re-reading these arguments over and over, they should expect others to call them on it.

    Richard Brown

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    511
    Likes (received)
    3

    Default

    Hi guys,

    Thanks for your posts, good points! Maybe I tend to theorize this thing a bit too much.
    I used the term master because I compare a fighting art mostly with crafts. As soon as you get the paper, same with an academic degree, you can call yourself a master.
    Everybody does.

    "Mastery in my opinion requires proven ability in the real world".

    I like this and think Kit has a point and (forgetting theorizing for a minute) I guess I share this point of view. It is an honest one.

    Best Regards,

    Johan Smits

  13. #13
    Roger Conant Guest

    Default

    Paul,
    Excellent analogy with the Jomon pottery. I'm not surprised you haven't recieved a direct response to the question you asked.
    This goes to the heart of the chicanery. It would be uncomfortable to many to confront it and answer honestly. The best I expected was for them to suggest putting your fake Jomon out with the real stuff and letting people make up their own minds about which they want. Which conveniently overlooks the fact that you would be trying to obscure the fakery of your product. If, as has been said before, they would be honest about the history of what they're presenting and then let people make up their minds, that would be fine. But they're deliberately deceptive about it. Your question made that obvious.
    As usual, looks as though they will keep an embarrassed silence, hoping that the thread will wander as it appears to be.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    511
    Likes (received)
    3

    Default

    Hi Paul,

    I guess it all depends on what you tell when you sell.

    Best Regards,

    Johan Smits

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    260
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Hi Johan, Roger, everyone,

    On the one hand, I could tell prospective customers that I have studied the history (+ archaeology) of the Jomon and Yayoi cultures via books, videos and seminars and I have modelled my pottery peices on historical samples. I could inform my potential customers that I'm not from a long line of Japanese potters, that most of my work is based on experimentation and copying of museum pieces. My pots are functional, robust and can be used or just displayed.

    Or I could tell prospective customers that I learned classical/traditional ceramic skills from an old Japanese Grandmaster that was stranded on a beach in Queensland (Australia) while he was fishing. In thanking me for assisting him he taught me 50+ years of Japanese pottery in 12 months and initiated me into the hiden and okuden of his ceramic tradition, foresaking his closest students and assistants that have studied under him for 30+ years, and confirmed upon me the soke-ship of his tradition. All of my skill and knowledge extends back through an unbroken line of pottery masters, and that I'm the last and only Grandmaster of Yamato-den ceramics as the last Grandmaster didn't have anyone to pass the soke-ship onto (or I cold humbly explain that I out performed all of the other senior Japanese potters who've been studying under the Grandmaster for 30+ years...ain't I the greatest). I only use traditional materials in my work (ie: Japanese clay, Japanese wheels, Japanese tools and other rare and hard to find Japanese products and materials and medium etc) even though I live and operate out of Bourke, NSW in the Australian outback, a million miles form Japan (Oh, but I did go to Japan for a weekend to study the rare and traditional arts in the aka-chochin district of Kyoto).

    Which story would make me the most money or bring me the most followers?

    Regards,

    Paul Steadman

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Quick question for Dave Lowry
    By Finny in forum Koryu: History and Tradition
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 18th September 2005, 06:41
  2. Article: "Mainline Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu Revisited", by Ted Howell
    By Nathan Scott in forum Daito ryu Succession Controversy
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 14th January 2004, 20:07
  3. Guard question (Kyokushin mainly)
    By Mike Williams in forum Karate Archive
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11th July 2003, 19:31
  4. A sword grip question
    By Jerry Johnson in forum Sword Arts
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 13th October 2002, 15:26

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •