There is something that I have seen not to often, but enough to make me wonder. In the Forum for the subject LEGITIMACY, the question was asked what determines legitimacy. I would also like a little feedback on what makes a style legitimate. It seems that there are some that have trained for anywhere from 0-50 years in one or more Martial Arts styles and develope their own from what they have learned and the next thing you know they are a 10th Dan. My questions to the forum: 1. Am I alone, or has anyone else seen this? 2. Who regulates this? 3. Is this the right thing to do (Opinion of course)? This is a touchy subject, but I am dying to know what others think. Thank you all...
------------------
Yours in Budo
NEW STYLE
Moderator: Available
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
NEW STYLE
AARKJ
Right now nobody regulates anything in terms of new styles. For the most part, people sneer at such efforts - particularly the traditionalists. But then every "traditional" style has had its origin somewhere in time where some bright and influential person started something new and put his/her stamp in history (Wing Chun was actually developed by a woman).
My personal opinion is that new styles are like mutations. For the most part they will not make it. But every once in a rare while a radical change is made that causes successive generations to have a big competitive advantage.
- Bill
Right now nobody regulates anything in terms of new styles. For the most part, people sneer at such efforts - particularly the traditionalists. But then every "traditional" style has had its origin somewhere in time where some bright and influential person started something new and put his/her stamp in history (Wing Chun was actually developed by a woman).
My personal opinion is that new styles are like mutations. For the most part they will not make it. But every once in a rare while a radical change is made that causes successive generations to have a big competitive advantage.
- Bill
NEW STYLE
A point of clarification, Glasheen-Sensei:
As a Wing Chun student myself, there is some dispute as to the official mythos of whether Yim Wing Chun or her mentor existed in actuality. No matter; the style teaches the use of the vertical fist very well, especially for those of us with vertical shortcomings.
student from Lilliput
As a Wing Chun student myself, there is some dispute as to the official mythos of whether Yim Wing Chun or her mentor existed in actuality. No matter; the style teaches the use of the vertical fist very well, especially for those of us with vertical shortcomings.
student from Lilliput
-
Bill Stockey
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Mon Oct 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Arlington,VA
- Contact:
NEW STYLE
If ones goes back far enough in Japanese martil arts history the founder trained ith a mountain mystic or a mountain demon. The old way of naming a dojo or a place was the same as naming a style. It was really only in this century that the name gamers have jumped in.
-
Jake Steinmann
- Posts: 1184
- Joined: Fri Apr 30, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Newton, MA
- Contact:
NEW STYLE
In a recent issue of Inside Kung Fu (I believe), Robert Dreeden made an observation that went something like "All styles, no matter how old, are made up. At some point, some one sat down a put together the style..."
Whether it came from a mountain demon, or the gym down the street...it's still just made up.
Jake
------------------
Defeat is worse than death. You have to live with defeat - Seal Team Slogan
Whether it came from a mountain demon, or the gym down the street...it's still just made up.
Jake
------------------
Defeat is worse than death. You have to live with defeat - Seal Team Slogan
NEW STYLE
Two things are required for a Martial Art to come about: A reason and a rhyme (more commonly heard "a history and a philosophy"). The history creates the reason the Art 'is'. The philosophy creates the rhyme, the harmony, the balance in the Art. It is up to the creator to develope those requirements and provide the Art. Styles come about when the student has become so enlightened that they find imbalances in the Art, impurities. The process of correcting and cleansing kind of reforge the Art, but usually do not completely stray from the path of the Art. That is how some styles survive, and some do not.
"Confusion is good, for it forces one to meditate upon the meaning of the world."
Veritas
"Confusion is good, for it forces one to meditate upon the meaning of the world."
Veritas
NEW STYLE
AARKJ-
I posted this some time ago in a different forum:
To whom it may concern:
I've already made my feelings pretty clear about people awarding themselves incredible rank and starting their own style. In general I consider it an ego trip- someone who can't be the big fish creating his own puddle.
I was challenged recently to describe what would convince me that a self-awarded rank was legitimate. Here are my initial thoughts:
1) If your style has any tournament component you should have been and/or trained at least one national champion. More, if the tournament circle is small.
2) If it is called a combat style, it must be tested, and that is hard. Perhaps 100+ uses of unnassisted, weaponless uses of force as either a cop, corrections officer or bouncer. Alternatively, a history of cops, etc who have previous experience with martial arts seeking you out and staying with you for more than one year. Many people hold seminars for LEO's then claim that they teach DT's while the officers that attended the class under orders felt nothing but contempt.
3)Designate and document all the skills your students must master from the lowest rank to the highest. If any of the high ranks are honorary, award yourself the highest real rank. If your style is worthwhile, as students mature and take over the ryu they will vote you the honorary rank, just like Kano.
4)Figure out how long it would take for a good student to achieve the rank you award yourself and be sure you have studied at least twice that long. If it would take a student longer to get to where you are than it took you, the style stunts students, it does not teach them.
5)Obviously, the art must have significant, preferably profound differences from all other arts you have studied.
6)If you are breaking off from another organization you must maintain loyalty to those that taught you- you owe them much. If that is impossible your maturity level may be too low for instructor status, much less master. At the very least maintain dignity.
7)If you are breaking away you must be better at both the art and teaching than anyone else in the old organization, especially if the technical differences are minor.
8)Please, if you choose to use a foreign language to describe or rank you art at least make the effort to use a real word and translate it correctly. Then live up to the terms you use. For instance, if you choose to call yourself an ancestral style at least have one parent to child transmission of
leadership in your history.
That's it, rough draft version. Comments?
Rory
I posted this some time ago in a different forum:
To whom it may concern:
I've already made my feelings pretty clear about people awarding themselves incredible rank and starting their own style. In general I consider it an ego trip- someone who can't be the big fish creating his own puddle.
I was challenged recently to describe what would convince me that a self-awarded rank was legitimate. Here are my initial thoughts:
1) If your style has any tournament component you should have been and/or trained at least one national champion. More, if the tournament circle is small.
2) If it is called a combat style, it must be tested, and that is hard. Perhaps 100+ uses of unnassisted, weaponless uses of force as either a cop, corrections officer or bouncer. Alternatively, a history of cops, etc who have previous experience with martial arts seeking you out and staying with you for more than one year. Many people hold seminars for LEO's then claim that they teach DT's while the officers that attended the class under orders felt nothing but contempt.
3)Designate and document all the skills your students must master from the lowest rank to the highest. If any of the high ranks are honorary, award yourself the highest real rank. If your style is worthwhile, as students mature and take over the ryu they will vote you the honorary rank, just like Kano.
4)Figure out how long it would take for a good student to achieve the rank you award yourself and be sure you have studied at least twice that long. If it would take a student longer to get to where you are than it took you, the style stunts students, it does not teach them.
5)Obviously, the art must have significant, preferably profound differences from all other arts you have studied.
6)If you are breaking off from another organization you must maintain loyalty to those that taught you- you owe them much. If that is impossible your maturity level may be too low for instructor status, much less master. At the very least maintain dignity.
7)If you are breaking away you must be better at both the art and teaching than anyone else in the old organization, especially if the technical differences are minor.
8)Please, if you choose to use a foreign language to describe or rank you art at least make the effort to use a real word and translate it correctly. Then live up to the terms you use. For instance, if you choose to call yourself an ancestral style at least have one parent to child transmission of
leadership in your history.
That's it, rough draft version. Comments?
Rory
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
NEW STYLE
Rory
This is really good. Obviously you have observed a lot of bad behavior and given it a lot of thought.
I found this one particularly humorous: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
This one has me thinking... <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
What a great litmus test. I think you should publish.
- Bill
This is really good. Obviously you have observed a lot of bad behavior and given it a lot of thought.
I found this one particularly humorous: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
What immediately came to mind is the gentleman (Terry Dukes) who calls himself Shifu Nagaboshi.Please, if you choose to use a foreign language to describe or rank you art at least make the effort to use a real word and translate it correctly. Then live up to the terms you use.
This one has me thinking... <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
That is really good. I also like the fact that you only promote yourself to the highest technical degree and have others assign the honorary status by acclaim.Figure out how long it would take for a good student to achieve the rank you award yourself and be sure you have studied at least twice that long. If it would take a student longer to get to where you are than it took you, the style stunts students, it does not teach them.
What a great litmus test. I think you should publish.
- Bill
NEW STYLE
-Bill
I concur I think it should be published! Everyone has been so good with the replies and watching the direction the comments are flowing I see that there is concern about illegitimate rank floating around as well as illegitimate styles. I have seen this also many times.
So I will toss a little gas on the fire. What about rank awarded by a passing Master (possibly as a last resort to keep a head of his system) that is neither written nor witnessed and was only communicated verbally.
Case in point the issues ongoing with ISSHIN RYU Karate.
------------------
Yours in Budo
I concur I think it should be published! Everyone has been so good with the replies and watching the direction the comments are flowing I see that there is concern about illegitimate rank floating around as well as illegitimate styles. I have seen this also many times.
So I will toss a little gas on the fire. What about rank awarded by a passing Master (possibly as a last resort to keep a head of his system) that is neither written nor witnessed and was only communicated verbally.
Case in point the issues ongoing with ISSHIN RYU Karate.
------------------
Yours in Budo
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
NEW STYLE
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
If the master failed to document, shame on him and too bad for the recipient. And then there's the possibility that he never awarded the rank. Either way, it didn't happen.
- Bill
They have a saying in medicine. If it wasn't written down, it didn't happen. In the case of medicine, this attitude is designed to ensure that a patient has proper coordination and continuity of care. In the case of martial arts, coordination and continuity in the care of students is just as important.neither written nor witnessed and was only communicated verbally
If the master failed to document, shame on him and too bad for the recipient. And then there's the possibility that he never awarded the rank. Either way, it didn't happen.
- Bill
NEW STYLE
I agree with your input.
"coordination and continuity in the care of students is just as important."
I believe that if we don't care for the students the Martial arts will not carry on the way that we hope they will.
------------------
Yours in Budo
"coordination and continuity in the care of students is just as important."
I believe that if we don't care for the students the Martial arts will not carry on the way that we hope they will.
------------------
Yours in Budo
NEW STYLE
Let me suggest one other attribute of a legitimate new style or master.
Integrity.
It may seem self-evident; in fact, it probably should. But this is where I believe most legitimate problems arise with new styles.
My TKD Grandmaster left the organization he was in and formed another one. He secured his Chung Do Kwan legitimacy (both organizations were descended from Chung Do Kwan by aligning with another CDK Grandmater and being re-recognized and promoted by Lee Won Kook, founder of the style. He does not tear down his old colleagues and Grandmasters and recognizes their ranks, etc.
Grandmaster Henry Cook of the Seven Winds Flying Fist System was trained in Karate, Judo, Wing Chun, police tactics, Aikido, and believed that Wing Chun as he was taught had deficiencies for the modern American battleground. His sifus would not allow him to deviate from the teaching and conitue to call it Wing Chun, but allowed him to form his own system, which he did. He is never satisfied with current training and always is modifying and improving the system.
Lee Jun Fan paid homage to his own sifus but did his own research and kept modifiying his training. He did not claim Jeet Kune Do was a secret ancient training revelaed only to him in a dream from "the etheric masters of Cappucino", etc.
Tony Blauer apparently believes his own martial background is largely irrelevant; I believe his formal training was in boxing, wrestling, and TKD. Again, he does not claim ancient secret traing; he does claim extensive research, biological advantages, and efficiency.
The common thread among legitimate new stylists/masters that I see is a recognition of roots and a dearth of self-aggrandisement about either self or style.
My $.02.
student
[This message has been edited by student (edited April 30, 2000).]
Integrity.
It may seem self-evident; in fact, it probably should. But this is where I believe most legitimate problems arise with new styles.
My TKD Grandmaster left the organization he was in and formed another one. He secured his Chung Do Kwan legitimacy (both organizations were descended from Chung Do Kwan by aligning with another CDK Grandmater and being re-recognized and promoted by Lee Won Kook, founder of the style. He does not tear down his old colleagues and Grandmasters and recognizes their ranks, etc.
Grandmaster Henry Cook of the Seven Winds Flying Fist System was trained in Karate, Judo, Wing Chun, police tactics, Aikido, and believed that Wing Chun as he was taught had deficiencies for the modern American battleground. His sifus would not allow him to deviate from the teaching and conitue to call it Wing Chun, but allowed him to form his own system, which he did. He is never satisfied with current training and always is modifying and improving the system.
Lee Jun Fan paid homage to his own sifus but did his own research and kept modifiying his training. He did not claim Jeet Kune Do was a secret ancient training revelaed only to him in a dream from "the etheric masters of Cappucino", etc.
Tony Blauer apparently believes his own martial background is largely irrelevant; I believe his formal training was in boxing, wrestling, and TKD. Again, he does not claim ancient secret traing; he does claim extensive research, biological advantages, and efficiency.
The common thread among legitimate new stylists/masters that I see is a recognition of roots and a dearth of self-aggrandisement about either self or style.
My $.02.
student
[This message has been edited by student (edited April 30, 2000).]
