addressing your teacher

[rmcrobertson]

I forgot. Here's an idea. Maybe the whole idea of, "master," was fine in its time, fine among the elderly and senior, perhaps even still fine in certain identifiable instances--but generally speaking, it's an idea who time is past.

I still argue that in this country, it's an title that's done a hell of a lot more haarm than good, but I dunno.

 

[Hollywood1340]

I simply recognize it as his rank, not his position. Race doesn't enter it to it, and never should.

 

[SingingTiger]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
As for the bit about context over-ruling connotation, nope, sorry. Words do not simply mean whatever we wish them to mean--whether we like it or not, they drag along all the meanings they've acquired in history.

Of course they don't just "mean whatever we wish them to mean." I'm not going to use the word "happy" when I mean "sad" because that's not one of the generally agreed-upon meanings of the word.

Let's say you're talking with a 90-year-old woman, and you mention her granddaughter. She smiles and says, "oh yes, she's always so happy and gay." In the past few decades (maybe more, I'm not sure), the term "gay" has developed a meaning of "homosexual," and that meaning has negative connotations as far as some people are concerned; at the very least, it often evokes a sense of controversy. Would you tell her that it's inappropriate to use the word because, when used with the other meaning, it has controversial connotations? I know I wouldn't. If I thought about the term at all as a term that refers to homosexuality (and I probably would, since that's the meaning it most often carries these days), I would immediately recognize that that's the not the meaning in use, and, in the current context, understand immediately what the woman meant. The issue of "master" is even easier, because the "expert" meaning is still in common use -- as evidenced on your own black belt certificate, where it's used in terms like "associate master" and "master of arts."

You're not really arguing that words with multiple meanings, one or more of which carries negative connotations, should never be used with their other meanings any more, are you? Seems to me to be a good way to kill the language, or at least make it awfully boring.

I'm surprised that you hadn't considered African-Americans and the issue of American slavery in this discussion. If you recognized that the master/slave relationship would be a connotation of the word, what were you thinking of? (Serious question, I'm curious.)

Rich

 

[Hollywood1340]

As an African American, that's the farthest thing in my mind when I train. There should be no race, sex, religion, or nationaltiy on a martial arts mat. If there is, they don't deserve to share the mat with you. I train with martial artists. As a human being I'm every bit there equal regarless of rank. So what they call themselves is pointless.

 

[rmcrobertson]

First off, I didn't directly bring up the issue of race. Or indirectly; somebody else did, and I took it as fair comment (not something directed against me, just comment) and a testimony to the fact that words cannot be dissected out of their cultural and historical contexts to be used as we please.

I find it a bit odd that this is coming up in this fashion, and I don't quite get it. Nonetheless, I think I've been explicit about what I mean. But still, another shot at it.

a) This is America. We don't have "masters," not anymore. What we do have, it would seem, is a nostalgia for a past that never really was. As several posters mentioned, "mastery," was originally a much lower-level term. For its present status, I blame David Carradine.

b) Anybody out there associate the term, "master," even remotely, with women? I think it extremely unlikely. What this argues is that the whole idea of, "mastery," as presently constructed in the martial arts community, is a patriarchal one. That means that, "father," is a big part of what's being said when it's used, and it excludes women.

c) Assuming that one is not 147 years old, and does not come from a very traditional background, why in the world would you want to be addressed as, "master," on a regular basis? At rubber chicken dinners, sure--nobody pays any attention to that stuff anyway--but day to day? I would find it embarassing in the extreme--not that it's ever going to be an issue, given my plodding progress in the martial arts and lack of interest in opening a school.

d) Anybody out there ever run into a phony who used the title? had to deal with something worse? read the back pages of "Black Belt," and feel a vague sense of disquiet about all the "masters," we seem to have in this country? I'd argue it's simply one of many terms that's become hopelessly debased. It should be taken out of mothballs and worn only on special occasions...like a tuxedo.

e) I insist upon my experience: every single person I've ever met who had a legitimate claim to mastery, whatever the hell that means, would've looked at me like I was insane if I'd used the term. Its use reminds me of the time I went to see Seung Sahn (I think that's the proper spelling) talk about Zen, back in Providence: every bonehead on the East Coast was there, leaving the articles out of their sentences and trying to sound like a bad translation of a koan. ("O Master!" they'd say, while supposedly asking questions. "Sky very blue! We here below! {questioner hits floor with flat of hand} What is life??") He proceeded to lecture on the tastiness of airport hamburgers, reminding me that humor is a big chunk of Zen. Oh, I did see one Buddhist "master," lecture a couple of times--Trungpa Rinpoche--now there was a guy who liked his titles. Read up on him; what a creep.

f) I think the usage has a corrupting effect, which is why I oppose it strongly. It helps us fetishize...

g) I doubt the word's gonna kill anybody. I also think that lots of charlaatans (as I've said) simply adopt a donw-home, folksy approach to screwing perople over. But in part, I think the concept's simply worth exploring; in part, I'm trying to figure out my own ideas on the subject. So, thanks.

Well, that's all too clear, I trust. I'm going to leave this as a summary and shut up, more or less. Them's my points. Sorry for the repetition.

 

[SingingTiger]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
He argues that translation is in fact an impossibility for just this reason: when we "translate," a word, we're stripping off everything that gives it its full meaning, and settling for an approximation.

I thought about this a lot before falling asleep last night. Seems to me a good argument against "stripping off" context when determining a speaker's meaning, regardless of whether or not one or more meanings for a word carry negative connotations.

I insist upon my experience

That's fine, but hopefully you realize that "anecdotal evidence" isn't really evidence at all. Just based on the posts in this thread, it's clear that there are others who have had experiences contrary to yours.

whatever the hell that means

Second time you've put it that way. But presumably, in the systems (unlike EPAK) that use the term, it has a specific meaning. A kung fu student could just as easily look at someone with a blue belt at your school and say, "she's a blue belt -- whatever the hell that means."

I still find it amusing that it's okay to use the term "associate master" (whatever the hell that means) but not to use the term "master."

Rich

 

[rmcrobertson]

Why, no. It never occurred to me that others might have different experiences...you mean, that individual experience is no authority?
Seriously, of course that's true.

Next: anybody wanna try defining what they think, "mastery," is? It strikes me that there are a few basic approaches:

a) define the term simply as a function of time-in-grade; you study for a long time, you're a "master." How long? I dunno. It depends.

b) define the term through explaining the rules of a particular style, tradition, etc.

c) define the term as a measure of both technical and "spiritual," achievement. Here, the trick would be to explain clearly what technical measures, and what spiritual achievement, you meant.

d) define the term as a ceremonial bit of verbal dress-up

e) define the term satirically, in the fashion of Bierce's, "Devil's Dictionaary;" i.e. "Master. Adjective employed to help strip Americans of their cash and free will. See also: Humbuggery (No, Gou, it doesn't mean what it looks like it means) in the martial arts, chi masters, McDojos, levitation, fire-walking, chi kung, Paul Mitchell Demonstration Teams, Count Dante. (Just kidding guys. take a breath...hold it...there. That's better.) I might add that I write this in California, of which Robert W. Smith once wrote: "California is to martial arts as garlic is to vampires."

f) define the term by offering examples of those considered to be masters, with clear illustrations of why.

g) define the term as a phenomenon necessitated by economic/cultural pressures.

h) define the term as being necessitated by psychological pressures: i.e. the desires of students looking for ways to shore up their egos (nothing necessarily wrong with this, by the way), a side-effect of what Freud called, "transference-love."

i) define the term as resulting from sexism, as yet another way to turn the dojo into a boy's own treehouse, with "Girlz Keep Out," written on the door with the, 's' put on backwards.

Certainly, there are other approaches to definition that I haven't thought of. Certainly, too, my sketches of approaches have some definitions built into them. OK. So what are your clearer definitions?

Thanks, in advance.

 

[Kenpomachine]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Ya know, I never even thought of African-Americans and the issue of American slavery,

A question out of curiosity here. When you refer to African Americans, does it only apply to negroes and moroccans and the like, or only to negroes?

 

[rmcrobertson]

The term's pretty specific. I believe it refers to American citizens who trace their "origins," back to the indigenous peoples of the African continent. It is, therefore, a cultural/historical/ethnic term. And it implies a deliberate choice of one's own past, or a sort of social choice aabout how to describe people on aa form. It is not, in my mind, a biological description, except in fantasy--since we all "originally," evolved in Africa.

If it helps, I'm taking some of this definition in bits and pieces from Henry Louis Gates' anthology, "Black Literature and Literary Theory," particularly his opening essay, "Criticism in the Jungle." I'd also point to Sollers, "The Invention of Ethnicity," as well as some earlier writing.

It's an interesting topic; I'm just not quite sure how to wedge it into a discussion of kenpo...whoops, wait, through discussing the BKF? But that's another string thingy...

 

[Old Warrior]

This is my final foray into this discussion. I agree with Hollywood there is no place for “race” in the martial arts.

The study of martial arts is, for the most part, an anachronism. The proliferation of deadly weapons, even in the hands of children, makes training for unarmed combat or the study of swordplay somewhat irrelevant. Part of the allure of the pursuit is the immersion in an ancient art and culture where the knowledge of martial arts was highly valued and the experts, perhaps, even revered.

When I put on my Kumdo uniform, it takes me to place in time, where the teachers were, in fact, called “masters" and their knowledge highly regarded. Part of the attraction is becoming part of the culture and adopting its customs and terminology is part of the package. In 2003 America “bowing” is considered offensive as it is a custom that is not performed even when greeting the President, who is the most powerful person in the world. We still have master sergeants in the army and master craftsmen in the arts and unions. If you don’t want to go along with calling the professor/teacher/instructor “master” – find another school that suits your sensitivity. You can’t please everyone.

 

[rmcrobertson]

I have to note that the idea of being teleported back in time is, in part, my point...though I'd add that in many cases, one is teleporting back to a "past," that never was. Those good times were filled with wars, violence, racial/ethnic/class/gender discrimination...just to mention the obvious. To me, it's just like folks who want to go back to the good ol' days in schools---you know, back when schools were segregated, and everybody had to pray first thing in the morning, which is exactly how it was when I was a kid.

I realize I'm being picky, but it's part of my post-fu...this ain't, "sensitivity," but knowledge and awareness.

Anyway, thanks for a discussion that has helped me to figure out my own thoughts on the matter.

 

[SingingTiger]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
anybody wanna try defining what they think, "mastery," is?

Great question.

Being a lowly blue belt -- and just barely, at that -- I'd be hard pressed to define what a first-degree black belt is, at my school or any other, with any degree of accuracy. I have no idea how to define the term "master" (which, as far as I know, isn't used at my school). But I suspect that for any school/organization for which the term has meaning, the approach used must be roughly along the lines of your example c), a measure of both technical and "spiritual," achievement. Possibly without even including the "spiritual" aspect (which, I agree, makes the definition tricky).

Just out of curiousity, do you (or anyone else) know what the definition of "associate master" (or any other high-level ranking) is within an EPAK organization?

Rich

 

[rmcrobertson]

Here's the quote from Larry Tatum's BB certificates, updated following Mr. Parker's original ideas. NB: I contributed a phrasing or two to these, though I don't recollect which, so anything you don't like is mine.

"At eighth degree (associate master), the black belt's concerns shift to areas of physical mastership that were not visible to him in the past. His art eventually begins to expand physically and mentally, so much so that a definite physical change becomes evident, expressing the fact that he has begun to settle into a physical mastery. Thus, movements become less contrived because they are in the process of becoming embodied within him."

Interestingly, eighth is pretty physical where seventh and ninth are more psychological/spiritual/social/cultural; the BB descriptions alternate that way from first to ninth...

Here's the one for tenth--in which none of the phrasing is mine at all.

"Tenth degree represents a lifelong endeavor to help all humankind. The person's rank is so respected by peers and students that the person's work affects the course of the art."

Hm; thanks for asking.

 

[SingingTiger]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
so anything you don't like is mine.

I'm used to that.

Just kidding, I've really enjoyed this thread.

The descriptions are interesting. If 8th focuses on physical and uses the phrase "physical mastery," and 9th focuses on the spiritual/etc. side, then it seems to me reasonable that the vague and all-encompassing nature of the description for 10th makes a good definition (in the context of the preceding levels) for "mastery." There are certainly other possible labels -- you mentioned "master of arts" earlier, though I don't know if that's for 9th or 10th, or one of the levels below "associate master" -- but "master" seems reasonable.

Anyway, thanks for making me think in this thread.

Rich

 

[Kenpomachine]

It's an interesting topic; I'm just not quite sure how to wedge it into a discussion of kenpo...whoops, wait, through discussing the BKF? But that's another string thingy...

I have started a new thread to continue the discussion on this topic in the locker room...