SokeCalkins said:
I would like to address the issue concerning the use of titles such as Soke, Shodai, Grandmaster and others, as well as some other issues. It seems that there are many traditionalists who are offended by Americans using these terms. They would rather see the use of the title Soke dropped, and Americans use the title of Founder. They don't understand why Americans insist on using an Asian term. They are also complaining about 40 year old Grandmasters.
At no point in this "address" is the real point addressed: that Soke has a specific meaning in the Japanese language that people int he western world are bastardising for their own personal gratification.
The last time I heard so much whining and crying was from children in a daycare center, and even they didn't cry as much as some of these people who call themselves martial artists.
And the last time I saw such a large group of people getting together claiming to be the "supreme grandmaster of this" and the "ultimate ninja fighter of that" was also in school...
In any case, "whining and crying" as they put it is not what it going on. People who know what they are talkign about attempt to correct misuse of a foreign language, and those misusing it constantly claim that actually they're right and the numerous linguists and members of the parent culture are in fact wrong.
I will begin with some facts that many may or may not know
First, I will address the issue of Americans using Japanese terms. This has been going on since the Japanese arts were brought to America. After all of these years, Americans still butcher the name Kara-Te. We pronounce it Ka Rotty.
i.e. they pronounce it wrong. that's hardly an excuse, and in fact it should also be corrected. You may as well at least try to pronounce Japanese terms as the Japanese would.
We also see it used in conjunction with the word "American". Schools call it American Karate. Is Karate American? Absolutely not, but people call it this anyway and it has been accepted as the norm.
It's also more honest than, for example, Fusho-Satori Ryu, whichh most people would THINK was Japanese, when in fact it's American. Something altered in America but with karate roots could probably be justified in calling itself America karate.
What about the Koreans? The Korean Yudo Association has changed its name to the Korean Judo Association. How dare those Koreans use a Japanese term (Judo). Isn't saying Korean Judo the same as saying American Karate?
If the KJA is part of the IJF (International Judo Federation) and follows it's grading and competition guidelines, then Yudo has every right to be referred to as Judo. The two arts seem to be almost identical anyway, so as long as they're similar enough, Judo and Yudo might as well be the same thing. In any case, I believe that Yudo still exists as its own art, with its own grading requirements, and the KJA now deals with Kodokan Judo.
How about American Kenpo?
Same thing
Many American martial artists use the term dojo or dojang, yet no one complains about that.
They use dojo/dojang CORRECTLY, which is what matters! Dojo = "place to practice the way", i.e. somewhere to train.
Many of the modern schools still teach Asian terminology, respect and discipline.
Also fine. The respect and discipline is even fine without any Asian roots, but introducing asian terminology into an art to make it seem more authentic is just misleading, especially when it's done badly.
So, this is okay, but once the word Soke comes into play, it's taboo. It was acceptable for Americans to use the term Sensei. Why is it okay for a 3rd dan to be called Sensei, or a higher ranking Grandmaster to go by the title of Shidoshi, but not okay for the founder of a system to have the title of Soke? This does not make sense.
Because Soke is the one used incorrectly. It DOES NOT mean founder. I asked a Japanese linguist friend of mine a while back to translater it for me, and he found that it essentially meant "The head of a Japanese family" with mention of a debt of honour to those who had gone before and those who will follow. It was used to identify the current head of a lineage, not necessarily of martial arts, but of anything where a monopoly was enforced.
As far as the title of Soke, Shodai or any other Asian term, why do Americans use it? Well, I am sure there are several reasons. Probably one reason is just because it sounds better than Founder. It is related more to the martial arts. I, myself, prefer the title Founder, but regardless, what difference does it make as long as the person has trained hard and earned the title.
Founder is at least correct usage. Using the title "soke" is like using the title "Knight of the Round Table" or "Duke of Kidderminster" to identify yourself as a founder.
I cannot speak for everyone who carries the title of Soke, but I can honestly say that those I have met do not require anyone to call them by this title.
But of course, most of the Western ones plaster it all over their websites and any other form of advertisement for them and their system.
Of course there are those who use the title of Soke to impress people which is not a good practice.
I think I'd struggle to find ANY who didn't do this...
Anyone who founds their own system is a Soke or Shodai, however, that does not mean they should go around calling themselves Soke. Maybe some of the old Masters such as Ueshiba, Kano, Shimabuku, Oyama and others never used the title of Soke, but nonetheless, all of these men were.
Wrong. The Japanese don't consider these men to be "soke", so how exactly are westerners qualified to disagree?
I imagine most of the grandmasters you named who founded their own systems at young ages probably put in as many hours as most people would do ina lifetime by that point...
And lastly, how dare a 22 year old with only a few years of study in Jiu-Jitsu found his own art and call it Judo. Jigoro Kano was born in 1860, received instruction in Jiu-Jitsu for the first time in 1877, and by 1882, he founded Judo. By the time Kano was 40, Judo had come to enjoy great popularity.
See my next post.
Regarding martial artists who found their own systems, they are not doing anything that the Grandmasters and Masters of the past didn't do.
I beg to differ. Most of them are putting in MUCH less effort than the other founders you have mentioned, who probably had trained more by age 30-40 than almost any westerner would in a lifetime. In addition, most of their arts were tested in one way or another, and survived. Judo, for example, beat almost all jujutsu schools who accepted their challenge (the sole exception being a school with a lot of groundfighting, which was then incorporated into Judo)
If you look into the history of what people consider traditional martial arts, every art was founded by someone who trained in different arts before developing their own. Look at the art of Hankido. This combines Korean Hapkido with Japanese Aikido. Mas Oyama trained in Chabi (a combination of Kempo and JuJitsu), Shotokan and Goju-Ryu before developing his Kyokushinkai. This is true tradition. I laugh when so-called traditionalists make comments about newly founded systems. They don't seem to realize that at one time the art they are studying was also considered a new martial art.
And I laugh when people create a new art and believe themselves the equals of masters like Kano and Ueshiba, both of whom earned their respect through their actions, not their titles.
Not the greatest of articles, and as I said, it NEVER addresses the issue that soke does not mean founder.
