Passing the Torch

[glad2bhere]

Dear Stuart:

I think I know what you are saying. When you have a particular teacher or leader it hard to think in terms of actually replacing that person. Personally I don't think its possible. Individuals such as Ji, Myung and Choi (among others) carve a special niche' for themselves and then simply leave a huge hole that no one can fill when they pass. When I think of succession, then, I think of someone who embodies the essence of a particular kwan, organization or art passing responsibilities to an individual of the next generation who likewise embodies that essence. I'm not sure that succeeding individual would have to be a carbon-copy of his predecessor but I think that the folks associated with the original leader would need to feel comfortable that the new leader would a.) leader through practical application of his predecesors' philosophy and b.) could safe-guard the integrity of the arts' curriculum. If this could be done I think it would reduce the natural desire for people to strike-out on their own. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[kwanjang]

Greetings,

Good topic.

I've been training with Ji Han Jae since Janurary 2004 it's been really wonderful, in the sense that I feel he's completing my physical, mental and sprtiual aspects of my last 20 plus years in HKD, but I'm worried about who would take over Sin Moo HKD in the future.

I personally dont think anyone can replace Doju Ji because he's very unique and considered by many the founder of the worlds most popular style of HKD.

From other MA such as Ed Parker's system, Bruce Lee, Remy Presas etc. the people with the highest Dans will all say they're the head of the system and most probably fight about it. Then many seperate Assocoations will start up.

That's my opinion on the sad and unfortunate reallity of the MA in general. But maybe thats how evolution works.

Hapki

Stuart Rosenberg

Hello Master Rosenberg:
Is it not unfortunate that passing the torch will almost certainly mean BIG changes for those who are left behind. In a way, it is not unlike fighting over an inheritance which has caused many a family to split up.

In the lesser known arts like mine, I believe that having the highest ranking student take over may be a result of that particular student having the most knowledge about the particular art. In an art like GM Ji teaches, there are so many who are right up there in knowledge, the choices are far more difficult. Like you, I fear that we will see yet more systems and break ups. Hopefully the art will not suffer more than it already has. :asian:

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Rudy:

Sorry to sound like a broken record on this point but what about your "Attitude"?

I understand what you are saying about a person being technically accomplished. Now, what about the importance of your particular take or view on things. For instance, let me back-up to something you mentioned on another Net a little while back.

The discussion was about how in your early days you were more of a "drill instructor" in your approach, and that with time you "mellowed" some and have become much more nurturing as a teacher. Would you want a person taking your role to be more of a drill sargeant and learn to mellow with time as did you ? Would you want your successor to learn from your "mistake" (??) and pick-up at the nurturing role that you developed into? As the head of your kwan is there a way you can increase the probability of having your successor express the sort of Attitude that you think is most beneficial for the survival of your art? Would your membership be accepting if they recognized you as nurturing but characterized your successor as more of a drill sargeant ( I mean, if THIS were the way you would want things to go down)? Would you make any special efforts to encourage the membership to express allegiance (in some manner) to the individual who would be an identified successor while you were still around to troubleshoot the process?Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[kwanjang]

Dear Rudy:

Sorry to sound like a broken record on this point but what about your "Attitude"?

I understand what you are saying about a person being technically accomplished. Now, what about the importance of your particular take or view on things. For instance, let me back-up to something you mentioned on another Net a little while back.

The discussion was about how in your early days you were more of a "drill instructor" in your approach, and that with time you "mellowed" some and have become much more nurturing as a teacher. Would you want a person taking your role to be more of a drill sargeant and learn to mellow with time as did you ? Would you want your successor to learn from your "mistake" (??) and pick-up at the nurturing role that you developed into? As the head of your kwan is there a way you can increase the probability of having your successor express the sort of Attitude that you think is most beneficial for the survival of your art? Would your membership be accepting if they recognized you as nurturing but characterized your successor as more of a drill sargeant ( I mean, if THIS were the way you would want things to go down)? Would you make any special efforts to encourage the membership to express allegiance (in some manner) to the individual who would be an identified successor while you were still around to troubleshoot the process?Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Hello Bruce:
Something wrong with my attitude? I thought I made my position pretty clear in my other post earlier on. When I replied to Master Rosenberg, I said my belief is that lesser known arts tend to likely choose the one who has most knowledge. I also believe that this is done because there are not too many people in high ranking positions waiting in the wings.

This does not mean that I agree with it, and I still think that people will only follow those whom they can have a positive relationship with. As I said, IMHO following a leader is not based on just learning more kicks and punches, it must also take in consideration many other things (including the attitude you mention). This is why I said in my earlier post that I consider my job to include teaching those values to my higher students. Alas, people will only take in what they want despite my best efforts.

Somewhat off topic, but still relevant IMHO. You are very right about age bringing another dimension to the table. I believe that being around a bit longer gives you a different outlook on what is important. With age, there should come a bit of wisdom gained from experiences, and that is something you bring to the table as you teach. Unfortunately, most younger leaders (including myself when I was young) tend to have a strong need to make their own mistakes (even when those mistakes have already been made by their teacher, and there was no need to repeat them).

When I was younger, I thought I knew it all. As I grow older, I realize just how very little I do know, and I am in a desperate hurry to learn more from all sources. Before someone gets the idea that learning more from all sources will make me another Jack of all Trades, I have simply come to understand that without filling my cup now and then, it gets mighty empty when others drink from it on a steady basis. In other words, I need to refuel the tank to keep going, but the gas I put in the tank does not necessarily change the direction of my journey... it certainly does not mean I will make changes to my art. I simply like to learn things for myself, and I won't let the art I teach stand in the way for my thirst for knowledge (or becoming more effective in teaching my chosen art by what I learn.

 

[American HKD]

Dear Rudy, kwanjang

You Wrote:

"...........When I was younger, I thought I knew it all. As I grow older, I realize just how very little I do know, and I am in a desperate hurry to learn more from all sources. Before someone gets the idea that learning more from all sources will make me another Jack of all Trades, I have simply come to understand that without filling my cup now and then, it gets mighty empty when others drink from it on a steady basis. In other words, I need to refuel the tank to keep going, but the gas I put in the tank does not necessarily change the direction of my journey... it certainly does not mean I will make changes to my art. I simply like to learn things for myself, and I won't let the art I teach stand in the way for my thirst for knowledge (or becoming more effective in teaching my chosen art by what I learn..........."

Sir, well put I feel the same way.

As much as love HKD and the way I learned it there's so much out there to learn from. It keeps my interest up and my mind alert comparing new ideas and figuring out various applications etc.

A very eye opening expirience for me with Doju Ji 2 weeks ago. He said to me and a friend Instructor Roy Miyahara and I will paraphrase "My method of teaching is to give you a foundation and the rest of what you learn or improve on is Ok, I will never say to you who taught you this or that etc."
That was such an eye opener for me comming from a HKD tradional teacher. It made me think that's why HKD varies so much because of the Master Ji's attitude that many different opinions are all good vs the traditional it's only my way attitude.

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Rudy:

As always you have a way of hitting right to the heart of things. The only problem with your "Attitude", Rudy, is that it comes from years of experience and there is no way we can BOTTLE it and share with the World through cases of I.V. bottles.

I would also be lying if I said that your posts didn't hit a sort of sad note in me as I found myself agreeing with each of the points you made. Most certainly I wish folks could simply pick-up where you might leave us and simply continue to grow the art from that point forward. As you shared in your post, though, it almost seems like part of the human condition that folks must need make all of their own mistakes for themselves, sometimes in spite of evidence and experience to the contrary. Do you think, then, that the pattern of splitting after the loss of a leader is, in some way, inevitable? I ask this because it seems that the training of a martial art is to develop autonomy, and then, when the person has a highly developed sense of independent thought (say, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th dan), we ask them to demonstrate their development by participating in a dependent relationship with an organization. Should we really be surprized when a person who has trained to develop independent thought confuses Independence, with Dependence, with INTER-dependence and finally strike-off on their own at the drop of a hat? I wonder if we have a basic flaw in the way in which we develop practitioners to accept responsibility? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[American HKD]

Dear Bruce,

you write

........Do you think, then, that the pattern of splitting after the loss of a leader is, in some way, inevitable? I ask this because it seems that the training of a martial art is to develop autonomy, and then, when the person has a highly developed sense of independent thought (say, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th dan), we ask them to demonstrate their development by participating in a dependent relationship with an organization. Should we really be surprized when a person who has trained to develop independent thought confuses Independence, with Dependence, with INTER-dependence and finally strike-off on their own at the drop of a hat? I wonder if we have a basic flaw in the way in which we develop practitioners to accept responsibility? Thoughts?........

I'm more and more convinced this is the natural path of things. HKD has so many branches of the tree.

In a sense it's suggested in MA to go on your own if not openly told to, otherwise we'd all be doing the same thing and MA would not evolve.

Bruce you and I would'nt have HKD as we know it if Ji just followed Choi completely. Alot of guts for such a young mans at the time would'nt you say.
Today we'd all laugh at a 25 year old starting his own system!

Doju Ji convinced me that independance and free thinking is the normal and natural path not the exception. Each man must develope himself completely.
Coming from a man with a true legacy that's very profound.

Ji told a high ranking Master in Sin Moo and a good friend of mine that " My Cerificate is the best you dont need any other. All the high ranking masters around the world have his certs. I.E. Bong Soo Han, Kim Jin Pal, Duk, Myung, Ke Young Kim, Hwang In Sik, most of the KHF, KHA original Kwan Masters and so on.
They all have my rank then started thier own Kwans and Associations.

Doju Ji IMHO is not about controlling the future of HKD just sharing his knowledge with as many people as he can. He also clearly sees the fact that each person is differant and will turn out differant no matter what anyway.

Truely a GREAT Master that's why I say I don't think there's one to replace him.

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Stuart:

".....I'm more and more convinced this is the natural path of things. HKD has so many branches of the tree. ...."

More and more I see that we are in agreement, but this doesn't address the concern that I have that maybe leadership in the modern world of Hapkido arts may actually be sending a mixed signal to its membership.

A.) On the one hand the Hapkido arts develops Character and Integrity to fuel autonomous action so that the individual can come out of the best part of themselves, unimpeded, to serve their community.

then--

B.) The individual is asked to subsume his autonomy under the auspices of an organization.

My view of a kwan is not unlike the Buddhist Sangha or "community" where people of varied backgrounds come for support, suggestions, training, etc. by which to better live their Buddhist Path. There seem to be a growing number of "organized Sangha" by which a person (for a fee) can "learn meditation", or "attend a seminar". If a Buddhist is empowered to renounce attachments, how is it that one does this by attaching to an organization or commercial venture? See what I mean?

Personally I think that folks like Rudy and JR (West) are on the right track by providing venues where people of mixed heritage or lineage can come and get guidance independent of their individual agendas. I guess I am wondering how we pass this sort of tolerance and growth ethic on to the next generation? Does this make sense?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[American HKD]

Bruce,

".........I guess I am wondering how we pass this sort of tolerance and growth ethic on to the next generation? Does this make sense?.........."

Probably by setting good examples ourselves is the best thing we can do.

They'll make mistakes along the way as we did and still do, but hopefully they'll come out on the right road.

 

[kwanjang]

Hello Stuart (please call me Rudy) and Bruce:
Thank you for being so kind. I think of my school and association as a family unit. Some kids stick close to the home, and others will venture out into the world... as head of the family, you love them both the same. Personally, I fully expect my students to go out and "build their own homes", and I actually encourage them to do just that. However, I also try to teach them that leaving before you finish the meal kinda leaves you with an empty belly.

As was mentioned before, we see too many young people leaving their schools and Masters before they have had a chance to learn all (or most of) the technique the Master has to offer. Too impatient to wait until it is the right time to learn (after you master what has been taught to you so far), they leave to learn more stuff from someone who is not so picky. Then they add more of the same lower rank stuff they learned from their new source, so in the end they have a whole lot of first or second dahn stuff. Unfortunately, as most of you know, the higher rank material often contains the "meat" of the program, and not having enough patience to learn it will tend to trim the original art down to bare roots. That is how many arts will be lost to future generations.

This is a trend we see in life. We stick the old folks with the knowledge in 'Homes", and we hire teenagers (with NO experience to teach our kids anything) to look after our children. Now we have tons of knowledge wasting away (often without any visits from the family) in homes, and our kids are handed a remote control to get their learning. Something is very wrong with this picture, and I am afraid in martial arts it is not much different. People will come to see the young Bruce Lees who can do all sorts of fancy stuff, but no one notices these folks have not yet learned how to share their fancy stuff. On the other end of the spectrum is the old Master who can no longer DO jumping spin kicks; however, he has a real knack of teaching folks how to do it. Unfortunately, no one realizes this until it is too late, and the old Masters are gone to the great Dojang.

We are at a cross roads, and many of the old Masters will be gone before you know it. When you have a chance to learn from the old men, DO IT NOW!

 

[American HKD]

Dear Rudy,

I agree 100%.

I was fortunate enough and envolved enough with eastern culture to learn to appreciate the wisdom and expirience of our elders.

The seasoned master deserve repect for thier knowledge and years of service to the Art, our western culture fails to teach this to the young people.

A tragity at best.

Again that's probably why I'm literaly having the greatest time of my life learning from Doju Ji now. He's mentioned many times that he's teaching us everything and holds nothing back.
Doju Ji feels that his time is short and has much to teach to the younger instructors and people should realize this from any senior master and learn from them.

Thank you Rudy for discussing these truths.

 

[Disco]

An interesting side bar has manifested itself. Rudy stipulated that the higher rank material often contains the "meat" of the program and Stuart stated that Doju Ji now is teaching us everything and holds nothing back.

There is no refined way to pose this question, so if offense is taken, I apologize before hand.

Just what do you consider the "meat" of a program and why is it held back until the higher ranks? To me and this is just my opinion, it smacks of doing a dis-service to the student. Perhaps it's just me and I'm confused with the concept of teacher - student relationship. I don't profess to be the most knowledgeable of teachers, but whatever I do know, my students know. If I should find something new within the world of martial arts and it would benefit my students, they get informed. When a student gives me his/her trust to teach, then that's what must be done. I can't predetermine that a student will be with me for X number of years, so it is my duty to afford as much training and knowledge as possible for whatever time period we have together. If a student leaves, whatever the reason, and I know that he was short changed, on purpose, then what would that make me? Again, this reflection is based upon what I think the "meat" of a program is. Other's viewpoint of meat may be different in context then mine.

Respectfully
Mike Dunn

 

[American HKD]

Mike,

No offense taken.

As with anything you go through the course, 1st grade through 12th, College then graduate school etc.

What I mean in regards to Ji han Jae is the following. I've been involved in an instructors training course with Master Ji, he made it a point to explain that he's teaching us the entire Sin Moo System, Philosophy Technique, Ki development, Mind development, etc. No secrets kept back.

Many Masters esspecially Old School types do in fact hold back high level or so called secret techniques from students for many reasons such as, 1. Power/control issues 2. Trust Issues 3. Self presevation issues, and so on.

What I think you mean is, a good instructor teaches each student to the best of his ability and teaches each tech. to the fullest. I agree but to teach any Art properly you should be at a certain level as with anything else in life.

You would'nt want a doctor who has a couple of years of Med school working on you, but a Black belt with 3,4,5 years in an Art can open a Dojang and call himself a Master because he has a flashy spin kick or something.

What I think Rudy means is the students not getting the proper instuction from a under qualified person doesnt have the background or meat of the system mastered because they left there teacher to soon. It happens to be a big problem.

I know people who teach students from thier basements that have mastered nothing. What will those students do teach someone else eventually? Much less I'm sure.



Any clearer?

 

[kwanjang]

An interesting side bar has manifested itself. Rudy stipulated that the higher rank material often contains the "meat" of the program and Stuart stated that Doju Ji now is teaching us everything and holds nothing back.

There is no refined way to pose this question, so if offense is taken, I apologize before hand.

Just what do you consider the "meat" of a program and why is it held back until the higher ranks? To me and this is just my opinion, it smacks of doing a dis-service to the student. Perhaps it's just me and I'm confused with the concept of teacher - student relationship. I don't profess to be the most knowledgeable of teachers, but whatever I do know, my students know. If I should find something new within the world of martial arts and it would benefit my students, they get informed. When a student gives me his/her trust to teach, then that's what must be done. I can't predetermine that a student will be with me for X number of years, so it is my duty to afford as much training and knowledge as possible for whatever time period we have together. If a student leaves, whatever the reason, and I know that he was short changed, on purpose, then what would that make me? Again, this reflection is based upon what I think the "meat" of a program is. Other's viewpoint of meat may be different in context then mine.

Respectfully
Mike Dunn

Hello Mike:
Absolutely no offense taken, and I'm sure none was meant. I think Stuart pretty much said what I meant by the "meat" of the program not being taught until a student reached a certain level of expertise in training.

My way of teaching is pretty much like building a house. I begin with the basic concepts. Once they are fully understood (not just being able to mimic them), I begin teaching how these basic concepts relate to one another (Bruce mentioned he saw some of that concept of teaching at my last seminar).

You would be surprised how many high ranking martial artists I find who do not yet "see" how techniques relate to one another. For example. I was at a seminar where a high ranking GM taught techniques. Another high ranking gm (no cap) who runs a very successful organization was able to mimic all of the stuff pretty good; however, I saw with utter amazement that he was NOT able to use the material he already had been taught to help him with the new material he was shown. In other words, he could only mimic. To me this meant that he just did not "know" Hap Ki Do, and all he could do was a pretty good job of mimicing some individual techniques. With the amount of material in Hap Ki Do, and the inability to see how this material inter relates, he will be in his grave before he knows Hap Ki Do. It is like having to learn 3608 seperate techniques instead of a few hundred principles. Unfortunately, all the folks he teaches will know nothing more than a collection of techniques. They will NOT know Hap Ki Do.

Once the idea of learning principles is grasped, a student begins to "see" opportunities in a confrontation without having to think about them. In other words, they can react to a situation instinctively. After all, an arm bar in any form is still just an arm bar, even if you execute it with your legs instead of your hands. You simply MUST know how to do your techniques from any given situation without the need of someone to show you how it works pretty much the same on the ground as standing up. It is only after that, I can begin to teach what I consider the meat of a program. To teach what comes next to someone who does not get this is sort of like teaching a black belt group with one white belt in the class who just does not "fit" in despite how hard he tries.

So you can see I don't hold things back, and I have no secret techniques I don't want to share. I am often simply not given enough time to get to the calculus after teaching the basic addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division problems. Frustrating to say the least. At the same time, it is easy to see how a young black belt with 8-10 years experience can think he has everything he needs. After all, he can do all of the fancy stuff already, and the "calculus" lessons just seem to be boring. I am sure someone else might be able to explain this better, but that is basically what I meant with my comments.

Oh, one more thing. If you ever seen an Instructor who just "shows" his students loads of techniques, you have probably run into someone who does not know how to teach. IMHO, simply sharing more techniques is not teaching... that takes someone who knows how to make you understand what you are doing. Look around, and you'll see bunches of the former, and very few of the latter. Some of them are the grandmasters (no cap) we were talking about earlier.

 

[kwanjang]

Had another incident a while back that sort of relates to the subject above. At a seminar I taught was in attendance a 7th dahn in (supposedly) Hap Ki Do. At one of the intermissions, I saw him sitting with his hands on his head sort of dejected. Thinking I was not fullfilling his needs, I was concerned. Instead, he related to me that in his 32 years of experience in Hap Ki Do (most of that time with some well known Masters), he was blown away by the basics I was teaching the class. He was just miffed about that.

I observed him a bit closer afterwards, and I noticed one major problem. He knew lots of techniques, and he could actually do them pretty well. He had good motion; however, he was not USING the Hap Ki Do he knew.

The seminar I taught was basic material; however, I did show how each of the techniques could be used in conjunction with the other techniques I taught. Like teaching someone a bunch of pressure points and finding he does not use them when he is doing joint locks. To use them together is a simple idea right, and you would expect that Hap Ki Do people with 32 years experience would automatically do that. Wrong!!!!!

 

[Disco]

Somewhat clearer, in sections........

He made it a point to explain that he's teaching us the entire Sin Moo System, Philosophy Technique, Ki development, Mind development, etc. No secrets kept back.

No disrespect intended here, just my Philosophical viewpoints.
On Philosophy Technique, I'm a little confused with the intent/meaning. If the meaning is why a technique is performed a certain way, my opinion is white belts should know why and how. Mind development, another perplexing dichotomy. Personally, I feel I can only attempt to influence a persons mind, muchless develop it. With the proliferation of high ranking infighting and deceitful ongoings, one would assume that that aspect has fallen short world wide in general. Ki development..........If were talking as an adjunct to physical development, then again that should also be at the beginning levels. Now if it's going into the realm of "Ripley's believe it or not", that could become a thread unto itself.

Many Masters esspecially Old School types do in fact hold back high level or so called secret techniques from students for many reasons such as, 1. Power/control issues 2. Trust Issues 3. Self presevation issues, and so on.

I may be putting you on the spot here, but could you give a "small" example of what you would consider a so called secret technique. When I hear this type of verbage, I invision the infamous "Dim mak". As I stated prior, I don't profess to be all knowing, but I am all inquisitive.
As for the power/control issue, again they either learn to handle this at the beginning stages or you just have a bully/egomanic on your hands. Those people should leave early in the training. They do if I'm involved. Trust, another issue that should show itself early on in the beginning stages of training. Self preservation ties into trust.

You would'nt want a doctor who has a couple of years of Med school working on you, but a Black belt with 3,4,5 years in an Art can open a Dojang and call himself a Master because he has a flashy spin kick or something.

Well, going to an ER, that's exactly what your going to get. They have to start somewhere. As for a BB with 3,4,5 years in the arts opening a dojang, it depends on the style I guess. I have seen more than a few Korean Masters farm out their BB's to open satellite schools and of course funnel funds back into the main school.

What I think Rudy means is the students not getting the proper instuction from a under qualified person doesnt have the background or meat of the system mastered because they left there teacher to soon. It happens to be a big problem.

I agree in principle here, but just what is the time element to receive the "meat" of the system. It almost looks were going in a circle here, cause now where back to the original premise.

I know people who teach students from thier basements that have mastered nothing. What will those students do teach someone else eventually? Much less I'm sure.

Point taken, but now comes the real crux of the subject. How, when do you know you have mastered something? To my way of thinking, it's a continuous learning and perfecting of elements of a system. There is really no way to really "master" anything. I'm a human being, with flaws and restrictions. Therefor incapable of mastering anything. Now I can become very proficient and better than the average person, but mastering something is unattainable. Semantics I know, but I think we can see the point.

Thanks for the input. Enjoy discussing with you, Bruce and Rudy. :asian:

 

[Disco]

Master Rudy, thanks for the reply. Understand what you mean when you stipulate understand not mimic. Sorry to say that you are correct in that there are many who teach and don't really understand. This subject can get really deep and intense. Thanks again for taking the time to reply. One of these days we'll be able to get together and have some fun. :asian:

 

[American HKD]

Dear Mike,

Great questions but not simple answers, I will try to give you some ideas of what I'm talking about.
Also I think you refered to me as Bruce at the end of your last post?

Somewhat clearer, in sections........

He made it a point to explain that he's teaching us the entire Sin Moo System, Philosophy Technique, Ki development, Mind development, etc. No secrets kept back.

No disrespect intended here, just my Philosophical viewpoints.
On Philosophy Technique, I'm a little confused with the intent/meaning. If the meaning is why a technique is performed a certain way, my opinion is white belts should know why and how. Mind development, another perplexing dichotomy. Personally, I feel I can only attempt to influence a persons mind, muchless develop it. Not someone elses mind your own mind and its higher funtions. With the proliferation of high ranking infighting and deceitful ongoings, one would assume that that aspect has fallen short world wide in general. Ki development..........If were talking as an adjunct to physical development, then again that should also be at the beginning levels. Some yes. There are different types of Ki simple and natural, some must be developed and taught how to use and what it's for.
Now if it's going into the realm of "Ripley's believe it or not", that could become a thread unto itself.

Many Masters esspecially Old School types do in fact hold back high level or so called secret techniques from students for many reasons such as, 1. Power/control issues 2. Trust Issues 3. Self presevation issues, and so on.

I may be putting you on the spot here, but could you give a "small" example of what you would consider a so called secret technique. When I hear this type of verbage, I invision the infamous "Dim mak". As I stated prior, I don't profess to be all knowing, but I am all inquisitive. There are very dangerous tech. from HKD that you may consider Dim Mak however I don't profess to have Mastered them although resently taught, also special tatics and oppnent control through your sprit and others means etc. Again too much for this venue.

As for the power/control issue, again they either learn to handle this at the beginning stages or you just have a bully/egomanic on your hands. Yes
Those people should leave early in the training. They do if I'm involved. Trust, another issue that should show itself early on in the beginning stages of training. Self preservation ties into trust. Yes

You would'nt want a doctor who has a couple of years of Med school working on you, but a Black belt with 3,4,5 years in an Art can open a Dojang and call himself a Master because he has a flashy spin kick or something.

Well, going to an ER, that's exactly what your going to get. They have to start somewhere. As for a BB with 3,4,5 years in the arts opening a dojang, it depends on the style I guess. Maybe but I doubt it. I have seen more than a few Korean Masters farm out their BB's to open satellite schools and of course funnel funds back into the main school. Yes for "money".

What I think Rudy means is the students not getting the proper instuction from a under qualified person doesnt have the background or meat of the system mastered because they left there teacher to soon. It happens to be a big problem.

I agree in principle here, but just what is the time element to receive the "meat" of the system. Everyones different and so are Masters no set time it's an individual assesment for each person. That is as Rudy said "if the student stays long enough to complete and mature into that level"

It almost looks were going in a circle here, cause now where back to the original premise.

I know people who teach students from thier basements that have mastered nothing. What will those students do teach someone else eventually? Much less I'm sure.

Point taken, but now comes the real crux of the subject. How, when do you know you have mastered something? To my way of thinking, it's a continuous learning and perfecting of elements of a system. There is really no way to really "master" anything. I'm a human being, with flaws and restrictions. Therefor incapable of mastering anything. Now I can become very proficient and better than the average person, but mastering something is unattainable. Semantics I know, but I think we can see the point.

Thanks for the input. Enjoy discussing with you, Bruce and Rudy. I'm Stuart not Bruce.

 

[Disco]

Stuart, you may have read it to quickly. I referenced all 3 of you gentlemen.
Thanks for the input. Enjoy discussing with you, Bruce and Rudy. I'm Stuart not Bruce.

Thanks again for your reply.

 

[glad2bhere]

I hear folks talking about what has become a pretty rare commodity in the Hapkido Arts.

There is no doubt that the Hapkido arts have some very accomplished practitioners.

There is no doubt that there is a lot of very sophisticated material and we could even take it higher.

There is no doubt that there are some very motivated folks who want to learn.

What I am finding it that the place in this World where one can find the point at which these three assets intersect to produce growth for the arts is typically about the size of a doormat and is right next door to where they keep the Holy Grail and the One True Cross and just across the street from the Easter Bunnys' house. Lets discount for a moment that most people will not accept leadership and teaching from a martial art teacher without the requisite epicanthic fold to the eye and the pidgin English. Lets put to one side that really learning a MA instead of just familiarizing oneself with a range of techniques is a thankless bit of anal retention. Lets consider that really getting good at a MA is a lot like pissing in a dark suit--- it may give you a warm feeling but nobody really notices (unless someone starts grandstanding for the acclaim). Having said all that, just how do you folks propose to pass our arts on to the next generation without them cutting corners? Isn't this really the sum total of the issue? The last generation busted their humps to pass things to us. We bust our butts to do the best we can with what we have been given. How do we increase the probability that the next generation will be as passionate about maintaining our arts as are we? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce