Why do Japanese arts use the Japanese language?

[Chris Parker]

if the Japanese or ttheir devotees want to be insulted by pointing historical facts or the mind blowing brutality of " historical' Japanese culture then so be it !

was Japanese culture responsible for the barbarism of the japanese empire, yes of course it was, what other reason could their be but their culture thought that acceptable.

let's put it this way, if a group set up a training camp, were they dressed up in german uniforms, practiced hurting people and speaking as much German as they could for the ways of hurting people, then they would quite rightly be called complete loons or extremists glorifying the excesses of the german empire. replace german with japanese and you have ma clubs and no one bats an eye

Wow........ so...... you equate the entire culture to only the negative aspects? Dude........

I understand... you don't get it. Fine. But how about you acknowledge that fact as well, so we don't go round in circles, where we explain reality to you, and your limited views see you attempt to insult people with each post?

Oh, and as far as the German example.... have you looked into HEMA? Kunst de Fechtens? Names like Liechtenhauer? Joachim Meyer? Hans Talhoffer? Plenty of German terminology used there....

 

[Tony Dismukes]

if the Japanese or ttheir devotees want to be insulted by pointing out historical facts of the mind blowing brutality of " historical' Japanese culture then so be it !

was Japanese culture responsible for the barbarism of the japanese empire, yes of course it was, what other reason could their be but their culture thought that acceptable.

let's put it this way, if a group set up a training camp, where they dressed up in german uniforms, practiced hurting people and speaking as much German as they could for the ways of hurting people, then they would quite rightly be called complete loons or extremists glorifying the excesses of the german empire. replace german with japanese and you have ma clubs and no one bats an eye

If you're only going to speak using language from a culture with no history of brutality and atrocities, then you're going to have very few options. Maybe Esperanto?

 

[jobo]

Wow........ so...... you equate the entire culture to only the negative aspects? Dude........

I understand... you don't get it. Fine. But how about you acknowledge that fact as well, so we don't go round in circles, where we explain reality to you, and your limited views see you attempt to insult people with each post?

Oh, and as far as the German example.... have you looked into HEMA? Kunst de Fechtens? Names like Liechtenhauer? Joachim Meyer? Hans Talhoffer? Plenty of German terminology used there....

if your insulted by facts theres not much I can do about it, but to be fair that's seems to be the modern philosophy to air brush out inconvienent fact that dont suit your world view, I'm not particularly proud of my own countries culture, but it's as nothing compared with some other countries.

so a straight question can you take the positives from japanese culture and off set those against say the " rape of nanking" and say on the whole it's good or benifical to the world, allowing that it's the very same " positives " which were being applied in nanking ?? or are you just cheery picking some aspect you agree with whilst ignoring the less palatable ones .

 

[jobo]

If you're only going to speak using language from a culture with no history of brutality and atrocities, then you're going to have very few options. Maybe Esperanto?

we are talking aboutspeaking a language for the main reason of promotion that culture, which is the example given,rather that, choosing one to speak because you wish to converse with native speakers, which is completely different .

let's say someone decided to speak english because they were great fans of british colonial policy, whilst dressing up in a red coat and practising suppressing native uprisings, I'd consider that some what iffy as well, just as I do those folk that dress up as nazis under the pretence its a historic reenactment,

 

[geezer]

Jobo, you've pushed this so far over the top that you are sounding absurd. An appreciation for traditional Japanese martial arts and a preference for using the Japanese terminology does not in any way indicate a support of the Japanese Imperialism of the WWII era. But if you want to condemn a whole culture for the excesses of that period, fine. If you don't want to use Japanese terms, great. Don't drive their cars, and don't use their products.

Now let's go a step further, and eliminate all Latin words from English 'cause them bad ol' Romans killled Jesus. Er ...um...Hold on ...WTF!. Oh sh--! Now I'm clean outta words.

 

[Buka]

I had a cup of tea this morning. One of those tea bags with the little sayings on the tag. It said....

Never argue with someone who was baptised in hot dog water.

So I think I'll just have me some popcorn now.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Interesting thread in a number of ways.... just, for the record....

Tomoe nage is probably best described as a "pendulum", or "droplet" throw... a tomoe is a swirling form, think of one half of the classic "Yin'Yang" symbol. The tomoe is found in a number of forms in Japanese culture, such as in groups of three (mitsu-tomoe) in a number of Japanese family crests as an example. "Kaiten nage" would be a "rotating", or "rolling" throw... a "stomach throw" would be "hara-nage".... a "circle throw" would be any of a number of terms, "en no nage" would be the most literal, although it could be "Enkei nage" (circular shape throw), "Marunage" (round throw), or a couple of others... but most commonly, the term "en" would be involved. And, while I'm here, from about page three, Blackknight mentioned that "Ken" means "punch"... actually, it means "fist", or "weapon", implying the object used to strike or attack... the most common term for a punch is "tsuki", more literally meaning "thrust (with a weapon, in context)"... classically, the idea or concept of punching in Japanese arts simply isn't the same as in Western ideals and cultural understanding.

And that brings us to the thrust of the question... why use Japanese terminology all the time? Well, for one thing, I'd disagree with the premise that practitioners of Japanese arts think of Japanese as a universal language of all martial arts... however, we do tend to think of the Japanese terms as universal, or at least, intrinsic enough to the arts we study to validate using them for preference over less specific terms (from inaccurate, or more vague attempted translations)... a good example of which is the discussion of the above tomoe nage. A number of "translations" were given, none of which were actually accurate, but were attempts to describe the throw in English. Despite the variation in English descriptive terms, using the term "Tomoe nage" is universal enough (largely thanks to the usage within Kodokan Judo... we'll come back to that) that, regardless of the specific English characterisation, everyone knew the throw being meant. In fact, reading "the throw Captain Kirk used so often" meant nothing to me... but the term "tomoe nage" instantly told me what Gerry was talking about.

By the same token, I have an immediate understanding of what an Ippon Seoi Nage is, regardless of how it is described in English (a "shoulder" throw... it's not, for the record... "one arm shoulder throw", which could be any of a number of variants I know that can be commonly called that... a "one arm throw", which again could apply to a number of actions... and so on). And again, just for the record, Seoi Nage is one of those things that has a common English description that is sometimes taken to be a translation, when it's not... it's commonly referred to in English as a "shoulder throw", however the term for "shoulder" (that would be a kata-nage, for the record) does not appear in the name at all... in fact, when you look at the name in Japanese, it is comprised of the characters "Sei" 背, meaning "back", as in your spine/shoulder blade side of your body, "O(i)" 負い, meaning "to bear (upon)", and "Nage" 投げ, which means "to throw"... giving an actual translation as "to throw by bearing the opponent upon your back", a fairly accurate description of the category of throws... but not what you find in the English terms.

So why do we insist on using these Japanese terms? Often because they give information that is lacking in the English descriptions... it can be technical (as in Seoi Nage), cultural (such as the imagery in Tomoe Nage), historical, tactical (particularly within the older, classical arts), and more. It's less about the terms being universal, even within Japanese arts, as many different arts will use different terms for the same, or similar concepts... or use the same name for different ones. As an example, many are familiar with the term "Bo" meaning "staff"... or "Jo" meaning "stick"... and many have an idea of what those weapons are. However things are not quite that simple... for example, the "Bo" might be a Rokushaku-bo (almost exactly "six foot staff")... or it might be given a name such as Chobo (elongated stick), as used in schools such as Yagyu Shingan Ryu Heiho... or Nagabo (long staff)... or the length might be longer or shorter than what is expected (YSgR's Chobo, for instance, is closer to 5 feet, other schools use slightly longer staves for reach advantages, and so on). A "Jo" is commonly thought of as a four foot stick weapon, primarily from Shinto Muso Ryu, and also seen in many forms of Aikido... and is, like the Bo, sometimes called a Yonshaku-jo (four foot stick)... except Muhi Muteki Ryu refer to their staff weapon as a Jo, despite being close to 6 feet long... and the idea of a Jo's length, even in schools such as Shinto Muso Ryu, has varied over the years. Then we have other forms of Bo or Jo... such as Hanbo... Tanbo.... Tanjo... Te Giri Bo.... and many others that might or might not be recognisable... and might be used interchangeably, or might be very specific... and even that varies with the exact same terms. A classic example is the short sword... it might be called a Shoto, or a Wakizashi, or a Kodachi... and each might be used to describe the exact same thing... or might mean something specific, such as a specific weapon or part of a school's syllabus... and the one teacher might use the same term as either generic or specific... Japanese is all in the context. So don't worry, even Japanese martial artists get a bit confused by the Japanese terms!

But why is it so important to use the Japanese terms? For that, we need to do a little historical study... starting in the Japanese school system with Kano Jigoro, founder of Judo, and his Kodokan training methodology...

In the late 1800's, a young martial artist called Kano Jigoro, who had studied and become licenced in two distinct classical Jujutsu systems, Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu (a relatively "new" classical art, being in it's second generation when Kano studied it, having been formed at the very end of the samurai rule), and Kito Ryu (an older art that included a number of facets of education, such as fighting in armour). Kano took his studies in these arts, as well as his knowledge of a few others and his understanding of academic education methods, and began to formulate a new training methodology, which he would come to refer to as Judo, distinct from the older Jujutsu systems. He altered a number of technical aspects, as well as developing a new teaching approach, focused more on developing skills in a confined area, rather than the more tactical centric approach of the older arts. This came to be symbolised by the free-form training and competitive formats that Judo is known for (for the record, many older Jujutsu, and even weaponry arts had extensive free-form training methods and sparring-like approaches), to the point that Judo became, in it's early days, a way for classical practitioners to test their abilities within Judo's context. It would not be uncommon to see a practitioners name card as stating, for example, "Takenouchi Ryu Jujutsu, Chuden Menkyo (Middle Licence) - Kodokan 4th Dan", indicating that the person held a middle level licence in Takenouchi Ryu, a classical jujutsu and weapons art, and had tested their skills to the level of 4th Dan in the open training at the Kodokan or one of it's affiliates. Due to this cross over between schools, general terminology came to be recognised throughout various arts, becoming a sort of universal terminology within Japan itself. This was the beginning of the development of standardised terminology for Japanese arts.

The next big development was found in the Japanese government. After the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate, and the development of the Meiji Restoration, where the Emperor Meiji, thorough his supporters, was restored as the ruler of Japan, and the Shogunate (military rulership) was overthrown, a number of edicts were passed that essentially ended the samurai, and the caste system that had ruled Japan for centuries. Having endured under the rule of the samurai for so long, much of Japan was not keen on embracing the culture that had acted as oppressive overlords for so long, leading to a great push back against anything seen as representing Japan's past. The newly formed government, however, as well as many business concerns, being headed by former samurai or samurai families, wanted to assist in preserving the culture of their ancestors, so a number of bodies were formed for the promotion and preservation of Japanese martial arts, under the guise of preserving unique Japanese culture. These bodies were responsible for things such as standardising modern martial arts, such as Kendo, Iaido, and so on, as well as being instrumental in helping rebuild the arts after the ban following WWII. They formulated the 9 Budo (Martial Ways/Arts) of Japan, giving particular status to nine "modern" budo arts as representative of Japanese culture; Kendo (modern sword art, which also acts as an umbrella for Iaido [sword drawing], and jodo [short staff]), Kyudo (archery), Judo (a throwing based competitive art), Aikido (a modern art based in locks, throws, and pinning methods), Karate-do (specifically referring to Japanese-based groups, such as Shotokan, Kyokushin, Wado-ryu etc, rather than the Okinawan forms, such as Uechi Ryu, Goju Ryu etc), Sumo (a very old form of grappling competition), Shorinji Kempo (ostensibly a mix of native Japanese arts and Shaolin-based kung fu... Shorinji Kempo is pretty much the Japanese pronunciation of "Shaolin Chuan-fa/Fist Methods"), Atarashii Naginata ("new" naginata, a long pole arm with a curved blade), and Jukendo (bayonet fighting based on older spear methods, and developed in the early 20th Century).

The Nippon Budokan organisation developed a "Budo Charter" for the promotion of Japanese Culture through Martial Arts, and began to push these ideas with sponsored visits, lectures, demonstrations, and more throughout Japan and the world. This, of course, has lead to a strong connection between the concept of teaching Japanese martial arts, and the teaching (and promotion) of Japanese culture... which is expressed not only through the actions, but through the language, which, of course, gives a greater appreciation back to the source of the art itself... Japan.

From this, we can see the usage of Japanese terms is three-fold (at least):
- Ease of communication by using terms that are understood by all involved (in the relevant arts)
- Lack of confusion by using many (often inaccurate) non-Japanese terms.
- Promotion of Japanese culture through martial arts.

Of course, each culture and community has it's own language... and the terms are found in each cultures art... to a greater or lesser degree. BJJ uses a mix of terms from different cultures, including Japanese (Kimono, Jiu-jitsu, etc), English (Mount, Guard etc), and Portuguese (Omoplata, Americana, and so on), reflecting it's mix of heritage and position in the world today... Chinese arts use Mandarin or Cantonese, depending on their origins... Korean arts often use Korean, especially in Korea (obviously!)... but Japanese arts tend to focus more on the idea of promoting Japanese culture, giving rise to the seemingly (but, I feel, not substantially) higher degree of usage of Japanese terminology. However I do feel that it is mainly used to speak within the context of Japanese arts, rather than being seen as "standard language" for all martial arts.

Good information - thanks for sharing, Chris.

I will argue that the Japanese terms do not carry any more information than the English equivalent terms (what you've referred to as English descriptions) to those of us who speak no actual Japanese. Seoi nage is just a term for a group of throws, to me. In fact, when you gave the breakdown, I suspected some of the throws I know fall into that group, though I'd never heard that term used for them before. So, for those of you who know the language (or at least enough to understand the information contained in the terms), your point is valid. For the rest of us, they're just the names of the techniques.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Hey Geezer,

Thanks! As I've said though, even when I'm not here, I'm here... ha! Still, life happens, you know... and people like Tony have been doing well covering most of what I'd say in a number of threads anyway... and, to be honest, there are a few things that made being here a bit more wearying at times.... speaking of....



So what? It's not about what's "reasonable" to you, and there is no need, desire, want, or prerogative to cater to your lacking grasp on the breadth of martial arts and the motivations, philosophies (yeah, I know you don't get that word either), approaches, or ideologies behind them or their practitioners. This is not about what is "reasonable" to you... it's about what's reasonable to the practitioners and the arts themselves.

It's really quite simple. If you are in a school that uses a lot of the native terminology of the art itself (in this case, Japanese), then it gets used... regardless of whatever you may think is "reasonable", or "outdated", or "useless", or "annoying", or "a waste", or anything else. If you don't like it, I'm sure you know the way out... of course, if you're not in a school that uses such terminology, then your views mean nothing to the people who are in such schools.

This idea of "I don't get it, it doesn't match my values, therefore no one should do it" is pretty small minded, honestly...



Yeah, again, really not anything that matters as far as we're concerned.... you can think all of that, but frankly, you're so far outside of the situation or conversation that you don't factor at all. You don't think the Japanese culture is worth promoting? Fine, don't do it... but telling people who appreciate the culture, or telling the Japanese themselves that their culture is not worth promoting or preserving is rather insulting, don't you think? You see no issue in saying "today we are going to use the 4 foot stick"? Neither do we. Mind you, it's not just about naming the weapon (although that's part of it)... it's about an immersion in the mentality of the school... which comes from the language used as much as the physical actions. Does the terminology make you better at martial arts? Well.... yes. They make you better at the art that use them, as you gain more insight, more understanding, more association, and deeper grasp of the essence of the school itself. You don't see that? Cool. But that doesn't mean it's not there... it just means that your martial experience is different... now you get to accept that others have different experiences and ideas as to what a martial art is actually made up of.



Then you don't understand it at all. I mean... you do know that there are certain words brought across from, for example, French, because they express concepts that aren't in existence in English, yeah? Terms that have a certain je ne sais quoi... and I know that some might read this and feel a form of schadenfreude... but that's fine as well... and the point remains.

Chris, it's not often I get to drop a "funny" rating on your posts, but the last paragraph made me chuckle. Thanks.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

we are talking aboutspeaking a language for the main reason of promotion that culture, which is the example given,rather that, choosing one to speak because you wish to converse with native speakers, which is completely different .

let's say someone decided to speak english because they were great fans of british colonial policy, whilst dressing up in a red coat and practising suppressing native uprisings, I'd consider that some what iffy as well, just as I do those folk that dress up as nazis under the pretence its a historic reenactment,

Wherein, again, you choose a single point in history and claim that's what's being supported. Weak, at best.

 

[Xue Sheng]

This idea of "I don't get it, it doesn't match my values, therefore no one should do it" is pretty small minded, honestly....

But what if they say "Wakarimasen" ( わかりません )

Sorry, could not resist...

Nice to see you're still around MT Chris

 

[jobo]

Wherein, again, you choose a single point in history and claim that's what's being supported. Weak, at best.

well pick another point of Japanese pre ww2 history and we can discuss that, how far back do you want to go ?

 

[geezer]

well pick another point of Japanese pre ww2 history and we can discuss that, how far back do you want to go ?

Well, if I were Black or Native American I could pretty much say the same about US history. You know most earlier times in history would have been dreary at best for any of us who weren't very rich. What's your point?" 'Cause you are beginning to come off as ...prejudiced.

I mean, 'cmon, Jobo. It's not like we're talking about the French for Godsake!

(Just kidding BTW. Part of my ancestry is French, along with a lot of English, Scottish, German and a bit of Irish, i.e. I'm an American Mutt).

 

[jobo]

Well, if I were Black or Native American I could pretty much say the same about US history. You know most earlier times in history would have been dreary at best for any of us who weren't very rich. What's your point?" 'Cause you are beginning to come off as ...prejudiced.

I mean, 'cmon, Jobo. It's not like we're talking about the French for Godsake!

(Just kidding BTW. Part of my ancestry is French, along with a lot of English, Scottish, German and a bit of Irish, i.e. I'm an American Mutt).

to be honest I wouldn't recommend american culture for any time in the last two hundred years. it was a bit better when we and the french were running it. The british were generally kinder to their colonial subjects than there at home subjects and canada turned out all right

I was amazed to learn that during the 1930s, the Americans were making semi serious plans to invade canada and the british in response were making semi serious plans to to blockade the eastern sea board and shell new york etal,, it could have all been very different

But that not the point, The point is that the guy wanted to PROMOTE japanese culture and i'm asking for anything good about it to promote, if your making the point they were all bad, which they were to varying degrees, that still doesn't make japanese culture worthy of promotion, it just means you should not be promoting any of them

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

In US, if your Karate school requires you to knee down in front of a Japanese flag (on the wall) and touch your head on the floor, will you do it?

 

[_Simon_]

In US, if your Karate school requires you to knee down in front of a Japanese flag (on the wall) and touch your head on the floor, will you do it?

YES! SIGN ME UP!

 

[Chris Parker]

Okay, if I'm going to be back, might as well be back....

if your insulted by facts theres not much I can do about it, but to be fair that's seems to be the modern philosophy to air brush out inconvienent fact that dont suit your world view, I'm not particularly proud of my own countries culture, but it's as nothing compared with some other countries.

I'm not insulted by facts, I am, however, insulted by your attitude and insinuations.

so a straight question can you take the positives from japanese culture and off set those against say the " rape of nanking" and say on the whole it's good or benifical to the world, allowing that it's the very same " positives " which were being applied in nanking ?? or are you just cheery picking some aspect you agree with whilst ignoring the less palatable ones .

You're equating "culture" with "historical events".... they are not the same thing. Unless you want to tell me that the "American culture" is one of dropping atomic weapons? Of assassinating presidents? These are events... but are not necessarily typical or even representative of the culture... in fact, they can be seen as notable as they are actually antithetic to the culture of the US.

we are talking aboutspeaking a language for the main reason of promotion that culture, which is the example given,rather that, choosing one to speak because you wish to converse with native speakers, which is completely different .

No, we are talking about predominantly using native Japanese terminology in Japanese arts in part for assisting in spreading Japanese culture... I would not say it's the main reason, but is a large one. The ease of communication with Japanese teachers is another part of it, as well as ease of accurate communication between different practitioners of different languages and nationalities.

let's say someone decided to speak english because they were great fans of british colonial policy, whilst dressing up in a red coat and practising suppressing native uprisings, I'd consider that some what iffy as well, just as I do those folk that dress up as nazis under the pretence its a historic reenactment,

You do realise that practicing a Japanese martial art, and using Japanese terminology is not really the same as re-enacting WWII atrocities? Or are you seriously believing that your reducto ad absurdum argument has any kind of merit at all?

well pick another point of Japanese pre ww2 history and we can discuss that, how far back do you want to go ?

Once again, historical events are not the same as a national culture... but, if you insist, let's look at the collected works of Hokusai... perhaps Sen no Rikyu and his development of the tea ceremony? How about the innovations regarding Japanese clothing and dying... or carpentry and architecture... maybe you'd prefer we start to look at Kabuki or Noh theatre... we could look at the concepts of etiquette, often derived from Ogasawara teachings or similar... concepts of duty and propriety... honourable action in thought, word, and deed... a look to the benefit fo the collective rather than the individual... I can go on, if you'd like... of course, if you'd rather just focus on negative events at the expense of understanding that actual culture or discussion, then there's no point you even being in this discussion.

to be honest I wouldn't recommend american culture for any time in the last two hundred years. it was a bit better when we and the french were running it. The british were generally kinder to their colonial subjects than there at home subjects and canada turned out all right

I was amazed to learn that during the 1930s, the Americans were making semi serious plans to invade canada and the british in response were making semi serious plans to to blockade the eastern sea board and shell new york etal,, it could have all been very different

None of this is "culture"....

But that not the point, The point is that the guy wanted to PROMOTE japanese culture and i'm asking for anything good about it to promote, if your making the point they were all bad, which they were to varying degrees, that still doesn't make japanese culture worthy of promotion, it just means you should not be promoting any of them

Really? You might want to go back are re-read, then... "The guy" said nothing about his wanting to promote Japanese culture... instead, he gave an explanation as tot he mindset of Japanese martial arts, coming from the Japanese government, and Japanese martial art instructors, which leads to an insistence on using Japanese terminology (in part). And you do get that Japanese culture is quite a patriotic one, yes? There is a real belief in the value of their culture, and a want to promote it, and it's unique aspects, both in Japan and to the world...

This is really no different than anyone being proud of their culture and wanting to promote it... which is both natural and common... it's just that the Japanese formalised that desire to a greater degree than most.

Good information - thanks for sharing, Chris.

Hey Gerry, thanks.

I will argue that the Japanese terms do not carry any more information than the English equivalent terms (what you've referred to as English descriptions) to those of us who speak no actual Japanese. Seoi nage is just a term for a group of throws, to me. In fact, when you gave the breakdown, I suspected some of the throws I know fall into that group, though I'd never heard that term used for them before. So, for those of you who know the language (or at least enough to understand the information contained in the terms), your point is valid. For the rest of us, they're just the names of the techniques.

I can understand that attitude... of course, the argument I would make there is... learn. An unspoken rule for Japanese arts is to endeavour to understand as many aspects, if not all, as possible... including the language used, and the insights the names and terminology used give. To a great degree, an argument can be made that, if you're not going into those details, then you're not really engaging in the study of a Japanese martial art... instead, it's just a series of actions... if that's all you want, cool. But it's quite a bit removed from the real study (in this approach).

But what if they say "Wakarimasen" ( わかりません )

But.... "I don't understand".... ha!

Sorry, could not resist...

Neither could I...

Nice to see you're still around MT Chris

Good to see you too.

In US, if your Karate school requires you to knee down in front of a Japanese flag (on the wall) and touch your head on the floor, will you do it?

What?

Again, you do what the school dictates. If you don't agree, for whatever reason.... well, you know where the door is. No one forces you to be a part of the school....[/QUOTE]

 

[jobo]

Okay, if I'm going to be back, might as well be back....



I'm not insulted by facts, I am, however, insulted by your attitude and insinuations.



You're equating "culture" with "historical events".... they are not the same thing. Unless you want to tell me that the "American culture" is one of dropping atomic weapons? Of assassinating presidents? These are events... but are not necessarily typical or even representative of the culture... in fact, they can be seen as notable as they are actually antithetic to the culture of the US.



No, we are talking about predominantly using native Japanese terminology in Japanese arts in part for assisting in spreading Japanese culture... I would not say it's the main reason, but is a large one. The ease of communication with Japanese teachers is another part of it, as well as ease of accurate communication between different practitioners of different languages and nationalities.



You do realise that practicing a Japanese martial art, and using Japanese terminology is not really the same as re-enacting WWII atrocities? Or are you seriously believing that your reducto ad absurdum argument has any kind of merit at all?



Once again, historical events are not the same as a national culture... but, if you insist, let's look at the collected works of Hokusai... perhaps Sen no Rikyu and his development of the tea ceremony? How about the innovations regarding Japanese clothing and dying... or carpentry and architecture... maybe you'd prefer we start to look at Kabuki or Noh theatre... we could look at the concepts of etiquette, often derived from Ogasawara teachings or similar... concepts of duty and propriety... honourable action in thought, word, and deed... a look to the benefit fo the collective rather than the individual... I can go on, if you'd like... of course, if you'd rather just focus on negative events at the expense of understanding that actual culture or discussion, then there's no point you even being in this discussion.



None of this is "culture"....



Really? You might want to go back are re-read, then... "The guy" said nothing about his wanting to promote Japanese culture... instead, he gave an explanation as tot he mindset of Japanese martial arts, coming from the Japanese government, and Japanese martial art instructors, which leads to an insistence on using Japanese terminology (in part). And you do get that Japanese culture is quite a patriotic one, yes? There is a real belief in the value of their culture, and a want to promote it, and it's unique aspects, both in Japan and to the world...

This is really no different than anyone being proud of their culture and wanting to promote it... which is both natural and common... it's just that the Japanese formalised that desire to a greater degree than most.



Hey Gerry, thanks.



I can understand that attitude... of course, the argument I would make there is... learn. An unspoken rule for Japanese arts is to endeavour to understand as many aspects, if not all, as possible... including the language used, and the insights the names and terminology used give. To a great degree, an argument can be made that, if you're not going into those details, then you're not really engaging in the study of a Japanese martial art... instead, it's just a series of actions... if that's all you want, cool. But it's quite a bit removed from the real study (in this approach).



But.... "I don't understand".... ha!



Neither could I...



Good to see you too.



What?

Again, you do what the school dictates. If you don't agree, for whatever reason.... well, you know where the door is. No one forces you to be a part of the school....

[/QUOTE]
no there not the same thing, but they are heavily intertwined, culture dictates historic events and events change culture.

on your other point, yes american culture and the dropping of atomic bomb on helpless civilians are indeed closely linked. there's very few nations on earth, certainly '' civilised ''ones that would have done that. therefore if we consider a culture that has genocide in its recent history and how shall we put it,, ? civil rights issues, then you can see that the culture is largely responsible for not caring anything about the fate of a 100,000 or so people. It was certainly culturally acceptable or they wouldn't have done it, cant see many people shedding tears in the victory in the pacific celebrations

 

[Chris Parker]

Actions and events can be extensions of cultural aspects, but are rarely, if ever, even close to the entirety of the culture itself. I would also suggest that the dropping of the atomic weapons on Japan was not so much symbolic or representative of the American culture... additionally, nothing exists in a vacuum... so you'd need to identify what aspect of the culture you're talking about. Which is why the events are not the same as the culture.... and the promotion of a culture is not promotion of particular events.

In other words, dude, you are seriously off base in all of this.

 

[jobo]

Actions and events can be extensions of cultural aspects, but are rarely, if ever, even close to the entirety of the culture itself. I would also suggest that the dropping of the atomic weapons on Japan was not so much symbolic or representative of the American culture... additionally, nothing exists in a vacuum... so you'd need to identify what aspect of the culture you're talking about. Which is why the events are not the same as the culture.... and the promotion of a culture is not promotion of particular events.

In other words, dude, you are seriously off base in all of this.

these are self proving statements. no other country has done that, so we honestly need to ask what's ''special'' about american culture, not only that they would do it, but celebrate doing it. .

a very quick review of culturally acceptable historic events in america comparatively recent past, from the treatment of native Americans to leaving people to starve in the dust bowl, shows it not to be at out of character with the American dream

 

[Chris Parker]

"Socially accepted" and "culturally acceptable" are not the same thing.... and I would argue that very few Americans celebrate the usage of atomic weaponry. So no, your comments fail in the face of actually understanding these terms. As far as why the Americans are the only ones who have used nuclear weapons, well.... at the time, they were the only ones who had developed them to the point that they were feasible... and a strong argument could be made that the Japanese were not going to surrender unless absolutely forced into it by an overwhelming reason, and, in that sense, the usage and deployment potentially brought the Pacific War to an end much sooner than would have happened, leading to many lives being saved at the expense of the victims of the Enola Gay and Bockscar's payloads. It's not celebrated as a positive action in many circles, though, and the decision would have been deeply agonising for Truman and all involved.

But seriously, this is all completely besides the point of this thread... you've gone off on a tangent that is ludicrous, and simply shows how little you grasp the concepts here. I recommend you stop embarrassing yourself, and leave it at this.