Martialart

Nobility has lots of definitions. At least one aspect of it is to be of a superior class to others. If I meet someone and learn that they have a third degree black belt in something, I'm impressed. I mean, unless I think they're lying. Wouldn't the black belt "club" be the modern-day Samuri? They were a noble class. And I realize some black belts don't shine with a lot of nobility, but look at some of the older martial artists, the ones who have given their life to it. Don't you think they have a noble quality? I don't know, perhaps one has to first believe in the idea of nobility before they will see nobility. Or maybe we have to define it, but I always thought it meant "a superior class" of person, for whatever reason.

But that's just it: if someone else brings it up, you can lie, but if you're a black belt you're probably going to tell them you're a black belt in Taekwondo, or whatever, and that's when it happens; that's when they say, "Wow. Really?" Then no matter how humble you try to act about it, it only adds to the mystique. Because everyone knows that being humble is something only the powerful can do. The weak can't be humble, just humiliated. When they say "Wow. Really?" They just made you noble. I'm just wondering if it's real?

I think martial arts is a bit like religion. So, for instance, if you're not a Latter Day Saint, it really doesn't matter if you're the Pope.

Don't you think that there's a difference between martial artists and non-martial artists? It seems that martial artists have a nobility, that is a superior quality and sanctification, a greater moral stature. Now that may not be true, but tell someone you have a black belt and they tend to think you're a cut above the rest, a powerful person. Is that not nobility?

When we call martial arts an art, I was always under the impression that it meant a skill that is highly developed, as in "arts and crafts." I never thought it meant art in the same way that an abstract painting is art, which would mean something created that is highly original and emotionally evocative. I do not create new things within Taekwondo; I perfect my ability to do those things that are already there.

If martial arts are going to be relevant across a lifespan, then there has to be room for competitions. Young people want to use their skills to compete--and they might as well. I mean, really, who wants a 19-year-old sitting in meditation all day? Who wants a 25-year-old so fixated on traditional rituals that the martial arts becomes a tomb for them? By the same token, it must be understood that there are deeper reasons for practicing martial arts that are revealed across the lifespan. When I'm sixty-five, I may be more concerned with teaching and with the survival of the Taekwondo association I belong to, so I may pursue that. When I'm seventy, I may be very concerned with tradition and prayer as I prepare for my departure from this world. If I am in poor health, I may find that I am happy the spiritual aspects of Taekwondo are there for me to participate in. So, we should keep in mind the developmental stages of life, and ask whether our martial art fits that procession.

Some people are great martial artists. They are great technicians, and they might even have a deep level of understanding into the human psyche and spiritual aspects of their style. That doesn't mean they are necessarily great communicators or teachers. If a teacher can't answer the simple stupid questions that come from beginners such as myself, then they have no business being in the role of an instructor. Q: We would never do a downward block in a front stance in a fight, so why are we doing it here? A: It's the way this style uses to train your legs and arms to work together in synchronization, which is necessary in free-form fighting. And to build the muscles in your arms and legs in such a way that blocks and stances become easy and quick for you to do. It also builds a disciplined mind which will allow you to endure in hardship and increase your sense of indominability. And it looks good and looks powerful and if you do it right, over and over, you will feel good about yourself and feel more powerful, and you will fight better as a result. That's it. A student is entitled to that explanation. After all, they have to work to earn the money to pay the tuition that pays the instructor. They deserve to be instructed for their hard-earned money, right? This antiquated notion of blind obedience, servility to the sensei over self, discipline to the point of dronish mindlessness doesn't work in the Western World. And make no mistake; the martial arts now belong to the Western World. They have ever since the Japanese started training U.S. Servicemen for money after WWII. Just my humble opinion.

As one who attends a bona fide McDojo (an ITA Taekwondo Plus school), I would like to set the record straight: for every minus there is to a McDojo, there is a plus over a club-dojo. 1. It costs us a lot of money. Everything is bought through the school: sparring gear, patches, doboks (uniforms), belts, monthly contracted tuition, start up fees, books, videos, etc. But everyone looks the same, the uniforms are high quality, and the dojang is very modern, clean, well lit, lots of AC and has all kinds of training aids and padded floors. 2. Yesterday, I saw an eight-year old whining to her mother and starting to cry about some childish thing--she was a second-degree black belt (the kid, not the mom). At least I know I don't have to kiss some immigrant sensei’s butt in order to get my belt that I will work for and I will earn. Besides, if they didn’t cater to kids and moms with video cameras, who’d pay for the school? The six or seven of us who really want to do our techniques right? I don’t think so. And one only has only to keep their eyes open for about ten minutes to get what’s real: Every senior instructor is an older adult, performs their hyung with precision and power, and really seems to care about teaching traditional Taekwondo. There are the many black belts, but there are not very many instructors (the ones with black lapels on their doboks). The black that matters is on the dobok, not on the belt. The little hidden caveat is knowing what to aspire to. 3. Everyone who grades passes, apparently. Because most of the students with colored belts, and many with black belts can’t seem to do proper stances, punch or kick with power or block with snap. They gave my wife and I green belts based on the training we did to the red belt level ten years ago. We still knew the basics, and as the head instructor said, if you spent a year and a half in Taekwondo, you deserve something for that. No one has ever shown us that respect in any other club we’ve been to. All our belts are and will be registered by a national organization (the ITA). Everything’s on a computer database. The club-school we went to for a year and a half before doesn’t even have a record of our attendance, and they now use a completely different belt system. 4. Ho-Am Taekwondo is a complete rip off of every Taekwondo system and karate style since 1920. The upside: we train in a traditional Taekwondo style (not just sport WTF), and every week I learn a new takedown, flip or self-defense move—just like in traditional karate. Every class is very aerobic and sweat- wrenching. The sparring is full-padded, controlled contact, we break boards (the re-usable plastic kind), we kick high, we practice our forms, and learn all the spin kicks; so it’s like the best of all the right stuff. Ho-Am Taekwondo may be a rip off, but they ripped off the right stuff. My biggest complaint is the expense of it all. But I make good money right now, and there’s no riff-raff in the class. I realize some people believe martial arts training should be for everyone. I disagree. It should be for the right kind of people. The kids are highly respectful, and everyone calls everyone ma’am or sir. I call a fifteen-year-old third-degree sir, and he calls me sir. I actually like the kid—and I don’t typically like kids! You want to join a crap club-dojo because the guy running it says he studied under a guy who once lived in Japan and claims to be the son of one who studied under Funakoshi, go for it. And when you have to keep changing from one free location to another, no one recognizes your black belt, no one knows what the heck you mean when you say, Whispering Cat Form Karate, or whatever it’s called, and you spend an hour of each class listening to the instructor talk about what you need to know while your stretch goes cold, go for it. Especially, if the only way you can get a belt is to make the sensei feel important, or let him flirt with you or whatever. I see the deficiencies of a McDojo, but there is no deficiency that affects me if I don’t want it to. They want me to have snap and pop in my forms. I don’t have to be sloppy just because the black belt in front of me is. They want me to be committed and care about my training. They (the senior instructors) care about Taekwondo. But if all you want to do is buy your belt with money and time, you’re probably going to be able to do that, too.

I got to ask, what's Car-Park Jutsu?

Fair enough. I think people choose the things they do based on deep psychological issues. The profession they ultimately choose, the type of exercise they do, etc. Might there be other reasons? Sure, of course, but when there are also other choices they could make that would have the same result, then there must be a reason for the choice the did make. You apparently don't believe that's true. Fair enough. True, and I cannot give a research paper on my opinion at this time. I'm appealing to what I believe is prima face or obvious just by looking at it. A bodybuilder, for instance who develops his or her physique beyond anything remotely natural may be doing it, as Sensei8 says, just because. All I'm saying is I don't buy that. It's too simple for something so obviously extreme. So, I suspect a deeper psychological motivation. Don't you? First, I don't have mathmatical or statistical proof. It is my opinion, and this is an informal forum, not a peer reviewed magazine. Right? Second, I think you may need greater insight when you say you haven't interjected opinions into this discussion in the same paragraph where you have just stated an opinion. It's your opinion that I need to justify my declarations. It's your opinion that you have not interjected opinions in this discussion, etc. But all that aside, I agree. I have merely stated my opinion on the matter. The term "martial" means war. I'm not sure how they are totally different things. But if you are not at war, fine. Then my opinion doesn't apply to you, and I wouldn't expect you to answer the question in the OP.

Like I said above, if you have nothing noteworthy in your opinion or special to contribute, then I take back what I said. I don't know how old you are, I don't know your general level of health or capabilities, but if you feel you should retire, then I trust your judgment. I don't consider it quitting or in any way dishonorable. A life is not just the last thing we do, it's all the years rolled up into a single person. From what you say about yourself, you have lead a distinguished life as martial art instructor. No one can take that away. Heck, you can't even take that away--not by retiring anyway. So, would you sell your dojo, or just flip over the closed sign or what? What will you do afterward?

LOL! That's funny...and no, it's not time for a memoir because I'm nobody special! Sorry, I thought it was you who said you had 45 years in martial arts. Wait, I just looked back, it was you. And you said that you had managed to run a high standard dojo and make a living at it doing so. I'm not sure what part of my post above you find so funny. But if you have nothing to contribute to the body of knowledge after all those decades, then by all means retire--whatever that entails for you.

Well then, apparently it doesn't apply to you. But sure, I have a point of view that seems to make sense to me, and I'm bouncing it around in this forum. I don't know why you seem offended by this. I don't know why you call yourself the "top tomcat," and I certainly don't know the reasons why you are in martial arts. So, if my theory doesn't apply to you, it really is enough to say so. You don't have to defeat it, do you? It simply doesn't apply to you.

No, I hear you. And sure I'm projecting. I'm projecting and seeing if anything sticks. You say I'm not describing your motives or needs, fine. But on the other hand, maybe if you had a war to fight, you'd become much better at self-defense. Nevertheless, those who come to class for fun, socialization, exercise and competition will I'm sure always outnumber those who have come to fight personal demons. Some people will pick up a pair of nunchakus or sais or a sword and it will be a pretty dance. Others will do so because it's a more intensive therapy for them to use against the demons they have to face in their mind.

I think one should retire from teaching and administrative positions whenver the heck they want to. But one should never stop doing martial arts (katas they know, stretching, warm ups, weapons exercises). Of course, as one gets older they may want to focus on softer kata, or even Tai Chi. But wasn't it you who said you had 45 years in martial arts? Correct me if I'm wrong. If that's the case, might it be time for a memoir?

When I am doing a palm-heel strike against a target. I'm very good. I'm very powerful, and I love it. I have really good hip twist, dead on precision and power that at times shocks me. I don't kyup because I'm affraid of how it will sound. When I finish, I'm in a perfect front stance. I actually impress myself. But when I'm doing it I see a bully from when I was 9 years old and powerless to stop him. He bust into our apartment where I was alone with my sister. We were always left alone to fend for ourselves--who knows where good ol' mom was. He beat me up and knocked the wind out of me. He was always beating me up. The incident was 38 years ago. The fear, anger, humiliation, and powerlessness remains. If anyone ever challenged me in that way again, I honestly think I could push their nose into their brain before they knew what hit them. I think I could do that, because I fight a demon every time in class when we practice that white-belt contact skill. I love it when we do that drill. My goal is to perfect one of the black belt hyungs by envisioning a demon in every move of it--just like I do with the palm heal strike. I have no shortage of demons. And what are the demons: guilt, regret, humiliations, bad choices, traumas, missed opportunities, and enough fear from my childhood to last several lifetimes. I have many demons. Apparently no one else in here does, except I'm intrigued by what you said. Apparently for the others up above it's all about fun, sport, exercise, love, good times and Karate picnics. But I have a psychiatric background, and I'm always a bit leery at those who smile and say "Everythings great!" while I'm applying antibiotic ointment to the stiches on their arm.

I don't want to get too concrete in my answers of your questions. Concrete thinking is a psychological defense mechanism, and it's not needed here. It's not my purpose to win an argument or change you're way of thinking. I just want to explore an issue. I believe behind every human action there is a reason. One puts food in their mouth because they are hungry. One chooses running over aerobics classes for a reason, and martial arts over gymnastics or mountain climbing for a reason. I am indeed trying to define the martial artist. And I realize not everyone has the same reasons for doing it. But when someone says they just want the challenge or the competition, it begs the question why they didn't take up soccer or rugby or little league football. If you say you only like the "fun" of it, or the challenge or competition, and if upon examination, you see no other reason why you are attracted to it, then you are probably not the person I should be talking to. There's nothing wrong with that--except one thing: you seem very opinionated that what I'm saying is wrong about you, and that only makes me more intrigued.

See, this is what I don't buy (no offense, especially when you realize I'm only writing this to help myself understand--I'm not presuming to teach anyone anything. I am being taught by your opinions). I don't buy that the study of martial arts is for self-defense. I think that is a facade, albeit an unconscious one. I've taken self-defense: it's called non-violent crisis intervention training, and reserve police officer training. In the first, I learned how to take down an aggressive patient, and or escape from that patient. In the second, I learned how to fire a weapon at a target and quickly reload, how to use a side-handle batton, and how to use pepper spray. That's self defense. I keep a Barretta 9mm 92FS on my bedside table at all times. At work, when I talk with a patient, I covertly keep a side stance, my hands out of my pockets, and a mindful presence about what they are doing with their hands--even with the cool patients. That's self-defense. None of that stuff took very long to learn. (By the way, I am not a reserve police officer at this time.). But in martial arts, self-defense is a side-effect of the training. Because it is martial training perfected to the level of an art, it naturally gives one the ability to fight an opponent, but by green belt, we are doing kata that has nothing to do with self-defense. By green belt, we are moving into an entirely different sphere of combat, and I believe that is a psychological sphere of combat. If you're into weapons, especially the Japanese katana, like in Iaido, you have completely left the realm of realistic self-defense. A gun is for self-defense. A sharp katana in trained hands is so mercilessly effective, it's not about self-defense. Think about it: modern martial arts, from Funakoshi's Shotokan Karate on, has come about in a world that has had superior battlefield weapons. It enjoyed it's greatest spread throughout the world after we dropped two nuclear weapons on Japan. Everyone just about in the US has a gun, and yet, martial arts is more popular here than it is in most Asian countries. All I'm asking is that when you are doing kata, when you are training in sparring, when you are training with your chosen weapon, what are you fighting? After all, you could have taken up golf or gymnastics--if all you wanted to do was challenge yourself. What do you think?

Ok, in other words, no one really wants to answer the question. And I can understand that, it's a deep psychological question. The six replies above have taken an abstract question and provided very concrete answers. I'm not trying to be argumentative; I'm just trying to go a little deeper. The cop says he trains for his job--but that doesn't explain training in techniques that are designed to kill and maim, especially at the black belt level. It explains perfecting white belt techniques, but nothing else. A couple say they just want to train for the challenge it presents--but that doesn't explain anything. It certainly doesn't explain why the martial arts. Or if that really is it, then to them the martial arts are abitrary, and so they are not really the people I am talking to. Another says martial arts is his life--the air he breaths--but he doesn't give any reason why that is the case. Why is it your breath of life when it is a lifelong training for extreme hand-to-hand combat situations that probably wouldn't even occur in the most outlandish war scenario, much less on the street. I think the general avoidance in answering the question points to the fact that the motivations are very deep within us. And, yes, to the one who asks is a long distance runner running away from something. I believe so. And I believe a martial artists is a person at war. And all I asked is what is your war?

What do you really train for? I mean, sure, there's the possibility that one day you may have to physically defend yourself, but for a balanced individual who has a healthy sense of paranoia and an awareness of their surroundings and who isn't looking for a fight, that's going to be a very unlikely occurrence. I work in a psychiatric hospital and it's still a very unlikely occurrence. Even so, even in my job, I would only use the techniques I've already learned in my school as a white belt--and then I'd stop short of actually striking or injuring a patient if at all possible. A cop would always rely on a batton, pepper spray, taser, gun, etc. Any martial arts they would use would be very rare, and then only be the basics of a martial art (takedowns, control holds, etc.). There's no need for black belt level training. There's definitely no need for weapons training (especially something like Iaido). In fact, for a skilled black belt to get in a fight in the French Quarter during Mardi Gras and kill someone, would almost certainly mean prison. Think about it, what self-defense includes killing someone? Or maiming them? Of course there is sparring, but in sparring only the most basic techniques are ever effective, and then that is a sport governed by rules. That's more for fun and to build up confidence and toughness. So, when you are doing complicated kata or hyung, and when you are doing it to the best of your ability, where is the war? We train for combat that never really comes. In some of the katas the situations played out wouldn't even be possible outside of a dream. So, what is the "martial" in your martial arts? What is the war you fight?

Well, you must be doing something right.

Four year old 6th dan, ha ha ha. Maybe they should just give them 10th dan at birth and save everybody a lot of trouble. (I know you were slightly exaggerating, right?) Exaggerating yes, but only a little. In the children's class I've seen black belts that look to be under 8 years old, and this one girl had a brown belt and was on her mom's lap in the waiting area asleep and sucking her thumb. I estimate she was around four. At first I was appalled, until I realized I was wasting far too much energy. Once the children's class started playing some game with a ball that had nothing to do with martial arts, I realized I might as well save my disgust for things that matter.

That's exactly what I'm talking about (that guy in the video). There's no effort in his punches or kicks or snap in his blocks. He just looks like he's reciting a hyung from memory. In fact, he looks the way I do when I'm first trying to memorize a hyung. It's a farce. It's a farce because he looks physically capable of doing better. I don't care how high his kicks are, but if they're low, then they should be with good form and power. When he blocks, he should look like he's actually trying to block something, and when he punches, he should look like he's trying to hit something. It seems in the ITA, that the real black belts have the senior instructor black stripe around the lapel of their dobok top (not the black strip around the hem of it--that signifies a black belt who doesn't want to teach). Most of the senior instructors seem to do their techniques quite well, or at least the one's I have wittnessed so far. So, I would say that in ITA, the way to tell the real black belts from the ones who just pay the dues to keep the dojang open are the ones who become senior instructors. No one says this, but I think it's something that's understood. I have a feeling becoming an instructor is not something anyone is guaranteed or can pay for. So, it seems that that's where they crack the whip on standards. In fact, the instructors don't pay for their membership, they just teach, so there's no incentive to "attract" them to the dojang. They don't help pay the rent. Perhaps that's something I should aim for. Who knows? It's a long way off. I must admit though, it is kind of sly on their part. It's like, "Oh sure, your four year old can get his 6th dan, but he'll never be an instructor."

"I wonder if in the long run it will bother you to be associated with this organization. It's a tough position to be in." I have wondered this myself. But the ITA (International Taekwondo Alliance) is growing. And the ITA can't be faulted. We have their DVD for White-Red belt forms and techniques. And the person demonstrating them is very good in his technique. The style itself, as I've said, is very traditional. At the school we go to, the instructors are really good in their technique. But they are a business, and you don't make dollars by failing your students. I guess what I'm trying to say is that in some way there has to be another way of judging the "quality" of a black belt. I mean, let's say some guy from some obscure Karate club has a black belt. Who says it's worth anything? At least in the ITA belt-mill, they have a national database of every belt everyone ever earns. Technically, it takes 22 months to get a black belt if you pass every grading. Which one is more legit? And what if a person earns a black belt, but then stops training? Do they eventually stop being a black belt?

Well, that all sounds very good. My guess is you don't run a dojo for profit. If you aren't trying to make a living at running a dojo, then you can call the shots. If you are, the customers call the shots--or at least they do to a very large degree.