Patrick McCarthy and George Donahue have a dialogue on the old CD - Part 5

 

Back in 1997 I was new to the internet and the CyberDojo. Almost immediately I found a lengthy dialogue between  Patrick McCarthy and George Donahue.

Patrick was a well known competitor, practitioner and author on his arts. He knew George as his book editor at Tuttle, but not as a martial artist.

George had been raised in Japan, was on an old Samuri tv series as a youth playing the younger version of the samurai for flashbacks when he learned various lessons. He later trained in karate on Okinawa. Established a Kashiba Juku group in the states and eventually became the martial arts editor  for Tuttle Publications.

Knowing that Patrick was in a somewhat heated discussion on the CD when George weighed in. Beginning what would be a lengthy discussions of an extremely erudite level of discourse. I do not know of another discussion of similar character. A discussion that does not exist  today.

This will be challenging but well worth the effort.

Because of it's length I am breaking it into several parts.
===============================================================




From Digest 1378 Sat,  2 Aug 1997 00:13:49 CDT

Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 21:30:36 -0400
From: gdonahue.kishaba.juku.usa@juno.com
To: karate@raven.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re: Hanshi, Kyoshi, Renshi continued (another long post),
    tardy part two of two
Message-ID: <19970801.215810.3798.0.gdonahue.kishaba.juku.usa@juno.com>

Hello everyone,

Here is the continuation of my discussion regarding propriety of issued titles, which is really just the point of departure.  Sorry for the delay, but I actually had to do some work in the office and at home for a change.

Patrick McCarthy wrote:

> Mr. Donohue wrote "it never seriously represented
> Okinawan martial arts or martial artists unless the
> Okinawan arts or artists made tremendous efforts to
> "fit in" with the prevailing Yamatunchu mentality."  
>
> Well, first, if I could just play devil's advocate for a
> moment, exactly what Okinawan arts is Mr. Donohue
> referring to? The only "arts" that I am familiar with that
> fall into this jurisdiction, are the eclectic interpretations
> of those loosely practiced "Chinese-based" defensive
> methods introduced to the mainland by Motobu Choki,
> Matayoshi Shinko, Funakoshi Gichin, Gima Shinken,
> Miyagi Chojun, Mabuni Kenwa, Uechi Kanbun, Kiyoda
> Juhatsu, Toyama Kanken, and Chitose Tsuyoshi. .)
>
> On the other hand, I have heard the misinformed speak of
> the infamous Tomarite, Nahate, and Shurite, "indigenous
> arts" which allegedly date back hundreds of years into
> Uchina history. Actually, Tomarite, Nahate, and Shurite
> were names thought up by a local festival planning
> committee in Okinawa during the winter of 1926 in
> preparation to host Kano Jigoro's visit in January of 1927.
> The entire idea, in addition to a small myriad of related
> activities, was to have local experts from Tomari, Naha,
> and Shuri present the much talked about Toudijutsu
> (Chinese "Martial Arts") which was Okinawa's contribution
> to Japan's war machine; in the same way that kendo
> and judo was being used as a political vehicle to funnel
> nationalism:
> Toudijutsu helped patriots foster physical fitness and
> fighting spirits. The reason that the village names were
> used in place of the prefix of "Tou," (China) was to
> conceal its foreign origins and promote its local
> cultivation.

If I understand properly, Mr. McCarthy is saying that there is no such thing as unique Okinawan martial arts.  Just Chinese martial arts practiced by Okinawans.  This is the equivalent of saying that the United States, or Australia, or Canada have no native traditions (other than those held by the indigenous inhabitants before the arrival of the Europeans) because they (either the people or the incipient traditions) originated in European venues.  I know that it was expedient for the Okinawans to downplay the Chinese origins of much of their martial arts. This was an era when the Japanese empire was subjugating China -- an era when Chinese residents of Okinawa, or Okinawans who showed too much enthusiasm for anything Chinese, were apt to be crushed by the government or its stooges for the slightest indiscretion.  I know also that it is highly distasteful for many Okinawans to acknowledge that some of their skills may have been handed down by the conquering Japanese.  A point can be seen in Yamane Ryu bojutsu.  The Okinawans with whom I've discussed this system always insist that this system is indigenous, despite the startling similarity to the sojutsu systems found in the main islands of Japan, which were no doubt well represented in the martial arts of the conquering Soga family and the Satsuma han.  Whatever the origins of the techniques, the Okinawans have definitely put their own stamp on them and made them uniquely theirs.  That, to me, suffices to brand their martial arts as Okinawan.

The fact that many of the martial arts systems practiced in Okinawa were or are substantially Chinese has never been disputed.  Naha te has never been anything more than a euphemism for Toute.  The subdivision of other arts as Tomari te and Shuri te is arbitrary and just about as meaningless.  The contributions of the Okinawans in transforming what have often been rather florid and relatively ineffectually executed
Chinese systems, in conjunction with native fighting skills, into useful, practical fighting arts, on the other hand, are hard to deny.


> Additionally, Mr. Donohue also wrote, "Many of them were
> unwilling or had no desire to submit their traditional and
> personal arts to the whims of a quasi-governmental
> organization. That didn't in any way invalidate the quality
> of their arts or detract from the skill of the practitioner."
>
> My own Okinawan karate/kobudo teacher, Kinjo
> (Kanagusuku) Hiroshi, [a direct disciple of Hanashiro
> Chomo (Koryu Uchinadi, and Oshiro Chojo, Yamaneryu
> Kobudo] who was a former representative of the DNBK,
> and also presently regarded as one of Japan's most
> senior authorities of Uchina "martial arts" history and
> culture, sadly maintains that few "native" defensive
> methods were little more than loosely practiced
> "traditions" during the turn of this century.  

I'm not sure what exactly Kinjo-sensei meant by "loosely practiced 'traditions,'" but this sounds pretty good to me.  Certainly preferable to rigidly practiced traditions.  I think that one of the biggest contributions my own senseis have made to my training is to restore the "looseness" to the practice.  We have fun, we train in a relaxed informal manner, we don't concern ourselves with the rigid hierarchy imposed upon the Okinawan culture by the Japanese, we don't try to impose uniformity of technique among the various practitioners, and -- most important – we learn a lot of effective fighting skills within a milieu of cooperation, friendship, and good will.  Our training has all the urgency and formality of a family backyard barbeque.  We have no certificates, but we have nice handwritten scrolls of encouragement from our sensei, and, aside from those we may have earned before being accepted as students, we have no ranks, just black belt.  This is terribly disorganized, and would cause an organization minded karateka to despair, but it is traditional for many loosely practiced traditions.  (As a matter of fact, we have no organization records whatsoever -- which is sometimes a problem when professional karateka claim falsely to be students of our teachers).  It's also a very effective way to learn and transmit martial skills. When my teachers are long dead, there will be no evidence of their skill and the only evidence of the effectiveness of their martial arts teaching skills will be the skill of their students and the subsequent generations of students.  Very hard to document!

> Some of the Uchinachu (Okinawans) who did comply, and
> were active members of the DNBK, in both Okinawa, and
> on the mainland, went on to apply for and recieve titles
> from the DNBK like Renshi and Kyoshi were Mabuni
> (Shitoryu,) Miyagi (Gojuryu) and Funakoshi (Toudijutsu).

And a good part of the reason for their success and the popularity of their systems may have been their willingness to compromise with the government and the dominant socio-political currents of the times – to bend with the wind.  Whether this helped their martial arts systems is highly questionable.  In some cases, it seems clearly to have been harmful.  Popularity and prodigious spread of a system often go hand in hand with dilution of its worth as a set of fighting skills.


> Mr. Donohue wrote "For most Okinawan martial artists, and
> many in the rest of Japan, particularly "uchi no bujutsu"
> lineages (private ryuha that were never opened to the
> general public), the Dai Nippon Butokukai was almost
> totally irrelevant.  If it had any relevance at all, it was
> merely as a body that set examples or standards for
> voluntary compliance."
>
> No doubt that there were such people, and, I for one would
> support such rationale, as it seems totally plausible if, in
> fact it ever existed. However, I have gone to great lengths
> to study Okinawan history and its culture at its source, and
> cannot concur with Mr. Donohue's opinions. With the
> exception of a handful of loosely practiced defensive
> "traditions," some of which have only surfaced in the last
> generation, I can't for the life of me figure out what people
> or "traditions" he is speaking about.

The "handful of loosely practiced defensive 'traditions'" is exactly what I am speaking about.  I find that the quality of this sort of traditional martial art often far exceeds the quality of the more codified and "modernized" sort.  Mere quantity is not a factor for me in considering whether or not a martial art is worthwhile.  House karate (uchi no bujutsu or uchinadi) is almost always better than dojo (commercial, public) karate.


> Moreover, virtually every defensive tradition practiced in
> Okinawa today has, in one way or another, been
> influenced by the Japanese.

Agreed.  Sometimes for the better, too, but often not.

> I do not personally know Mr. Donohue, but am certain that
> he must have evidence of such claims. I for one, and I am
> certain that there are others too that would be equally
> eager to read his response. Therefore I respectfully ask
> him to provide it so that we all may learn from him.

Mr. McCarthy and I are comparing apples to oranges.  He is talking of quantified, codified information of the sort available in libraries and government document repositories.  This is the meat of reality for historians.  However, much of human experience is not recorded on paper, even in these times of intrusive government, insurance companies, and direct merchants.  And much of what has been recorded has been subsequently lost, particularly in Okinawa, but also in Japan and China. I'm dealing with oral tradition provided to me by my teachers, by my family, and by the evidence presented to me when I see the effectiveness of the techniques my teachers have shared with me.  It was never written in stone.  If it was, it would have lost its meaning to me and to the world.  This is the same sort of divergence of opinion that occurs between Theravada Buddhists, who study the written sutras with great energy and devotion, and Zen Buddhists, who would burn the sutras for heat in the winter so that they could continue their meditation practice.

I have to confess that I'm a lover of data and statistics too.  I studied modern Japanese history (1850 to 1950s) in graduate school.  My concentration was on the political systems and the interactions with and reactions to Western imperial aggression, as well as on religion and philosophy.  -- My lineage as a history scholar is George Sansom to George Lenson to George Donahue.  I guess that makes me George III, the crazy one.   ;-)  -- I also have to admit that in my work as an editor I've often beaten authors into submission by dumping facts and organizational strictures on them.  

I used to approach my martial arts training in the same way and I came up originally in a karate system whose founder considered himself as much a karate historian as a karate practitioner.  It was very hard for me to lighten up and really learn the good stuff: the meat of the technique, the poetry of the motion, the joy of the practice.  My teachers have been very patient.

The written history and the speculation upon it that Mr. McCarthy deals with is as fascinating to me as it seems to be to him.  I get all his books as soon as they come into print, and I read the source material listed in his bibliographies, when I have time.  However, I don't feel that this sort of information has much to do with my actual training or with anyone else's.  Nor do I feel that any organization anywhere can provide anything to match what can be provided by a single simple dedicated teacher who is willing to go to the trouble to teach you his stuff, however loosely the tradition may have been passed on to him and however loosely it may be passed on to you.  

Many martial artists aren't fortunate enough to find this sort of real teacher.  For them, organizations and books have to serve as meager substitutes.

> I agree with Mr. Donohue's conclusion threat
> "Organizations' use of titles are matters solely for the
> discretion of the  organizations themselves. Ultimately,
> the government doesn't own the language.  Many
> organizations are lax or commercial or cynical in their
> issuance of titles.  Many are not.  As long as no fraud is
> committed on the general public, it's none of the
> government's business.  Government (particularly the
> Japanese government) has generally acted to
> suppress martial arts that don't conform to the
> government's political agenda."
>
> A Japanese maxim which aptly describes how things
> or people that do not conform to the inflexible social
> guidelines so well know in Japan goes, "Deru kugi
> wah utareru" (A protruding nail ultimately gets pounded down.)

This is, unfortunately, still the prevailing attitude in Japan.  An attitude that forces the more creative and talented young Japanese to move to New York.  ;-)  Rather than propagating this attitude among Western martial artists, or attempting to fit in with Japanese organizations that have played a part in maintaining that attitude, those Western bujutsuka who are familiar with Japanese culture and polity would better employ their precious training time in adapting what is useful from the Japanese, Okinawan, and Chinese traditions to more humane standards of honor, probity, and individual freedom.  Take with gratitude and humility what is good in the Eastern tradition, mix it with what is good and true in the Western tradition, and leave the rest to wither away.

> Mr. Donohue spoke of "Martial artists, in general and
> particularly in Okinawa, have often been at the forefront
> of resistance to government repression."
>
> The only historical testimony that I am aware that might
> even fit the bill is the folklore surrounding Jana Uekata,
> whose character served as the star of the 43 part NHK
> drama entitled "Ryukyu no Kaze."

Available in Japanese video shops in NYC!  (No subtitles, though.)

> However his plight surrounded Uchina Odori (Okinawan
> dance) rather than Toudijutsu. Then there was Teijusoku
> Uekata who a statesman from Nago who also spoke of
> "te." However, he was never involved with such a
> political problem with the Japanese.
<other good citations cut>
> I wonder if this is what Mr. Donohue is referring to?

Actually, I shouldn't have made the statement.  It was bombastic and, upon reconsideration, only slightly true.  I was thinking of a few specific cases that loom large in my consciousness, but that don't necessarily loom large in the collective memory.  I apologize for letting my mouth (fingers, in this case) run ahead of my mind.  Most martial artists in the era of Japanese imperialist adventurism were just as cowardly and concerned with keeping the government from hammering them down as was the public in general.  Japan has not had many heroes in modern times.

> Mr. Donohue concluded with "The proliferation of gaudy
> titles for martial artists of little real accomplishment is
> indeed unfortunate, if those things bother you, but it's
> just a minor irritation. Far better to have a dozen hanshi
> operating dojos in your town than to have a government
> bureaucracy determining standards for what you can
> learn and teach within your art."
>
> I wonder if the same thing could be said of other
> professions? "That it's just a minor irritation." I am a
> professional master-level accredited instructor and am
> deeply concerned about those who run around making a
> mockery of karate and kobudo with the use of such titles.
> It undermines all that which reputable organizations, like
> the DNBK, have worked so hard to establish and perpetuate.

I'm an amateur martial artist, as are my teachers, as were their  teachers.  I do respect some professional martial artists, but in general I hold amateur martial artists in higher regard.  It is professionals who feel the need to organize and govern, to restrict admission to the profession to those who share similar beliefs and goals, and to keep the skills and services -- in the language of economics -- a scarce commodity.  This is fine, as long as the professionals don't attempt to interfere with or influence the amateurs.  Some professions obviously must be heavily regulated.  I wouldn't want to have my appendix removed by an amateur surgeon or a graduate of the Acme "Surgery in One Easy Lesson" correspondence course.  Martial arts, however, are just that -- arts -- and not professions.  To try to force an art into the mold of a profession can only diminish the value of the art.


> Contrary to Mr. Donohue, I strongly believe that it has been
> because of untimely historical phenomena, and a lack of
> government intervention, that common outcomes and
> standardized assessment criteria, necessary in the
> accreditation process of the tertiary titles in question,
> might have otherwise continued on
>
> Presently such universal standards do not exist in
> karate/kobudo anywhere and teaching curricula vary from
> one teacher to another based primarily upon the individual
> experience of the person(s) most responsible for
> imparting the method.

Diversity is good and exciting, uniformity is numbing.  Part of the fun in being a martial artist is in the quest for the real thing – holding out for the chili dog or cheese dog among the ordinary wiener dogs of life.  For you vegetarians, think of the difference between a garden grown tomato and a hothouse, gassed, pink rock you can get in any supermarket.  The garden variety has blemishes, is bumpy, and is inconveniently sized, but the taste is real.  Anything we can buy packaged and sanitized, standardized and smoothed to a common denominator (whether the lowest or not) is hardly worth having.

This pertains especially to martial arts.  Standardization breeds mediocrity.  Having to deal with someone who is junior to you chronologically, in training time, and in martial skill being awarded the title of hanshi, while you remain a mere generic black belt, is a trifling price to pay.

> I respect your input, thank you for your patience, and look
> forward to your (Mr. Donohue) reply.

Thank you Mr. McCarthy.  I respect your work and talents as well.  I suppose we'll never agree on many things, but agreement is not a necessary commodity for harmonious co-existence.  I'm glad that you've made your presence felt in this forum -- it's a great stimulus for me. ;-)

I'm looking forward to reading your next book.

Gambatte!

George Donahue

 

 

==========================================

 Note: These 5 posts represent 1/2 of this discussion. To save yur minds  I am going on to other posts  that I have for a while, then I will resume the rest of this discussion. IMO I have really never heard these things discussed ever since that time.