.png)
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 vartious 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 1367 – Tues July 22, 1997
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 22:47:02 +1000
From: "Patrick McCarthy" <Bujin@bigpond.com>
To: <karate@raven.cc.ukans.edu>
Subject: Re: KARATE digest 1364
Message-ID: <12583401519337@onaustralia.com.au>
Hanshi, Kyoshi, Renshi Titles continued (long post)
I must apologize if part of my response about the Dai Nippon Butokukai was somewhat ambiguous. It would not be the first time that I have inadvertently done such a thing. There is enough ambiguity surrounding the history of karate without me adding to it. I hope that the following might help settle the matter or provoke some more clarity.
Mr. Donohue wrote, "I agree with Mr. McCarthy that indiscriminate use of undeserved titles is unfortunate. However, I don't agree that the Dai Nippon Butokukai has any authority for "overseeing" martial arts.
Mr. Donohue is correct. Ever since 1945, when the DNBK was officially disbanded, and the government reshuffled, it lost its autonomy. In fact, no one oversaw any form of "martial arts" because of restrictions the occupational forces placed upon such practices throughout the entire country at that time.
However, from 1895 until the end of the war, the DNBK was THE organization selected and administered by, the government. It was responsible for overseeing ALL of the Japanese "martial arts." That also included the many interpretations of Uchinadi that vied for recognition on the mainland, and at home too. Of course, they're always exceptions to the rule. Those individuals (Naichi & Uchinanchu alike) who did not care to partake in such bureaucratical jurisdiction refrained from doing so. However, that is not the question of this issue. Only that the DNBK was the organization which established the title system. They did so and exercised exclusivity in issuing them until they were prevented from doing so.
In 1953 the DNBK re-surfaced, as did the practice of many "martail arts." Unlike before the war, the DNBK became a privately funded organization which maintained much of its original membership and its exclusivity. Having been a member of the DNBK (Kyoto honbu) during my many years in Japan, and having conducted much research into its historical role during the Meiji, Taisho and Showa eras, my familiarity with it is more than a passing one. I can assure anyone reading this post that the DNBK continues
on preserving the same virtues, values and principles that it has always perpetuated.
Mr. Donohue also wrote that "this organization, as most, was political from the start."
I concur. Isn't that the nature of government organizations? Being political. Is there some other kind of organization?
Mr. Donohue also mentioned that "it governed only its members, and it had no enforcement authority."
I am not sure what point Mr. Donohue was actually trying to make here that concerns the issue about titles that I brought into question, but, I assume that it is in some way connected to karate. Of course the DNBK governed its membership. There was never a question as to enforcing its authority, as there is no historical testimony to the contrary. The pre-war DNBK fell directly under the auspices of 5 ministries [Welfare, Education, War, Navy, and National Affairs.] It was THE licensing AUTHORITY for the teacher's
titles in question in Japan. Moreover, it was also the same organization responsible for setting forth the criteria necessary for what is now known as modern karatedo.
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.
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.
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).
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. Moreover, virtually every defensive tradition practiced in Okinawa today has, in one way or another, been influenced by the Japanese.
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.
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.)
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." 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.
There is the history of the "Ishimakuratou" or "Stone Pillow Party in Okinawa." Headed by former Sanshikan statesman Kamekawa Uekata Moritake. The policy of the "Kuruha" or "Black Sect," as it was sometimes called, was to gain independence and share friendly relations with China rather than being consumed by the Naichi (Yamato.)
Other historical testimony I studied included Matsumora Kosaku (Chikudon Pechin,) the prominent expert of Toudijutsu from Tomari, who was politically active during the late part of the 19th century. I know that he believed in using his Toudijutsu to further their political campaign.
In opposition to the Kuruha was Giwan Choho, an Uchinanchu (Okinawan) who represented active participation with the Japanese. His political faction was called the "Kaikatou" or "Open Country Party," and often referred to as the "Shiruha" or "White Sect." However, he had no connection with Toudijutsu. Nonetheless, such opposition between the two sects provided for some hostility during pre-turn-of-the century Okinawa.
I wonder if this is what Mr. Donohue is referring to?
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.
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.
I respect your input, thank you for your patience, and look forward to your (Mr. Donohue) reply.
Patrick McCarthy
Dai Nippon Butokukai Australia Shibucho: Kyoshi Karatedo 7th Dan; Yamaneryu
Kobudo Shihan: International Ryukyu Karate Research Society Director.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Digest 1368 Wed, 23 Jul 1997 00:06:19 CDT
Date: 22 Jul 97 13:28:32
From: gdonahue@randomhouse.com
To: karate@raven.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re: Hanshi, Kyoshi, Renshi Titles continued (another long post),
part one of two
Message-ID: <199707221728.AA11020@interlock.randomhouse.com>
I've split my response to this thread in two, because it's very long. Part two will come this evening or tomorrow.
In response to my quibbles with his earlier post, Patrick McCarthy graciously wrote:
> I must apologize if part of my response about the Dai
> Nippon Butokukai was somewhat ambiguous. It would
> not be the first time that I have inadvertently done such a
> thing. There is enough ambiguity surrounding the history
> of karate without me adding to it. I hope that the following
> might help settle the matter or provoke some more clarity.
I, too, have to apologize. In re-reading my post, I see that I've come across as being too unreasonably disputatious (why does this always happen to me?). It wasn't my intention to carp. In addition, as I fired off my reply to the original post from Mr. McCarthy, I unconsciously allowed my knee-jerk libertarianism to dominate my tone (I'll try to rein it in this time). I admire Mr. McCarthy's scholarship and over the years I've read everything he's written that I could get my hands on. He's always done a fine job, and I've particularly enjoyed his translation of the Bubishi, in both the Tuttle edition
and the earlier self-published one.
That said, we seem to have a fundamental disagreement regarding the value of government authority and regulation in the martial arts.
<cut>
> However, from 1895 until the end of the war, the DNBK was
> THE organization selected and administered by, the
> government. It was responsible for overseeing ALL of the
> Japanese "martial arts." That also included the many
> interpretations of Uchinadi that vied for recognition on the
> mainland, and at home too. Of course, they're always
> exceptions to the rule. Those individuals (Naichi &
> Uchinanchu alike) who did not care to partake in such
> bureaucratical jurisdiction refrained from doing so.
Saying that there were exceptions to the rule, pretty fairly describes the situation in Japan outside of Okinawa. In Okinawa, I think the exceptions WERE the rule. Of course, I can't document this, because by their very nature as outsiders, the exceptions wouldn't be down "on record." I can only rely on the colloquial accounts of the few Okinawan martial instructors with whom I've talked at length. The Okinawan tradition I study has been handed down substantially outside the mainstream of government-recorded and supervised martial arts in Japan, yet it is vibrant and among the best traditions I've
ever witnessed. This is what attracted me to the system in the first place and led me to give up my training in other systems, except as adjuncts to the core training.
> However, that is not the question of this issue. Only that
> the DNBK was the organization which established the
> title system. They did so and exercised exclusivity in
> issuing them until they were prevented from doing so.
There's no disputing this, nor is there any reason to do so. The DNBK established a system which has been widely emulated and adopted by ryuha that didn't exist in the time of the DNBK's authority or that existed then but didn't submit to the DNBK's authority. The mere fact of the DNBK's having established the terminology didn't preclude others from later using a convenient nomenclature and grading system, which was not, after all,
copyrighted or trademarked and no longer had the force of law. These words are in the public domain, and they're useful, so they get used -- and, human nature being what it is, often they get misused. Organizations and ryuha that have adopted the nomenclature are not in the wrong by the mere adoption.
> In 1953 the DNBK re-surfaced, as did the practice of
> many "martail arts." Unlike before the war, the DNBK
> became a privately funded organization which
> maintained much of its original membership and its
> exclusivity. Having been a member of the DNBK (Kyoto
> honbu) during my many years in Japan, and having
> conducted much research into its historical role during
> the Meiji, Taisho and Showa eras, my familiarity with it
> is more than a passing one. I can assure anyone
> reading this post that the DNBK continues on
> preserving the same virtues, values and principles that it
> has always perpetuated.
I agree with Mr. McCarthy that the DNBK did much to preserve the values of budo and that much of what we know today as budo bears the stamp of its efforts. I can't argue with Mr. McCarthy's knowledge of the details of the DNBK's role, either, as my knowledge of the individual activities of that specific organization is superficial. However, I think that the DNBK, and all organizations with regulatory authority of any degree, serve in the main to stifle innovation, enforce uniformity, and elevate socio-political goals having little to do with the actual techniques and knowledge of the regulated area,
In the late Tokugawa era and post-bakufu transition of bujutsu to budo, too much of the meat of most of the regulated fighting systems was lost, in large part because of the goals of the Japanese government, which in no way included having a populace with the means or mentality to resist orders of the increasingly fascist military rulers. The goals were more along the lines of developing a compliant, strong, resilient, competitive, unquestioning stock of potential soldiers, bureaucrats, and laborers for service to the newly assertive, soon-to-be-conquering empire.
Mr. McCarthy's own tireless and admirable work in resurrecting the "lost"
techniques over the years might have been unneeded if the Japanese government
had kept its heavy hands off in the first place.
The very name Dai Nippon Butokukai screams out me -- and others of my background -- cultural aggression and repression. "Dai Nippon" was the name used to denote the greater Japanese empire, including possessions in Korea and Manchuria and, a bit later, the East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (that is, subjugated Asian neighbors). This term was used by many patriotic organizations, all up to little good for the world in general. To romanticize an era and to aggrandize an organization that played a part, however small, in a sordid historical undertaking, is not productive for the further development of martial arts or world peace. Many Western and even many Japanese martial artists have no idea of the degree to which Japanese martial artists of the early part of this century were involved in helping to suppress sentiment against the military dictatorship that had usurped power in Japan. It was the Japanese university karate, kendo, and judo clubs, for example, that served as enforcers against pacifist and anti-imperialist sentiment among the Japanese civilian populace. They routinely beat opponents, burned down their houses and businesses, and in general served in a capacity similar to that of the Red Guard in Mao's Cultural Revolution (when, by the way, most of the remaining real martial arts and Buddhist traditions of China were irrevocably destroyed).
Best to recognize the many contributions of the sleeping dog, take note of the harm the sleeping dog has done and might do again, and let it lie. A hundred hanshi in Manhattan (where I work, teach, and study) is a very small price to pay.
> Mr. Donohue also wrote that "this organization, as most
> was political from the start."
>
> I concur. Isn't that the nature of government organizations?
> Being political. Is there some other kind of organization?
There are non-governmental organizations, too, and they're often more political than governmental organizations. The point is not whether organizations are political, but why anyone in his right mind would wish to submit to the caprices of any organization unless submission brings with it more advantage than not submitting. (Unless, of course, the government requires submission. Then, the advantage is in not being the nail that gets hammered down.) I don't see any such advantage in the martial arts, particularly when the organization has government-granted enforcement power.
> Mr. Donohue also mentioned that "it governed only its members,
> and it had no enforcement authority."
>
> I am not sure what point Mr. Donohue was actually trying to make
> here that concerns the issue about titles that I brought into question,
> but, I assume that it is in some way connected to karate. Of course
> the DNBK governed its membership. There was never a question
> as to enforcing its authority, as there is no historical testimony to
> the contrary. The pre-war DNBK fell directly under the auspices of
> 5 ministries [Welfare, Education, War, Navy, and National Affairs.]
> It was THE licensing AUTHORITY for the teacher's titles in
> question in Japan. Moreover, it was also the same organization
> responsible for setting forth the criteria necessary for what is now
> known as modern karatedo.
I was wrong in making this statement. It seems that the organization did have the legal authority to stifle nonconforming martial artists who didn't remain quietly anonymous. (In fact, the government and its quasi-judicial arms relentlessly stifled all on conformity in the era in question.) It doesn't have the authority now, and, if it did, that authority wouldn't extend beyond the boundaries of Japan.
As "the organization responsible for ... modern karatedo," I'd say that the DNBK has a lot to answer for. The DNBK presided over and instigated a relentless and tragic loss of technique, from which we are only now beginning to recover, more than fifty years later. It's ironic that much of this process of recovery of the heart of karatedo is taking place outside of Japan -- in Mr. McCarthy's efforts in Australia, for example.
George Donahue
----------
gdonahue@randomhouse.com / gdonahue.kishaba.juku.usa@juno.com
Kishaba Juku of New York City at the Ken Zen Institute of Japanese Martial Arts
and Culture
Okinawa Karate-Do Shorin Ryu Kishaba Juku / Matsubayashi Ryu / Ryukyu Kobujutsu
Nana korobi, ya oki.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)