G
GouRonin
Guest
I have to say that I enjoyed that last post so much that I didn't even have the urge to punch you in the mouth. On top of that I totally agreed with you.
addressing your teacher
- Thread starter rachel
- Start date
I have to say that I enjoyed that last post so much that I didn't even have the urge to punch you in the mouth. On top of that I totally agreed with you.
kenpo_cory
Purple Belt
What's LOTR got to do with anything other than fantasy entertainment? Do we have philosophy majors on here?
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Read the posts, dude.
R
RCastillo
Guest
Ouch! you missed him, and hit me ! Canadians are our allies!
I need a cold one for my face!
Sigung86
2nd Black Belt
The Good Doctor fancies himself a Literature Professor with delusions of teaching in California. Gou (pronounced Gao like Ow in owl (the bird, not part of a b-owl, nor confused with bowel), fancies himself to be a barb-witted, quasi-ill-mannered, Clyde-like, Russian Marital, or perhaps, martial, artist.
And me I like them both and watch their shennanigans... I am ...
BORED OF THE RINGS!!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
aka "The Right Reverend Bob"
And me I like them both and watch their shennanigans... I am ...
BORED OF THE RINGS!!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
aka "The Right Reverend Bob"
E
Elfan
Guest
The Lord of the Rings has sold 60 million mass market paper back copies and probaby millions more of all the other editios. In addition a movie based on it has, as you pointed out, maid a good bit of money. When something has been read by so many differnt people it tends to start meaning whatever people want it to mean (like the Christian Bible).
I could take the support for Aragorn and right of kings to lead me to belive that politicaly we should suport our leader, George W. Bush, in whatever he does. Or I might look at the theme of power curupting, decide that the US trying to have military power with no possible competetor and decide we should opose George W. Bush's policies. Which one I choose will likely hinge on what I thought of Bush to begin with.
On the racism thing, the german publishing company wanted proof that Tolkien was not Jewish before it would publish The Hobbit. He refused and wrote this to a friend in a letter:
I could take the support for Aragorn and right of kings to lead me to belive that politicaly we should suport our leader, George W. Bush, in whatever he does. Or I might look at the theme of power curupting, decide that the US trying to have military power with no possible competetor and decide we should opose George W. Bush's policies. Which one I choose will likely hinge on what I thought of Bush to begin with.
On the racism thing, the german publishing company wanted proof that Tolkien was not Jewish before it would publish The Hobbit. He refused and wrote this to a friend in a letter:
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Um...did we all read the same book? watch the same movie? the ones in which characters are constantly talking about, "the race of Numenor," and, "the blood that flows in my veins?" to mention only the two most prominent examples?
To go back to the original question--or at least in its direction--what do your claims about Tolkein have to do with terms of respect?
To go back to the original question--or at least in its direction--what do your claims about Tolkein have to do with terms of respect?
which is why i thought Starship Troopers was one of the most radical hollywood sci-fi movies made
as to titles -- cool is what it is at the moment it is- come tomorrow may be a soldier etc...
i think gou might be right about you- you're probably the only guy on this forum that's read Robert Musil- good thing you do kenpo .
peace.
K
Kenpomachine
Guest
How's that a character in a book shoulod reflect what the writer think about a certain subject? There's enough number of races in Tolkien's books to support almost any position you want to make it support.
Plus, he defended the humans right to rule their lifes, at least imho. And that sure isn't feudalism.
G
GouRonin
Guest
Yes. I have a university degree in it.
I resemble that remark!
I have a minor in Philosophy.
As for the Title(s), I prefer on the mats to be referred to as Mr. Parsons, or simply sir. If a mistake is made no issue is made of it either. Now, I also call students by there last name, as in Mr. Smith please execute technique XYZ.
As for Racism, you can find it anywhere you look. The use of Black Belt could be a negative comment to our friends of African heritage. The term of Yellow Belt and White belt and Red Belt could also be negative. Then again it could be used to say that since Black and degrees of Black is/are the highest ranks then does not that then support the superiority of the color Black.
I could also go on and find an argument with anything anyone said, and find issue with any book written. How about a certain race or tribe being the chosen ones? How about, only those of a certain faith have it correct? How about people who only have the latest trend in clothes are IN the know?
As for an author being a direct representative of his writings, is this also true of actors and the roles they play? If you study a Japanese Martial Art then are you Japanese? The argument falls apart real quick when it is tried to be proven. Now, this does not mean that the author did not have some of these thoughts or beliefs, it just cannot be proven unless there are some writings that address this issue. If the author wrote notes about his beliefs or intentions.
In the comedy "Back To School" Rodney Dangerfield hired the author to write is interpretation for his assignment in college. And the instructor told him his paper was so far from the truth, yet who else but the author would know his work the best. Now this is an example of someone in the movie business picking on academia, yet it holds true on how anyone can read anything into anything.
My Apologies for the non-coherent rambling
Rich
:asian:
As for the Title(s), I prefer on the mats to be referred to as Mr. Parsons, or simply sir. If a mistake is made no issue is made of it either. Now, I also call students by there last name, as in Mr. Smith please execute technique XYZ.
As for Racism, you can find it anywhere you look. The use of Black Belt could be a negative comment to our friends of African heritage. The term of Yellow Belt and White belt and Red Belt could also be negative. Then again it could be used to say that since Black and degrees of Black is/are the highest ranks then does not that then support the superiority of the color Black.
I could also go on and find an argument with anything anyone said, and find issue with any book written. How about a certain race or tribe being the chosen ones? How about, only those of a certain faith have it correct? How about people who only have the latest trend in clothes are IN the know?
As for an author being a direct representative of his writings, is this also true of actors and the roles they play? If you study a Japanese Martial Art then are you Japanese? The argument falls apart real quick when it is tried to be proven. Now, this does not mean that the author did not have some of these thoughts or beliefs, it just cannot be proven unless there are some writings that address this issue. If the author wrote notes about his beliefs or intentions.
In the comedy "Back To School" Rodney Dangerfield hired the author to write is interpretation for his assignment in college. And the instructor told him his paper was so far from the truth, yet who else but the author would know his work the best. Now this is an example of someone in the movie business picking on academia, yet it holds true on how anyone can read anything into anything.
My Apologies for the non-coherent rambling
Rich
:asian:
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
OK, look. To clarify.
First, I couldn't get through, "The Man Without Qualities." Bored me; preferred Thos. Pynchon--MA types may want to read, "Vineland," where not only is the dreaded dim mak employed, not only is one of the lead characters a trained, "ninjette," who reads a magazine called, "Aggro World," but we are treated to a description of the aftereffectes of the ultimate MA technique, the hideous, "gojiru na kimpiru." (Then, I advise the following websites: teleportcity; and you call yourself a scientist?; Stomp Tokyo; Jabootu's B-movie dimension.)
Second: the argument that "black belts can be taken as...," simply isn't even approximately my point. Nor did I call J.R.R. Tolkein--a professor of philology who specialized in Old English and Anglo-Saxon, incidentally (read his, "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics") all of which he ripped off right and left--some kind of racist, anti-semite, or whatever. I said that a) his books clearly had "racist content," if we take the meaning of "racist," to be that one classifies people first and foremost by their race, their blood, their biology, and b) that I suspected the royalist politics of his books was exemplary of the causes for so many in martial arts looking for a master rather than a teacher.
Third: there is in martial arts a strain--most easily visible in the traditional arts, by the way--that I'd have to identify as racist in the sense defined in the preceding paragraph. Draeger argued that the whole division between "internal," and "external" arts really meant, "chinese," and "not-chinese," and went on to discuss the militarist and racist ideology behind much of twentieth-century Japanese arts. (Regrettably I don't read Japanese; I've been told that Funakoshi's autobiography has a lot of racial superiority stuff that was conveniently left out of the English editions; anybody know for sure?) It's pretty damn clear that Morehei Ueshiba has some odd little notions, given that if you read John Stephens' "Abundant Peace," the founder of aikido a) belonged to some really iffy (and that's being polite) Japanese societies, b) had his epiphany while in China during the late twenties, with a group that was trying to seize Manchuria so Japan could move in. There's the ongoing "controversy," in sumo about non-Japanese wrestlers attaining yokozuna status (see David Benjamin's "Sumo: A Fan's Notes," about the best and funniest maartial arts book I've ever seen). And to this day, I hear repeated stories about the difficulty Westerners encounter with regard to attaining rank in "traditional" (i.e. "Asian," whatever that word means) systems. Nor is this one sided: the silly controversy I always used to hear about, when I was a kid and readcing "Argosy," magazines I'd sneak out of my dad's room, pretty clearly argued for boxing as exemplifying a Western, white guy civilization that was superior to an "eastern," non-white-guy world.
Hey, at least nobody got ticked that I also said the whole thing about, "mastery," and "masters," was a guy problem, a man's issue--or that I tied the love of LOTR to the Brits love of what was correctly called, "their imperium."
But just watch the flicks. Is there some moment when an orc--interesting skin color there; and then even the human allies of Mordor are identified by the original books as Saracens--might break out of their biology? That's the essence of racism: to claim that what we are is defined and indeed completely constrained by our biology. Yes, some of the people in LOTR can choose what to be--but that moral choice is specifically reserved, in movie and in book, to fair-skinned characters. And in movie and book, one's moral choice--one's decision for good and evil--is again and again specifically defined as choosing to accept one's destined place in a monarchical universe (see the old Tillyard book, "The Elizabethan Chain of Being"). That's what separates Boromir and Faramir--essentially, the B-man is too damn democratic, and won't accept the fact that his blood means he cannot be King until the moment he dies.
I love this stuff, and it's no worse than Shakespeare. But let's not pretend ideology ain't there.
My next rant will be truly offensive, I promise. I'll take up the subject of male anxiety and looking for a master, linking it to political anxiety and a longing-for a fantasy past.
Thanks, folks. Interesting discussion.
First, I couldn't get through, "The Man Without Qualities." Bored me; preferred Thos. Pynchon--MA types may want to read, "Vineland," where not only is the dreaded dim mak employed, not only is one of the lead characters a trained, "ninjette," who reads a magazine called, "Aggro World," but we are treated to a description of the aftereffectes of the ultimate MA technique, the hideous, "gojiru na kimpiru." (Then, I advise the following websites: teleportcity; and you call yourself a scientist?; Stomp Tokyo; Jabootu's B-movie dimension.)
Second: the argument that "black belts can be taken as...," simply isn't even approximately my point. Nor did I call J.R.R. Tolkein--a professor of philology who specialized in Old English and Anglo-Saxon, incidentally (read his, "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics") all of which he ripped off right and left--some kind of racist, anti-semite, or whatever. I said that a) his books clearly had "racist content," if we take the meaning of "racist," to be that one classifies people first and foremost by their race, their blood, their biology, and b) that I suspected the royalist politics of his books was exemplary of the causes for so many in martial arts looking for a master rather than a teacher.
Third: there is in martial arts a strain--most easily visible in the traditional arts, by the way--that I'd have to identify as racist in the sense defined in the preceding paragraph. Draeger argued that the whole division between "internal," and "external" arts really meant, "chinese," and "not-chinese," and went on to discuss the militarist and racist ideology behind much of twentieth-century Japanese arts. (Regrettably I don't read Japanese; I've been told that Funakoshi's autobiography has a lot of racial superiority stuff that was conveniently left out of the English editions; anybody know for sure?) It's pretty damn clear that Morehei Ueshiba has some odd little notions, given that if you read John Stephens' "Abundant Peace," the founder of aikido a) belonged to some really iffy (and that's being polite) Japanese societies, b) had his epiphany while in China during the late twenties, with a group that was trying to seize Manchuria so Japan could move in. There's the ongoing "controversy," in sumo about non-Japanese wrestlers attaining yokozuna status (see David Benjamin's "Sumo: A Fan's Notes," about the best and funniest maartial arts book I've ever seen). And to this day, I hear repeated stories about the difficulty Westerners encounter with regard to attaining rank in "traditional" (i.e. "Asian," whatever that word means) systems. Nor is this one sided: the silly controversy I always used to hear about, when I was a kid and readcing "Argosy," magazines I'd sneak out of my dad's room, pretty clearly argued for boxing as exemplifying a Western, white guy civilization that was superior to an "eastern," non-white-guy world.
Hey, at least nobody got ticked that I also said the whole thing about, "mastery," and "masters," was a guy problem, a man's issue--or that I tied the love of LOTR to the Brits love of what was correctly called, "their imperium."
But just watch the flicks. Is there some moment when an orc--interesting skin color there; and then even the human allies of Mordor are identified by the original books as Saracens--might break out of their biology? That's the essence of racism: to claim that what we are is defined and indeed completely constrained by our biology. Yes, some of the people in LOTR can choose what to be--but that moral choice is specifically reserved, in movie and in book, to fair-skinned characters. And in movie and book, one's moral choice--one's decision for good and evil--is again and again specifically defined as choosing to accept one's destined place in a monarchical universe (see the old Tillyard book, "The Elizabethan Chain of Being"). That's what separates Boromir and Faramir--essentially, the B-man is too damn democratic, and won't accept the fact that his blood means he cannot be King until the moment he dies.
I love this stuff, and it's no worse than Shakespeare. But let's not pretend ideology ain't there.
My next rant will be truly offensive, I promise. I'll take up the subject of male anxiety and looking for a master, linking it to political anxiety and a longing-for a fantasy past.
Thanks, folks. Interesting discussion.
G
GouRonin
Guest
Ok.
I want to punch you in the mouth again.
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Sorry about that, chief. And how's about we lay off the, "punch in the mouth," rhetoric? Just say, "I think you're wrong," or, "I think you're completely kidding yourself," or "You have no idea what you're talking about," and here's why, eh? I realize it's just the way you write...but in future, I'll avoid responding, and I suspect you've got some interesting things to say on the topic.
Thanks.
Thanks.
G
GouRonin
Guest
Eat my shorts.
You're welcome.
R
RCastillo
Guest
Originally posted by GouRonin
Ok.
I want to punch you in the mouth again.
Make sure you get it right this time, I don't want to 2-0. And if you do. that's 2 beers you owe me!
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2002
- Messages
- 8,069
- Reaction score
- 25
Don't make me release that home video of yours.......If you are under 21, don't even ask....:rofl:
S
SingingTiger
Guest
That's certainly your prerogative, but, with all due respect to Mr. Parker, I'd argue that that position implies that the word "master" has only one definition, when in fact it has many.
Barring any kind of duress, I'll also decline to refer to anyone as "master" if I believe that the person I'm addressing expects me to be some kind of slave (i.e., where the definition of "master" being used is "one having authority over another"). But if I'm studying under someone who prefers to be addressed as master because he or she is "an artist, performer, or player of consummate skill," I'll have no problem using the term.
Personally, I can't imagine that I'd ever want to be called "master." I'm very informal, and I doubt it would ever feel comfortable. But that's my preference, and that doesn't make those who have different preferences wrong.
Rich
G
GouRonin
Guest
I said I was young and needed the money!
:cuss:
K
Kirk
Guest
Great post!
