Grandmaster?

[skribs]

Why is it I have serious issues with calling anyone Master anything, yet I have zero problems with calling someone Master in another language, like Shihan (Japanese)? I’d honestly not attend any school where I had to call anyone master, no matter how good the instruction hypothetically would be.

Edit: For the record, I’m white. Many of my black friends say they’d never call anyone master; I understand and respect that. My disdain for it has nothing to do with that. My mind doesn’t go anywhere near there in a MA context.

I think of it like Master and Apprentice. I grew up on Star Wars, so it's not hard to think of my Master the way Luke Skywalker thinks of Ben and Yoda. In Star Wars, a Master is simply a Jedi Knight who has trained another. I mean, after bachelor's degree comes Master's degree, and we don't have any trouble calling people the next part (Doctor).

 

[hoshin1600]

Dont forget about Grand Master "B"

 

[JR 137]

I think of it like Master and Apprentice. I grew up on Star Wars, so it's not hard to think of my Master the way Luke Skywalker thinks of Ben and Yoda. In Star Wars, a Master is simply a Jedi Knight who has trained another. I mean, after bachelor's degree comes Master's degree, and we don't have any trouble calling people the next part (Doctor).

I think of it exactly as you say. IMO a “master” in MA is someone who’s mastered the art, relative to most others.

I think calling someone “master” has more implications of subservience to them rather than purely respect for them. It’s not completely rational on my part, and I recognize it. I just can’t bring myself to calling anyone that, ESPECIALLY when they demand it.

But “shihan” is the same term, just Japanese. And I have absolutely no qualms with that term. I don’t know the Korean, Chinese, etc terms, but I wouldn’t have problems with them either. Yeah, I’m weird. Fully admit it.

 

[JR 137]

In the USA, for those who continue to make it so, there is baggage connected with the title 'Master,' in Asia, at least in Japan and Korea, especially in the martial arts, it is a title of respect for a level of learning, and abilities of the art. We have terms that imply that in the western world, such as 'Doctor' mentioned above, for those of a certain learning in the medical field. In my understanding of some asian cultures, I have no problem calling some teachers Master or Grand Master. But that's just me.



I don't know you but I would guess it is the baggage issue I mentioned above. If you have a lot of black friends, you may choose to try and ensure you never hurt or anger them by using a title Master or Grand Master. Or not, since you say not. But that is just you. Many are like you in the west, especially in the USA. It is sort of part of our history and culture.

But consider - If you went to teach somewhere in asia, and got angry with students who insisted they should bow to you when they encountered you, and let them know that, what would you expect their reaction to be?

I don’t look at it as American history, baggage, not anything remotely close to that. Race doesn’t enter the equation at all.

As in my previous post, I know why it’s used; it’s used to define so to speak someone’s accomplishments in MA. To me personally it just has a connotation of subservience. I know I’m wrong about that, but I just can’t change it no matter how much I try to rationalize the term. Master in any other language is fine. Again, I’m weird. We all are in our own ways though.

If I ever achieve that rank, my title would be master in Japanese. I wouldn’t be keen on people calling me anything other than JR, but etiquette is what it is and I respect it.

 

[JR 137]

Haha yeah I'd also find it weird to call someone master to be honest... but very comfortable with Shihan, Sensei and Sempai.

And nup I still can't not imagine you as being black (have always just associated your avatar with you hahaha XD).

So you like my avatar? A certain clown here was calling me a bully a while back. I found it so comical that I thought who’s my favorite bully of all time. Immediately found a picture of Deebo from Friday, and the rest is history

 

[_Simon_]

So you like my avatar? A certain clown here was calling me a bully a while back. I found it so comical that I thought who’s my favorite bully of all time. Immediately found a picture of Deebo from Friday, and the rest is history

Hahaha ah so thaaaat's the story! Nice

 

[Flying Crane]

I think of it exactly as you say. IMO a “master” in MA is someone who’s mastered the art, relative to most others.

I think calling someone “master” has more implications of subservience to them rather than purely respect for them. It’s not completely rational on my part, and I recognize it. I just can’t bring myself to calling anyone that, ESPECIALLY when they demand it.

But “shihan” is the same term, just Japanese. And I have absolutely no qualms with that term. I don’t know the Korean, Chinese, etc terms, but I wouldn’t have problems with them either. Yeah, I’m weird. Fully admit it.

In the Chinese martial arts, we don’t tend to us such titles. Sifu means teacher, but it actually kind of means father, or someone who has gone before you, and it denotes a personal relationship between the two people. Sigung means grandfather, and it is your teacher’s teacher. Again, this is a specific relationship between the two people.

While someone could be Sigung to you, that same person would be Sifu to your teacher (your Sifu). So it is not a title to be worn. It is a word that describes a relationship.

There are additional terms to denote seniority in the school, terms that essentially mean brother or sister (as classmates) as well as elder and eldest brother and sister and younger brother and sister (I cannot remember the terms).

There is also uncle or aunt, who would be your sifu’s classmate.

One person could be each of these titles to different people, all at the same time. They could be Sigung to you, Sifu to your Sifu, brother to a classmate, younger brother to another classmate, uncle to his classmate’s student, etc., all at the same time.

There might be a term for Founder, I think it is Dai Sigung, but that means Great-Grandfather and is a bit more symbolic but it still denotes a relationship even if it is spanned over several generations. But other than that, not much for the actual titles like Master or Grandmaster.

It drives me a little nuts when I see people referring to themselves as Sigung, thinking it means Grandmaster. They want their own students to call them that. That is like me calling my own father, “Grandfather”. It just shows ignorance.

 

[jks9199]

That is why i said it only in my system.
Of course beating it in accordance of the system.
For example in taichi, i might be wrong here, to gauge the understanding of the system is by sparring in push hand / tui sao, so in the system i currently in, if the student able to draw in tui sao against the master, than he is equal to the master.
But until now, that was never happened, so for the last two or three grandmaster generation, there was gap in knowledge, like the last one has over 20+ year knowledge gap with the late one, so for every generation, there was regression every time a grandmaster passed away.

Sent from my BV8000Pro using Tapatalk

Then that's a shame. I'm nowhere near a master, let alone a grandmaster, but I want my students to know more and do more with our art than I do.

 

[jks9199]

Because Doctor has standards that are universally recognized and is a DEGREE that one earns. It is very different.

So... MD or PhD? What about arts that label their most senior instructors as "professor?"

Titles are only as meaningful as the context and the source. Without knowing both, it's merely a word.

In my system, our 9th level black belts are our grandmasters. Our chief instructor is our Grandmaster. Subtle, but it's a meaningful distinction to us.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

What do you think qualifies someone to be a Grandmaster?

In my MA system, we honor dead master as grand master.

 

[dvcochran]

Grand...as in grandfather. A father who's offspring has also become a father.
Thus a master who's students have also become masters.
The hard part is to define master...good luck with that.

I have heard this before. Best way I have every heard it explained.

 

[dvcochran]

In KKW Taekwondo a Grand Master rank can be achieved at 7th or 8th degree black belt (I believe). Which means you must have been a black belt for a minimum of 21-28 years, probably more if you didn't test every time you were able to. If you assume Master at 5th degree and GM at 8th degree, that means 10 years to become a Master, and another 18 years after that to be a GM. As someone who is 30 years old and going for 3rd Dan next month, at a minimum I would be 55 years old before qualifying to be a grand master. I'd be old enough to be a grandfather (although probably won't be) and I would have spent more than half my life doing Taekwondo.



I think it depends on the situation. In Taekwondo, you wouldn't call yourself that unless you've earned the appropriate rank. At which point I don't see the problem with demanding people call you by the title the organization has bestowed upon you. I call my Master "Master" and I tell my students NOT to call me Master because I haven't earned it yet. (I say "I'm mister, I'm not a master yet...although I like the sound of that!"). When I have earned the title, you bet I'm going to insist on my students calling me Master.

However, if someone has extensive compiled experience in martial arts and creates their own art or system, can they not name themselves Grandmaster of their new system?

Certainly, it should be someone who is "all knowing" of their art. I do not consider a seasoned veteran in any MA automatically a GM. I have always been told gaining GM status has a lot to do with how you have grown your art and your community. I suppose that means there is a political element to it? For me, under no circumstance should someone self-name themselves Grand Master. There is just not enough substance to justify the title.

 

[dvcochran]

Oh, also...

Do I take it you're suggesting that nobody earns the grand master title?

By all means they do. With the sheer volume of certified, qualified black belts on the planet, I think title needs to be maintained at the highest standard. I worked out with our GM long before the was a GM. I still catch myself calling him Master Shin. Many people do, and he shows no regard to it. Humble. I take special care to address him properly in more formal settings.
By rank I can be addressed Master, but choose and ask not to be. I haven't been directly involved in the day to day of our Dojangs for some time and just don't feel comfortable with the title.
In my work life I have two Masters degrees and make damn sure you know it if I smell bs.
In reality, it took me a total of 8 years to get my two engineering masters degrees. It took me 18 years in TKD.

 

[skribs]

Certainly, it should be someone who is "all knowing" of their art. I do not consider a seasoned veteran in any MA automatically a GM. I have always been told gaining GM status has a lot to do with how you have grown your art and your community. I suppose that means there is a political element to it? For me, under no circumstance should someone self-name themselves Grand Master. There is just not enough substance to justify the title.

In Taekwondo, the higher dan ranks are a bit political. At least to my knowledge. I'm not there yet!

What if you are the founder of a new art? And not someone like me (2nd Dan in TKD and orange belt in another). But someone who is Master rank in 2-3 arts already, and ranked black belt (or equivalent amount of training) in another 2-3 arts?

 

[_Simon_]

In Taekwondo, the higher dan ranks are a bit political. At least to my knowledge. I'm not there yet!

What if you are the founder of a new art? And not someone like me (2nd Dan in TKD and orange belt in another). But someone who is Master rank in 2-3 arts already, and ranked black belt (or equivalent amount of training) in another 2-3 arts?

Then you're Super Saiyan Master

 

[JadeDragon]

In China was told that the Grandmaster is the top of the tree, and has been elected to be in that position for his outstanding ability. He is the best person to fit the role of leader of that particular style. So there can only be one Grandmaster, who is the head of that specific style. You can't be the Grandmaster of Yang style in Birmingham or Manchester , there is only one Grandmaster who we all look up to. Sometimes we call out Master "Shi Fu" and his Master should then be "Shi Gong" (like Father and grandfather)

If you decide to call yourself Grandmaster you are saying that this is my system and I am the head of this system. So if I called myself a Grandmaster my system could no longer be Chen Style Tai Chi as there is already a Grandmaster for that. I would have to invent a name for my new system.

Now that it is more profitable to teach kung fu, you will see teachers pontificate themselves through their students hyping them as a grandmaster. These teachers hype themselves as grandmasters, even when their sifu is the true Grandmaster of their style, even while their Sifu is still alive; which is very disrespectful in Traditional Chinese Martial Arts. This denigrates the term grandmaster and implies that the student is at the same ability of their Sifu.

Click below for more:
Grandmaster

 

[dvcochran]

In Taekwondo, the higher dan ranks are a bit political. At least to my knowledge. I'm not there yet!

What if you are the founder of a new art? And not someone like me (2nd Dan in TKD and orange belt in another). But someone who is Master rank in 2-3 arts already, and ranked black belt (or equivalent amount of training) in another 2-3 arts?

I have a hard time seeing how someone who has worked out in "X" Martial Art for 4-6 years then moved on to something else, then moved on to something else, etc..., being a GM. It would be like having multiple Masters degrees from a College but deciding unilaterally you have a PhD.
It can and has been done I am sure. Sometimes, but not always rightly so. If someone was really excellent at growing their brand and legitimizing their new style, and spent several years in the process, I feel it would work without coming off as a douche bag.
Of course, new styles have to start somewhere. It takes an exceptional person to do it. I wonder how important their title was to them in the beginning? Or, how many current styles can be traced to one single person who was a GM from conception?

In the engineering world I work in there aren't many times a PhD carries enough more weight to justify the time and expense. You do not need a PhD to get your P.E. stamp and that is kind of the "end all" requirement for some high end applications.

 

[skribs]

I have a hard time seeing how someone who has worked out in "X" Martial Art for 4-6 years then moved on to something else, then moved on to something else, etc..., being a GM. It would be like having multiple Masters degrees from a College but deciding unilaterally you have a PhD.
It can and has been done I am sure. Sometimes, but not always rightly so. If someone was really excellent at growing their brand and legitimizing their new style, and spent several years in the process, I feel it would work without coming off as a douche bag.
Of course, new styles have to start somewhere. It takes an exceptional person to do it. I wonder how important their title was to them in the beginning? Or, how many current styles can be traced to one single person who was a GM from conception?

In the engineering world I work in there aren't many times a PhD carries enough more weight to justify the time and expense. You do not need a PhD to get your P.E. stamp and that is kind of the "end all" requirement for some high end applications.

Master rank should take more than 4-6 years. (Using TKD as my example again, because it's what I know best) it should take at least 12-15 years.

 

[JR 137]

In the engineering world I work in there aren't many times a PhD carries enough more weight to justify the time and expense. You do not need a PhD to get your P.E. stamp and that is kind of the "end all" requirement for some high end applications.

Becoming a full professor (not adjunct nor the like) is probably the extent of PhD requirements in that field. And even then, with the right work experience and knowledge, that can easily be waived with a master’s degree or if there’s a post-master’s certificate of some sort (some fields have this). I guess it’s pretty much mandatory for a department head/chair.

But unless you want to teach it full-time and/or want some sort of extra oomph in your resume and credentials, I don’t see the point in many fields. Some fields have a glass ceiling that doesn’t get broken without one though.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Because Doctor has standards that are universally recognized and is a DEGREE that one earns. It is very different.

In both cases, it’s a title. If an organization seems someone to have met the standards for GM, why shouldn’t they use that term?