Unraveling the Essence of a Grandmaster: A Perspective on Leadership in Martial Arts

[Gyakuto]

For me it's simple.

Students learn martial arts.
Instructors teach students martial arts.
Masters teach instructors to teach students martial arts.
Grand masters teach masters to teach instructors to teach students martial arts.

‘Simplistic’ rather than ‘simple’ 😉

 

[Gyakuto]

I’m sure someone has said the following on another thread: any honorific should only be bestowed by others with no vested interest in the honour (“..we make her a hanshi and she’ll promote us up the grading ladder due to her indebtedness to us”), those being honoured should not use the title to introduce or refer to themselves (I’ve never met a knight of the realm or whatever, who’s introduced themselves as Sir/Lord/Lady/Baroness).

Let’s be honest about this, many of the people who use these titles are displaying their self grandiosity and I believe the Japanese martial arts (of which I only have any experience) try to instil humility in attitude and behaviour in the practitioner.

 

[Hot Lunch]

Let’s be honest about this, many of the people who use these titles are displaying their self grandiosity and I believe the Japanese martial arts (of which I only have any experience) try to instil humility in attitude and behaviour in the practitioner.

So the OP practices FMA, and the two guys defending it practice KMA.

Aren't there several Christianity-based cults where the Korean male head is believed to be God or the second coming of the messiah by the members - such as Ahn Sahng-hong, Lee Man-hee, and a few others? And then there's the Kim regime...

And this isn't a criticism of Korean culture. Minus a Kim regime equivalent, we've have David Koresh and other self-proclaimed messiahs right here in the US.

But it does appear that Japanese culture wouldn't allow for things like this.

 

[Gyakuto]

So the OP practices FMA, and the two guys defending it practice KMA.

Aren't there several Christianity-based cults where the Korean male head is believed to be God or the second coming of the messiah by the members - such as Ahn Sahng-hong, Lee Man-hee, and a few others? And then there's the Kim regime...

And this isn't a criticism of Korean culture. Minus a Kim regime equivalent, we've have David Koresh and other self-proclaimed messiahs right here in the US.

But it does appear that Japanese culture wouldn't allow for things like this.

I’m not sure how this is relevant, Hot Lunch. Do you mind explaining it to me?

 

[HighKick]

Or you just didn't know. I've never wanted to be called Grandmaster. I don't even get called Master. I'm just not that formal. These are titles that the organization uses. Students call me Sir or Sabumnim if they're being formalish. Otherwise, it's Mark.
The only person I've ever insisted call me Master was Mrs. Dog. And you can probably guess how well that worked.

From everything I have studied, calling someone grandmaster is a very Western convention. Essentially a marketing/promotional tool.
We call or Kwan Jang Nim Grandmaster. Not exactly sure when it started but somewhere around the time he promoted to 8th Dan (now 9th Dan). Not certain who said it first, but I am certain it was intended as respect, and it just stuck. But those of us who go way back with our GM, usually just say 'Master' Shin. He is full blooded Korean, and rarely do you hear him say Master, it is almost always Mister or Missus.
From my experience, Koreans and Easterns in general are not all that big on expressing title.
The exception is when a bunch of Korean instructors get together at tournaments, courses/seminars, such. They darn well want to be acknowledged within their peers.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Same as what Gyakuto said. I hear that word, and the first thing that comes to mind is someone whose belt and gi is covered in a bunch shiny accoutrements.

Okay, the issue is your reaction to it, or that shiny belt? I mean, if someone carries that title, but is wearing a plain white gi and black belt, what's the issue?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

As Gyakuto notes, the skills and attributes of an effective organizational chief executive don't have any particular relationship to the skills and attributes necessary to be an exceptional martial arts practitioner or instructor.

Beyond that, I'm not sure why any martial art needs a hierarchical organization, especially one where each rank "commands" the one beneath. I don't see any particular benefits and I see lots of ways it can go wrong.

I'm also skeptical of the idea that any martial art is best served by having a single person in charge who guides its progress. In my experience, technical development in an art primarily comes from the collective experience of thousands of practitioners around the world as they continuously share and test new ideas.

I agree with all of this. The only good purpose I've seen in having that hierarchy is where promotions are single-point (any instructor can promote to the rank below them). I can understand why organizations would have a single point with final authority when they are relatively small, when the style needs some guided cohesiveness (I'm thinking of almost any art that relies on forms, where those forms being similar across all schools is useful), and to have someone who can determine when an instructor doesn't belong in the style (for ethical reasons, for instance). Beyond a point, it would make more sense to have a Board or some such to remove that single point, while still providing control.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Here's the catch: some titles imply a greater level of submission/deference by the addressor to the addressee than others. That's why it's not always this simple.

The title of "chief instructor" implies a healthy distance between the person using that term and the person to whom the title applies. The titles of "master" and "grandmaster" imply an unhealthy relationship between the holder of that title and the person addressing them as such. Cult leaders immediately come to mind.

By the way, since I've been on this forum, this is probably the second most discussed topic after... belts.

Like a black belt rank, these titles only mean what they mean to those using them. I've had instructors who had that unhealthy sense of the relationship no matter what they were called. I've known at least two instructors who disliked "master" but were granted that by their association (the people below them, actually). If my FMA instructor had asked to be called some equivalent of "grandmaster", I'd have been fine with it. He was a humble guy, and what title he chose wouldn't have changed that.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

For me it's simple.

Students learn martial arts.
Instructors teach students martial arts.
Masters teach instructors to teach students martial arts.
Grand masters teach masters to teach instructors to teach students martial arts.

That's a reasonable view, and it wouldn't matter what terms you put in those spaces (student, instructor, master, grandmaster) - the point would still be reasonable. It's just words.

 

[Gyakuto]

It’s interesting that ‘great’ historical figures of Japan receive no honorific. It’s just Tokugawa Ieyasu, or Uesugi Kenshi.

Anyway, I don’t think the OP was really interested into getting into the semantics of honorifics. The OP asks if his sentiments resonate with us, but I can’t easily pinpoint what her sentiments are. Is she suggesting a grandmaster <shudder> should be all things to all people? Superb teacher, decisive manager of the martial art’s association, benevolent, forward planning, wise nice to children and animals? Is she suggesting that if a grandmaster <shudder> does not fulfil any of those criteria, or prefers to keep things on a small scale, then they are undeserving of that title?
This sounds like deification.

 

[Gyakuto]

Okay, the issue is your reaction to it, or that shiny belt? I mean, if someone carries that title, but is wearing a plain white gi and black belt, what's the issue?

That’s an oxymoron, Gerry Seymour. 😉

Looking at Google images after searching for ‘martial arts grandmaster’ reveals some sort of shiny keikogi adornment, not always, of course, but generally. The quantity of adornments seems to be more directly correlated with degree of obesity of the grandmaster, but I haven’t run the numbers on that, so it’s unsubstantiated.😐

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That’s an oxymoron, Gerry Seymour. 😉

Looking at Google images after searching for ‘martial arts grandmaster’ reveals some sort of shiny keikogi adornment, not always, of course, but generally. The quantity of adornments seems to be more directly correlated with degree of obesity of the grandmaster, but I haven’t run the numbers on that, so it’s unsubstantiated.😐

What's an oxymoron in my post? Someone with that title and no adornments? But you, yourself, said they exist.

I'll challenge that a Google image search for "grandmaster" is likely to produce what Google's algorithm thinks differentiates a grandmaster from other martial artists, and isn't really a way to judge individuals.

As for the unnecessary comments about people getting fat as they age, are you now suggesting that folks with bad genetics can't be good instructors? That's the worst kind of judging a book by its cover. You can do better.

 

[Gyakuto]

What's an oxymoron in my post? Someone with that title and no adornments? But you, yourself, said they exist.

I'll challenge that a Google image search for "grandmaster" is likely to produce what Google's algorithm thinks differentiates a grandmaster from other martial artists, and isn't really a way to judge individuals.

As for the unnecessary comments about people getting fat as they age, are you now suggesting that folks with bad genetics can't be good instructors? That's the worst kind of judging a book by its cover. You can do better.

I think you should reboot your ‘sense of humour’ algorithm, Gerry Seymour. 🤖

But since you’ve asked, martial arts is the one of the few physical disciplines where the teacher is expected to be ‘better’ than his students. It’s very strange because nobody expects a boxing or swimming coach to be as good as their top student but, for some reason, there is that expectation in our disciplines.

As a complete aside, most people get fat as they age because their calorie intake exceeds their metabolic needs. This happened to me so I reduced my caloric intake and KAPOW! Normal range BMI ensued. There are some medical conditions that can make the person put on weight, hypothyroidism and Cushing’s syndrom but the latter is quite rare. ‘Bad genetics’ making everyone fat is an excuse for the vast majority of people. Rarely, a pattern of inherited obesity within a family is caused by a specific variant of a single gene (monogenic obesity)

 

[Hot Lunch]

I’m not sure how this is relevant, Hot Lunch. Do you mind explaining it to me?

I quoted you. You were saying that titles such as "grandmaster" are contrary to the humility that is taught in Japanese martial arts. And it appears that, outside of Japanese martial arts, there's nothing inhibiting people from holding such titles. I was just expanding on what you said.

 

[Hot Lunch]

Okay, the issue is your reaction to it, or that shiny belt? I mean, if someone carries that title, but is wearing a plain white gi and black belt, what's the issue?

Someone holding the title of "Grandmaster," but is dressed like a normal human being? I need some time to process that thought...

 

[Hot Lunch]

As for the unnecessary comments about people getting fat as they age, are you now suggesting that folks with bad genetics can't be good instructors? That's the worst kind of judging a book by its cover. You can do better.

The observation is that the fatter they are, the more shiny objects on their gi and belt. My observation is the same. Looks like someone right out of a Saturday Night Live or other sketch comedy skit.

This isn't to say that someone who's older and overweight can't be good instructors. But if his martial arts uniform looks like a Christmas tree, you gotta wonder how he got all of that with his level of physical fitness.

 

[Gyakuto]

I quoted you. You were saying that titles such as "grandmaster" are contrary to the humility that is taught in Japanese martial arts. And it appears that, outside of Japanese martial arts, there's nothing inhibiting people from holding such titles. I was just expanding on what you said.

Ah, I see. Thank you.🙏🏽

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I actually have no opinion on the issue. Some organizations have grandmasters, some do not. I'll address a person as they wish to be addressed, it's no skin off my nose to be polite to them. Same with clerics who wish to be addressed by various honorifics. I'm not a member of their church, but if it's 'Bishop' or 'Reverend' or 'Most Reverend Special Agent Impressive Hat Feared By Arrogant Toasters', I'm OK with it. Life's too short to get worked up over it, I reckon.

My Sensei likes to be called Sensei, so that's what I call him. People from outside our dojo call him "Master," which sounds odd to my ears, but it's fine. I don't care what anyone calls me in the dojo. My Sensei usually introduces me to new students as "Sensei Bill," and that's nice. Sometimes I'm just "Mister Bill" and that's fine too.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Unraveling the Essence of a Grandmaster: A Perspective on Leadership in Martial Arts

Understanding the concept of a ‘grandmaster’ can often be challenging. However, one shared quality among all grandmasters is undeniably their innate leadership skills. Taking Modern Arnis as our reference point, we see a clear hierarchy – from the students to the Guros (teachers), ascending to the Masters, the Datus, and finally, the Grandmaster. This pyramid illustrates the evolution of leadership, with each rank commanding the one beneath.

At the pinnacle, the grandmaster symbolizes the embodiment of leadership, often likened to a president or a king. They bear the responsibility of guiding all other ranks, setting the course for the future of the organization, and embodying the essence of the art.

However, recently there has been a surge in individuals seeking to earn the title of ‘grandmaster’ for personal prestige, with little or no intention of shouldering the leadership responsibilities that the title demands. It’s my humble belief that such behavior undermines the sanctity of the title and the art.

Take note, martial arts aspirants who have achieved the esteemed title of ‘grandmaster’, yet only lead a handful of students from a school, recreation center, backyard or garage, it’s time to either rise to the occasion or respectfully step aside.

I present these thoughts as my personal perspective. I acknowledge and respect the diversity of opinions in the martial arts community and I am open to engaging in constructive conversations about this or related topics.

So, dear readers, community members, and fellow martial arts enthusiasts, I invite your feedback. Do my sentiments resonate, or am I just being overly critical? Are we, as part of this revered tradition, upholding the high standards set by our predecessors?

Thank you for considering my viewpoint, and I look forward to our dialogue.

With all due respect,
Datu Tim Hartman
World Modern Arnis Alliance

#modernarnis #DatuHartman #arnis #datu #Filipinomartialarts #grandmaster #martialarts

Note: the term Grandmaster, if on mainland China, is only a title used to impress westerners. Between Chinese, it tends to mean someone is fake. And it is used in the west, by those from China, to impress westerners

Per my Yang Shifu, trained in Hong Kong, there are no Grandmasters in China, only Sifu....

Also note those using Shigong (sigong) in the west to refer to themselves as "Grandmaster" are using the word incredibly wrong. It would translate to teacher's teacher.... So they are saying, by using Shigong, that they taught their teacher who then taught them.

 

[Bujingodai]

Definately one of the things I despised about my former organization. There were it seems almost as many masters, grandmasters and Shihan as there were students.