A few questions about JJ

[Steve]

YouTube? That's funny. Particularly as Alanis morrisette is Canadian. Well, until she was in her 30s.

 

[Hanzou]

Interestingly, a buddy of mine just got back from Japan, and noted that whenever he mentioned "Jujutsu" to the Japanese, they thought he was talking about Bjj.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

As some people said earlier (I believe PGSmtih, Hanzou) I will side with Chris on this one. His knowledge in this area is sound and very, very good! He is an "expert" in this area.

Unfortunately, not everyone on this thread understands this area as well!

So let's look at one of the crux or the recent conversation on this thread:

If someone, somewhere along the line a non-Japanese learns some Japanese Jujutsu and then mixes it with whatever we shall say some wrestling and boxing and creates a new name for their system such as DoDo JuJitsu and they keep the trappings of a gi, some words, etc. They live in xyz country but it is not Japan. They are not Japanese. It is not Japanese Jujutsu anymore but their interpretation of it. Does it have Japanese trapping, technique, etc. sure but the art because it has added boxing, wrestling it is not Japanese. It is a mix, eclectic and if done well it may be an actually great system. However, that doesn't make it a Japanese system. It is not found in Japan. Nor would it be truthful for them to really advertise it as such.

Japanese martial systems are divided into two categories. Koryu or pre-Meiji Restoration and Gendai or founded at the beginning or after the Meiji Restoration. The Koryu systems are actually listed in the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten. It is a fairly comprehensive list. Gendai Budo or modern budo are systems established after the meiji restoration started. Judo, Karate, aikido to name just a few are Gendai Budo. Is BJJ a Gendai Budo and a Japanese system? It wears a gi, so it has some trappings, it is derived from Judo, so it has a Japanese lineage. However, it was founded by a Brazilian in Brazil and it has evolved so I would not include it as a Gendai Budo. It is distinctly Brazilian now. I personally know of no BJJ instructors that would refer to their martial system as a Japanese system. Derived yes but now distinctly Brazilian! It is a Brazilian martial art and there is a lot of pride in that!

Now let's move forward and get rid of the pot shots at each other.

This forum is for Japanese Jujutsu/Judo and is in the Japanese Martial Arts area. Let's talk about Japanese martial arts from the perspective of what the OP wanted or what makes up Japanese Jujutsu!

 

[Steve]

I'm with Chris on this one, too. Truly, he's an expert

 

[Chris Parker]

With deference to Brian's post above (thanks for that, Brian), and frankly ignoring Steve's… whatever he's posting… there is still something that apparently needs to be clarified… again.

Sigh…

Do you know what fraud busting is?

Apparently a fair bit better than you do, yes.

Pretty sure you cant just call people liers.

That's not really what fraud busting is about. If someone is patently doing one a particular thing, it's not fraud busting to make the observation as to what they're doing… nor is it necessarily fraud busting to simply say someone is lying… particularly if such a statement can be backed up. I might add that I haven't said that Barry is lying, just that he might be (knowingly) misrepresenting what he offers.

Fraud busting is more of a pursuant attack on the credibility of someone, regardless of the credibility of the attack, and the rule was instigated primarily to prevent opening the site (and Bob at the time) to highly annoying and costly law suits from a number of frauds who do get rather sue-happy whenever called on their BS. So no, it's not fraud busting to make the observation that a patently Western-created system is not a Japanese one… okay?

That you have to be Japanese to understand Japanese culture. And so therefore to authentically represent it?

Look, I'm getting a little tired of saying this over and over again, so if you continue with this line of lunacy, it'll probably get reported for trolling, okay?

No. There is no statement, belief, comment, intimation, or anything of the kind from anyone except you. There has never been a claim from anyone here that being Japanese was required, or even that a Japanese martial art, being defined as a martial art from Japan, required anything like the person discussing it to be Japanese, or that the person teaching it needed to be Japanese to "authentically represent (Japanese culture)".

Get this frankly idiotic idea out of your head. That's the only place it's been.

Or you can instead teach Japanese jujitsu without worrying about authentically representing it.

Anyone can teach Japanese Jujutsu, provided they've actually learnt it first. That's it. Forget this bizarre idea of "authentically representing it", as frankly, you don't have the first clue what that would even entail in the first place. Two of the best teachers of such systems here in Melbourne are Westerners… one is Australian, the other an English ex-patriate… both teaching very different systems (one classed as jujutsu, the other a sogo bujutsu system with a yawara [jujutsu] syllabus incorporated). Then again, I've known of Japanese "instructors" who are just the opposite… making up highly dubious systems, and going about as far against the ideals and traits of Japanese arts as they could.

So, if you could get past your very false ideas, and accept that you don't really know what you're talking about here, perhaps we could move on.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

In the interests of clear communication, I'm going to side with Chris, Brian, and others in saying that an art should only be referred to as "Japanese xyz" if that particular style was actually created in Japan.

"Traditional" we can argue over endlessly, because the term gets used in very different ways by different people and the traditions in question may be 5 years old or 500 years old.

"Jujutsu" is a family of arts which at this point includes systems created all over the world. Most of the jujutsu systems created in the West don't have a lot of resemblance to the koryu arts, but generally at least part of their ancestry goes back to Japan (most often via Judo). Given that ancestry, I have no problem with those arts being called jujutsu (or jiu-jitsu).

For purposes of clarity, though, it only makes sense to reserve the term "Japanese jujutsu" for jujutsu systems which were created in Japan. If you want to describe an art by its nationality, then jujutsu systems created in America can be called "American jujutsu". Systems created in Britain can be called "British jujutsu" The art created in Brazil can be called "Brazilian jiu-jitsu".

(Not to say there can't be fuzzy cases. Danzan Ryu was created by a native born Japanese who was living in Hawaii at the time, with occasional visits back to Japan. I suppose it wouldn't be unreasonable to call that "Japanese-American jujutsu".)

I think most of the instructors teaching western jujutsu systems while referring to it as "Japanese jujutsu" are not committing any sort of deliberate fraud. They just aren't that knowledgeable about the history of their art and its predecessors. That isn't uncommon at all in the martial arts world. Most martial artists have a history passed down to them which is more myth than fact.

 

[Jameswhelan]

In the interests of clear communication, I'm going to side with Chris, Brian, and others in saying that an art should only be referred to as "Japanese xyz" if that particular style was actually created in Japan.

"Traditional" we can argue over endlessly, because the term gets used in very different ways by different people and the traditions in question may be 5 years old or 500 years old.

"Jujutsu" is a family of arts which at this point includes systems created all over the world. Most of the jujutsu systems created in the West don't have a lot of resemblance to the koryu arts, but generally at least part of their ancestry goes back to Japan (most often via Judo). Given that ancestry, I have no problem with those arts being called jujutsu (or jiu-jitsu).

For purposes of clarity, though, it only makes sense to reserve the term "Japanese jujutsu" for jujutsu systems which were created in Japan. If you want to describe an art by its nationality, then jujutsu systems created in America can be called "American jujutsu". Systems created in Britain can be called "British jujutsu" The art created in Brazil can be called "Brazilian jiu-jitsu".

(Not to say there can't be fuzzy cases. Danzan Ryu was created by a native born Japanese who was living in Hawaii at the time, with occasional visits back to Japan. I suppose it wouldn't be unreasonable to call that "Japanese-American jujutsu".)

I think most of the instructors teaching western jujutsu systems while referring to it as "Japanese jujutsu" are not committing any sort of deliberate fraud. They just aren't that knowledgeable about the history of their art and its predecessors. That isn't uncommon at all in the martial arts world. Most martial artists have a history passed down to them which is more myth than fact.

When someone says 'Japanese jujutsu', what they mean is 'jujutsu that isn't Brazillian jiu jitsu'. Most people aren't bothered with the apparent nuance that only a jujutsu that comes from Japan in the totality of its form qualifies to be called 'Japanese jujutsu'. For most people, Jujutsu comes from the samurai and that's good enough for them. Insisting on not seeing it as most people see it is gate-keeping and playing the koryu police - its deliberately bad communication and this thread is the result.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think most of the instructors teaching western jujutsu systems while referring to it as "Japanese jujutsu" are not committing any sort of deliberate fraud. They just aren't that knowledgeable about the history of their art and its predecessors. That isn't uncommon at all in the martial arts world. Most martial artists have a history passed down to them which is more myth than fact.

I think there's also the issue of folks who develop a system based upon some Jujutsu system that originated in Japan. If the new system was created in the US, one could most reasonably argue it's an American Jujutsu system. Some, however, tend to classify based on origin of the traditions and techniques, and those folks would call the new system a Japanese Jujutsu sysem. I don't have a big issue with either, though the AJ nomenclature is arguably more accurate.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

When someone says 'Japanese jujutsu', what they mean is 'jujutsu that isn't Brazillian jiu jitsu'. Most people aren't bothered with the apparent nuance that only a jujutsu that comes from Japan in the totality of its form qualifies to be called 'Japanese jujutsu'. For most people, Jujutsu comes from the samurai and that's good enough for them. Insisting on not seeing it as most people see it is gate-keeping and playing the koryu police - its deliberately bad communication and this thread is the result.

This is a good point. With the surge in popularity of BJJ, simply saying "Jujutsu" isn't clear, because many will think it's BJJ. Adding "Japanese" to the term can be a simple shorthand way of clarifying that it's not the Judo-based BJJ, but is based on the original Japanese arts called Jujutsu.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

When someone says 'Japanese jujutsu', what they mean is 'jujutsu that isn't Brazillian jiu jitsu'.

If by "someone" you mean "people who don't know much about the history of jujutsu", then you might be right. By the same token, some people might use "Kung Fu" to describe all striking arts which aren't western boxing.

If someone is honestly interested in understanding the distinction, it doesn't take long to absorb the idea that (for example) Shingitai Jujutsu is no more closely related to Japanese jujutsu than BJJ is.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

This is a good point. With the surge in popularity of BJJ, simply saying "Jujutsu" isn't clear, because many will think it's BJJ. Adding "Japanese" to the term can be a simple shorthand way of clarifying that it's not the Judo-based BJJ, but is based on the original Japanese arts called Jujutsu.

Actually, most of the modern western jujutsu systems aren't directly derived from Japanese jujutsu systems any more than BJJ is. Like BJJ, they are hybrids built on a foundation of Judo and some other arts. (BJJ has a Judo base with some Sombo and Catch Wrestling mixed in. A typical American jujutsu system might have a Judo base with some Karate, Aikido, and a bit of Arnis, for example.)

 

[Steve]

If by "someone" you mean "people who don't know much about the history of jujutsu", then you might be right. By the same token, some people might use "Kung Fu" to describe all striking arts which aren't western boxing.

If someone is honestly interested in understanding the distinction, it doesn't take long to absorb the idea that (for example) Shingitai Jujutsu is no more closely related to Japanese jujutsu than BJJ is.

Isn't this the thing? The distinction is academic. For some it matters a great deal. But it isn't a practical distinction.

Japanese massage means something very specific and whether it is actually Japanese is academic and, I would huess, unimportant to the guys looking for one. They don't care if it's from Japan. Only that its "Japanese."

 

[Xue Sheng]

Isn't this the thing? The distinction is academic. For some it matters a great deal. But it isn't a practical distinction.

Japanese massage means something very specific and whether it is actually Japanese is academic and, I would huess, unimportant to the guys looking for one. They don't care if it's from Japan. Only that its "Japanese."

The difference I feel you are talking about here is the difference between what is real and what is perceived which leads me to your statement being more of

They don't care if it's from Japan. Only that they believe it is "Japanese."

That does not make it Japanese.

 

[Steve]

The difference I feel you are talking about here is the difference between what is real and what is perceived which leads me to your statement being more of

They don't care if it's from Japan. Only that they believe it is "Japanese."

That does not make it Japanese.

Yes. Exactly!! They don't care if it's authentic. They only care that its what they expect it to be. Further, they may be unhappy if they get something authentic because it isn't what they expect.

Edit. Just to be clear I think its not about real vs perceived as much as its authentic or not and whether that matters at all in context.

 

[Steve]

With deference to Brian's post above (thanks for that, Brian), and frankly ignoring Steve's… whatever he's posting… there is still something that apparently needs to be clarified… again.

Sigh…



Apparently a fair bit better than you do, yes.



That's not really what fraud busting is about. If someone is patently doing one a particular thing, it's not fraud busting to make the observation as to what they're doing… nor is it necessarily fraud busting to simply say someone is lying… particularly if such a statement can be backed up. I might add that I haven't said that Barry is lying, just that he might be (knowingly) misrepresenting what he offers.

Fraud busting is more of a pursuant attack on the credibility of someone, regardless of the credibility of the attack, and the rule was instigated primarily to prevent opening the site (and Bob at the time) to highly annoying and costly law suits from a number of frauds who do get rather sue-happy whenever called on their BS. So no, it's not fraud busting to make the observation that a patently Western-created system is not a Japanese one… okay?



Look, I'm getting a little tired of saying this over and over again, so if you continue with this line of lunacy, it'll probably get reported for trolling, okay?

No. There is no statement, belief, comment, intimation, or anything of the kind from anyone except you. There has never been a claim from anyone here that being Japanese was required, or even that a Japanese martial art, being defined as a martial art from Japan, required anything like the person discussing it to be Japanese, or that the person teaching it needed to be Japanese to "authentically represent (Japanese culture)".

Get this frankly idiotic idea out of your head. That's the only place it's been.



Anyone can teach Japanese Jujutsu, provided they've actually learnt it first. That's it. Forget this bizarre idea of "authentically representing it", as frankly, you don't have the first clue what that would even entail in the first place. Two of the best teachers of such systems here in Melbourne are Westerners… one is Australian, the other an English ex-patriate… both teaching very different systems (one classed as jujutsu, the other a sogo bujutsu system with a yawara [jujutsu] syllabus incorporated). Then again, I've known of Japanese "instructors" who are just the opposite… making up highly dubious systems, and going about as far against the ideals and traits of Japanese arts as they could.

So, if you could get past your very false ideas, and accept that you don't really know what you're talking about here, perhaps we could move on.

Calm down, son.

 

[pgsmith]

Yes. Exactly!! They don't care if it's authentic. They only care that its what they expect it to be. Further, they may be unhappy if they get something authentic because it isn't what they expect.

Edit. Just to be clear I think its not about real vs perceived as much as its authentic or not and whether that matters at all in context.

But you're missing the point in your dogged drive to be correct and express your opinion. The point is that those of us that contribute regularly to this forum don't care what others expect. This forum is for Japanese martial arts, specifically Jujutsu / Judo. It isn't labeled "martial arts that others may think are Japanese" or "martial arts that use some Japanese words". It is labeled "Japanese Martial Arts". Therefore we practice, and are interested in discussing, legitimate schools of Japanese jujutsu / judo, not everyone else's ideas of what they perceive to be Japanese. If you tell us you practice Bob's Genuine and Authentic Samurai Jiujitsu that Bob invented complete with floor grappling and head kicks, we'll tell you that it isn't appropriate for this forum since it's not a Japanese jujutsu school, no matter what you believe.

So, there it is. You may genuinely be correct in your statements regarding what others may think their art is, but that still doesn't mean that it's appropriate for this forum in my opinion.

 

[Steve]

I appreciate that you acknowledge we are all simply expressing our opinions.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

But you're missing the point in your dogged drive to be correct and express your opinion. The point is that those of us that contribute regularly to this forum don't care what others expect. This forum is for Japanese martial arts, specifically Jujutsu / Judo. It isn't labeled "martial arts that others may think are Japanese" or "martial arts that use some Japanese words". It is labeled "Japanese Martial Arts". Therefore we practice, and are interested in discussing, legitimate schools of Japanese jujutsu / judo, not everyone else's ideas of what they perceive to be Japanese. If you tell us you practice Bob's Genuine and Authentic Samurai Jiujitsu that Bob invented complete with floor grappling and head kicks, we'll tell you that it isn't appropriate for this forum since it's not a Japanese jujutsu school, no matter what you believe.

So, there it is. You may genuinely be correct in your statements regarding what others may think their art is, but that still doesn't mean that it's appropriate for this forum in my opinion.

Absolutely! This forum is for Japanese martial arts. Martial arts that are actually found in Japan. If they are Koryu they are found in the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten or if they are a Gendai Budo they are found in Japan. Not just what someone thinks is a Japanese art.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Here's a point of interest. What of arts that originated in Japan, and have died there and continue (in mostly the same form) elsewhere?

 

[Steve]

Absolutely! This forum is for Japanese martial arts. Martial arts that are actually found in Japan. If they are Koryu they are found in the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten or if they are a Gendai Budo they are found in Japan. Not just what someone thinks is a Japanese art.

thanks, Brian. I appreciate your opinion, and will remind you guys that what is interesting to me need not be interesting to you. And vice versa. But I'm pretty sure there are no rules compelling you to read threads that aren't of interest to you. This thread was not, from the start, about strictly Japanese jujutsu, and at any point a mod could move it. However, they (you) did not.

You guys can respond to the content of my posts, or not. But this lame attempt at ganging up is just a little pitiful.