Last one....errr...what do you think of my website again?

[Cruentus]

Hi...My limit is 3 multiple threads on the same topic, I think.

I asked about this in the FMA forum, but I would like opinions from those who do other martial arts as well. Wondering what you think of the content of my site. Presentation and technical tips are helpful too...as I am an amature!

Site: http://www.geocities.com/paul_janulis/Home.html

Thanks!

:ultracool

Paul

 

[Gary Crawford]

Exellent site Paul!! I love the concept behind the name "Tulisan".Your idealology is right on the money.Your rank concept is great too.If lived in your area,I'd be there for your next class!I'm sure I could learn alot from you!

 

[Jade Tigress]

Exellent site Paul!! I love the concept behind the name "Tulisan".Your idealology is right on the money.Your rank concept is great too.If lived in your area,I'd be there for your next class!I'm sure I could learn alot from you!

I agree. It looks great. Especially for your first attempt. It's easy to read and provides alot of important information about you and your school. Well done!

 

[Cruentus]

Thanks for the feedback so far, guys! :asian:

Paul

 

[MJS]

Great site Paul!!!

Mike

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Nice site - "through" on main page, though.

Easy to look around - good job!

 

[loki09789]

Hi...My limit is 3 multiple threads on the same topic, I think.

I asked about this in the FMA forum, but I would like opinions from those who do other martial arts as well. Wondering what you think of the content of my site. Presentation and technical tips are helpful too...as I am an amature!

Site: http://www.geocities.com/paul_janulis/Home.html

Thanks!

:ultracool

Paul

In the site, you defend your rank system as modelled after a Masters Degree program in college/academia, yet you are using terms like Journeyman and such for the lower ranks that would come from a master as in 'Craftsman/artist' context not an academic "topic mastery" context. It might be more consistent if the reasoning was in line with the usage.

 

[Cruentus]

In the site, you defend your rank system as modelled after a Masters Degree program in college/academia, yet you are using terms like Journeyman and such for the lower ranks that would come from a master as in 'Craftsman/artist' context not an academic "topic mastery" context. It might be more consistent if the reasoning was in line with the usage.

Hmm..

Perhaps I didn't explain it well enough.

I was really just making the comparison between rank, title, and certification in "martial fantasy land" to both the tradesmen industry and academia. I was making the point that in a "trade," you can get certified in 3 to 5 years, and you can go out and produce, and "do you own work." I was making the point that also, in acadamia, roughly 6 years of diligent study makes you a "master" in that subject (via "masters degree"). However, in the "martial arts world," most systems and teachers will not allow you to go out and do your own work, or to make it your own, even after 4 to 6 years of diligent study. You are often expected to pay homage to them, and pay them lots of money, as they hold you down and do things to prevent you from being successful. This is unless of course they can reap financial rewards from your success, in which case, your success at that point really belongs to them. I feel that this trend is, to put it simply, not right. I feel that this is a faux tradition, for one. For two, this would never fly in the "real world." In the real world, you couldn't fullfill all your requirements for a journeymans, but still be expected to only do what your teacher/employer says, and give him half your money and all the credit for your work to boot. In the real world, you couldn't fulfill the requirements for a Bachalors degree, and still be expected to pay for classes and yearly dues to the university, while not being allowed to get a job with your degree; or if you get a job with it, that job will actually belong to the university instead of you. In the "real world" this behavior is not only unfair, but legally not allowed; however, we let this fly in martial arts. I am simply speaking against this, and saying that there are alternatives.

Now, my actual instructor certification based off the medievel tradesmen method of certification (ironically, both acadamia and modern trades model after this to a degree). And that is apprentice, instructor, master, grandmaster. These are not titles or rank; rather they are certifications of performance and teaching proficiency.

I hope that made sense, and I apologize if I was not more clear. I will be reviewing and making changes later this week, so that will be one of the things that I will look at.

Thanks,

Paul Janulis

 

[loki09789]

Hmm..

Perhaps I didn't explain it well enough.


Now, my actual instructor certification based off the medievel tradesmen method of certification (ironically, both acadamia and modern trades model after this to a degree). And that is apprentice, instructor, master, grandmaster. These are not titles or rank; rather they are certifications of performance and teaching proficiency.

I hope that made sense, and I apologize if I was not more clear. I will be reviewing and making changes later this week, so that will be one of the things that I will look at.

Thanks,

Paul Janulis

Actually the academic model is different from the Tradesman model by a lot because the academic model is based on the use of education to create religiously trained/priestly nobleman when the church controlled the education and only nobles were allowed to attend higher learning. That religious based education was why families like the Medici's could have such a foothold in the Church because they would go from "Duke De Medici" to "Pope Leo."

For example terms like adept and acolyte are scholarly/religous 'ranking'. The term "clerk" derives from the term "Cleric" which was a minimally educated student who could read and write/copy documents and begin earning his way.

Terms like Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, Senior, Graduate, PhD. ....are academic terms that connote the intellectual development and rank status within that group - but those are more rooted in Liberal Arts goals. The medieval academic approach was religious/philosophically based in Christian/Catholic Doctrine, Rhetoric and the like.

The Medieval Tradesman model was built on the guild houses. A boy was sold into apprenticeship/indenture by his parents/guardians to learn a skill at the hands of a master starting at a very early age. He did all the manual labor and even some of the cooking and cleaning as a novice apprentice. As he progressed into his pre-teens he would be taught and be allowed to do basic tasks (ex. Blacksmith apprentices learned to make nails and shoe horses as early training tasks, freeing up the master for more intricate work). In his teens/twenties he was a 'journeyman' after he had proven that he was basically skilled enough to be a 'tinker' type of worker and had enough skill/hours/years to go on the road and not embarass his master craftsman/mentor and to do basic work as needed by the people of the time.

Unfortunately, just like the politics and ego that you are speaking out against there were still instances of 'apprentices' being denied promotion because the master either didn't have anyone else to pick of the work that would fall on him after the promotion to journeyman or he wanted to keep drawing the money that was coming in from the family to pay for the training.

Just like martial arts ranking/promotion/titles, there were just as much (probably more) abuse of the system by people who were not using the system for what it was originally intended for - educational progression/development of the craft within a quality control structure. Some used it like people who abuse social services/foster parenting for personal gain.

It isn't the system that is the problem it is the perception and application/abuse.

There was no instructor in the Medieval model because you went from apprentice to journeyman to master. Legitimate instruction was carried out by active master/members of guildhouses who were awarded master craftsman status as fitting the trade. Only masters were allowed to take on apprentices - and were usually paid for the task of training and boarding them. For good or ill, these terms are titles/ranks associated with rights and priviledges/duties. They are markers of distinction, like belt ranks/titles that are philosophically based on skill and ability/contributions.

Journeyman were sometimes encouraged to work in pairs for security and mutual support during the development to master, but they were not allowed to take students and had to register with the local guild house where ever they went. There was a huge emphasis in lineage/apprenticeship/community within the trade. During the Medieval period, the trade guilds would put on religiously inspired plays that reflected their trade (Noah and the flood for shipwrights/carpenters, Jesus' water into wine sign for barrelwrights/coopers, The fishes and loaves story for fisherman and millers).

I understand the intention, but the message needs to be thematically consistent,thats all I am saying. I would say though that there are far more schools that recognize/award rank and title with integrity than corrupt ones. the attention goes to that crappy 10% though.

 

[Flatlander]

I do like the idea of 'craftsman' though. Because for those who weren't apprentices yet, could still be a craftsman. Which just sounds cool, IMO.

 

[Cruentus]

Paul Martin,

Very well thought out post. I appreciate your input.

2 major content things that I'll be most probably changing over the next week or so:

#1. The name "clann" will probably change to "gild" (guild). Although "clann" has special meaning in my family history, the word spelled differently also has a different kind of "special" meaning in american history that is very negative (Klu Klux Klan). Now...I could leave it, and probably attract a few new students from places like Howell MI., that is not the kind of clientel I want to attract. I have been thinking about "Gild" all week...and I am starting to like it. THe definition of gild (guild) from merriam-webster is: "an association of people with common interests, especially a medieval association of craftsmen." We do the "martial-craft," and with the certification structure, and such, the word "gild" may also be a good fit.

#2. Paul M., you are correct in that there are inconsistancies in my explaination of my certification system. The system itself is a good one, and the concept makes sense, but there is confusion in the way I explain how it fits together with history.

Basically, the idea behind is this...

Real World: You study a trade, craft, or subject, get a degree or certification, then go out and do your own work with it, chose to stay and gain more knowledge, or both.
Martial fantasy world: You study a trade or craft (martial arts) for 5, 10, 20 plus years, only in hopes of getting something, ANYTHING, from your instructor that will verify your proficiency. This could be enterence into the black belt club, getting a certian rank, title, or what have you. Meanwhile, while you are trying to attain this "thing" that will verify you as a better person/proficient martial artist, all your time and money goes to this higher power. And, if you ever become one of the few allowed to go out and do work, you will still find that all of the credit (and some money still) will not truely belong to you, and will go to the "higher power".

The real world system works well in real life, the fantasy world one does not. The real world system you pay for a service, and in return you get knowledge/skill without anything being held back, and you get verification that you attained this knowledge or skill. In the fantasy world you pay, and pay, and pay for "hope" that you will attain this higher level of knowledge. In the real world, you get to eat the carrot, in the fantasy world, the carrot is only dangled in front of your face. The fantasy world system, under any other circumstance, would be considered a cult. However, we let this behavior slide in Martial Arts. I believe (and you may or may not agree with this perception) that there are elements of this behavior that permiate a very high percentage of martial arts

My structure is what I am doing to combat this problem. I am chosing a real world certification system rather then a fantasy land ranking structure. It only happends to be one solution; others may deal with it in different ways.

However, I'll say again that your right in your assessment; so I need to revise my explainations, as I do see inconsistancies.

Thanks again!

:asian:

 

[Cruentus]

Ohh..and one more thing...

Not being afraid to ask for suggestions, getting input, and revising things as I go along (as I say in my site this is a "working process,") does 2 VEEERY BAAAD things for me:

#1. It shows, that (gasp) Paul Janulis does not know everything. This completely ruins the "supreme majestico grand master" status I am aiming for.

#2. It gives others ownership for having good ideas, completely ruining the perception that only I am allowed to have good ideas.

#3. It shows that I am still learning, which means (gasp again) that Paul Janulis does not know everything, again completely ruining that perception of "supreme majestico grand master" status that I was aiming for.

Man-o-man, I'll have to stop this crazyness, or all of those shrines that my students have for me will be left unattended.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Ohh..and one more thing...

Not being afraid to ask for suggestions, getting input, and revising things as I go along (as I say in my site this is a "working process,") does 2 VEEERY BAAAD things for me:

#1. It shows, that (gasp) Paul Janulis does not know everything. This completely ruins the "supreme majestico grand master" status I am aiming for.

#2. It gives others ownership for having good ideas, completely ruining the perception that only I am allowed to have good ideas.

#3. It shows that I am still learning, which means (gasp again) that Paul Janulis does not know everything, again completely ruining that perception of "supreme majestico grand master" status that I was aiming for.

Man-o-man, I'll have to stop this crazyness, or all of those shrines that my students have for me will be left unattended.

Hmmmm, 2 very bad things and then 1), 2) & 3), I can see why English and Poli Sci was your major .

 

[Enson]

its probably because you are using geocities but it brings on a lot of "pop ups" on my comp. see if you can get your own domain name.

peace

 

[loki09789]

Paul Martin,

Very well thought out post. I appreciate your input.

My structure is what I am doing to combat this problem. I am chosing a real world certification system rather then a fantasy land ranking structure. It only happends to be one solution; others may deal with it in different ways.

However, I'll say again that your right in your assessment; so I need to revise my explainations, as I do see inconsistancies.

Thanks again!

:asian:

Yup, worthy mission to shoot for. The rank structure as 'craft/art' based is a good idea too because it promotes skill focus. Personally, practicing what you preach is the best way to combat this 'martial fantasy' topic IMO. Focus on quality, set goals and train for them with integrity. Regardless of the framework, those things should be part of the program.

Question: Using the Guild/craft idea, what are you training your journeymen/women for when you talk about being able to 'apply' the skills that you instruct them in? Are they in a martial arts business/instructor program so that they can teach? Is it to prepare them to apply this craft in a service position (LEO/EMT/Military...). The craftsman model is about training people in a trade skill and a livelyhood. Will you be instituting business traning/planning for your journeyman/master class students who want to earn a living based on this skill? If they will be applying their martial craft as instructors, will you have an instructor training track as well?

We used the ranking/title system only for academic structure and skill progression - not for 'airs' or to extend the training time or hold anyone back. During the class, there were no belts worn, titles/rank used in talking to each other or formalities observed for any purpose other than respect for each other and the training heritage.

After a certain skill level, Jerome even changed how he introduced/addressed his senior BB's as training partners instead of students in recognition for us coming into our own and seeing us as peers, albeit junior in training because of time in training. We were even encouraged to become 'grad student/journeymen' types within the art because we had to find a topic to study/research/focus on so that we were applying our martial scholarly training to achieve mastery by hands on application.

It is nice to be in a training group that promotes growth and individual paths along with loyalty and mutual respect. I hope this structure works out for you.

 

[Littledragon]

Its nice but you should add some pictures.

 

[Cruentus]

Question: Using the Guild/craft idea, what are you training your journeymen/women for when you talk about being able to 'apply' the skills that you instruct them in? Are they in a martial arts business/instructor program so that they can teach? Is it to prepare them to apply this craft in a service position (LEO/EMT/Military...). The craftsman model is about training people in a trade skill and a livelyhood. Will you be instituting business traning/planning for your journeyman/master class students who want to earn a living based on this skill? If they will be applying their martial craft as instructors, will you have an instructor training track as well?

All good questions. In the medievel guilds, you had "apprentice, journeymans, master." There were only a few master craftsmen, and that was mostly done to control competition, even though it also helped maintain quality as well. Journeymen could go out and make money off their craft. Apprentices could not, but had to be accepted into the apprenticeship program, of which they did work for the master, but was fed and clothed and given allowence in return.

This structure has since been modernized; apprentices work for pay, and when they fully learn their craft, they become a journeymen and can teach, and get paid a journeymens wage.

Because we no longer live in Medieval times, and because modern times truely does not value "martial craft" enough for everyone to make a living off of it, I have modified my certification program to fit the needs of the group, the nature "martial craft," and the modern real world.

So, with that, I have a few different programs. I have a Self-Defense program, a Journeymans program, and an instructors certification program. Let me run through the gambit...

Self Defense Program: No certifications here. Someone just wants to learn basic self defense in todays world. Instead of wasting time and money at a martial arts school, they can come to me for private instruction. I will tailor a program that will suit their needs, and in a short amount of time, they will have the knowledge that they are looking for.

Journaymens program: This is also a private program, and certification is involved. This is if someone wants specialized knowledge in a specific area, or with a specific tool (knife, stick, etc.). Depending on their needs, I tailor a program that will suit them. At the end of the program, they are a certified "Journeymans" in whatever craft we trained. What does this mean? This means that I certify, or "vouch" that they are proficient in that area. I am not "Vouching" for their teaching abilities. Now, because I am not pigeon holing anyone, I am not going to say what they can or can't do with their journeymans...I am just vouching that they are proficient in an area. Now, for this area...being able to "apply" their skills means that they will be able to perform proficiency in that area of study.

Instructor Certification: This is what we cover in the general class, and this is where I will certify instructors, with the level of proficiency based off skill and teaching ability. The first level is no level...meaning that I am glad that they are a member or our group, but they are not ready for me to "Vouch" for them yet. "Apprentice" means that I will "vouch" that they have a good base knowledge of the arts based on basic guidlines, but I am not willing to "vouch" that they have knowledge enough to teach yet. "Instructor" means that I will "vouch" that they have instructor level abilities, and that they can teach. To answer one of your questions here, "yes," I will have seen and helped them where needed on their teaching so I can rightfully "vouch" for it. "Master" certification means that I can vouch that they are at mastery level, and "Grandmaster" certification means that they can certifiy for my group as if they were me (carry on the legacy). The thing about all this stuff is that I don't tell anyone what they can or can't do...I only "vouch" for them through certification. What they do with it is up to them.

So...to further answer your questions, the "self defense" and "journeymens" programs are taylored to fit the individuals needs. The knife program for a civilian will be tailored much different then the knife program for the military operator, for example. So...the nature of the "craft" will depend on their individual needs.

Now, the instructor certification program follows a specific guideline, or curiculum, designed to help the student develop both martial and teaching skills in a well rounded fashion. If they want to make "a business" with those skills, they can, but this program is more designed in honing a craft in a similar way that an art school may hone your painting skills. You may never make money off of painting, but this is still your craft and passion.

I hope I made sense, and answered what you are asking.

It is nice to be in a training group that promotes growth and individual paths along with loyalty and mutual respect. I hope this structure works out for you.

Thanks Again!!

Paul Janulis

btw...I can relate to the idea of not using the term "students." I am getting out of that habit, and trying to use the term "members" myself. :asian:

 

[loki09789]

All good questions. In the medievel guilds, you had "apprentice, journeymans, master." There were only a few master craftsmen, and that was mostly done to control competition, even though it also helped maintain quality as well. Journeymen could go out and make money off their craft. Apprentices could not, but had to be accepted into the apprenticeship program, of which they did work for the master, but was fed and clothed and given allowence in return.

This structure has since been modernized; apprentices work for pay, and when they fully learn their craft, they become a journeymen and can teach, and get paid a journeymens wage.

Because we no longer live in Medieval times, and because modern times truely does not value "martial craft" enough for everyone to make a living off of it, I have modified my certification program to fit the needs of the group, the nature "martial craft," and the modern real world.

In the old medieval model there were actually quite a few masters proportionate to the trade/skill population. The general peace keeping tactic was to spread them out geographically (part of the reason for the term Journeyman, because they became 'master craftsman' by furthering their craft skill outside of the market demographic of their mentor/master).

Basically, the senior master of a local guild house had masters, journeyman and apprentices under his 'jurisdiction' of guild soveriegnity - much like a Local noble would have subordinate nobles who swore loyalty to him. The guild structure was based on the aristocratic culture - A hierarchy of ranks that each had duties and limitations. Much like the senior most rank promotions in martial arts, the titles and rank of the guild hierarchy were as much about political/executive/administrative ability and contribution to the guild itself as it did with the actual artistic skill of the craftsman.

Even in the current trade craft model, I don't think that journeyman are instructors per say. There are instructors of trade skills, but their teaching certification is a different training track from their skill track. The minimum instructor/skill level in order to be licensed as an instructor might be journeyman, but they still go through instructor training. Teaching is recognized as a craft of its own.

As far as the modern times not valuing 'martial craft' I would disagree. I think the modern age values it as part of a hero/icon/role model - consider how much hype there is around comic book based movie heroes, the new Arthur movie and such.

I think the intrinsic, moral, cultural value of the martial craft as a tool of personal fitness/psychological/spiritual development is alive and well. I do think that people are being dooped into thinking that the structure and techniques/goals of their current 'traditional training' is directly linked to the ways of the 'ancient warriors' when there is very little actual link but tons of recreation/redefining what the 'ancient warrior' really was and was not like. Is the recreation/redefining bad? Not necessarily. It is a common practice to redefine an ancient hero/icon to fit the needs of the age that the prepetuation is taking place in. Is the ignorance/miseducation of the historical facts a bad thing? Well, call it part of the learning process that starts with aspiring to attain/match and ideal/icon and finishes with toppling that ideal/icon when you realize further along that journey what is and is not real. We all do it with someone/something that we idealize/romanticize. After a while you do start to notice the staple in the centerfold's belly button.

I think it is valued as part of what our current military/civil servants as LEO/Agents of the law need to be effective at their job. I think it is no recognized as necessary for the average citizen to be trained as 'martial craftsmem/women'. I think that "martial craft" has been more valued as part of individual need in times of more crime/instability than we live in in suburbia/first world countries. I would rather have my son be safe and free enough to focus on art and education and not have to focus on learning 'martial craft' as a necessary part of his survival. He will learn it because he wants to (which he does) and because I think it has value as a developmental tool along with self defense prep. It is all brain training. Some edu-experts call it multi-sensory learning. I just say it makes sense to involve as many experiences/senses in the learning/development process.

In your website, the mission/philosophy comes off as more "anti-martial arts structure" and less about the positive intent of your chosen titles, ranking/certification and structure. I say ditch the "they are lying and doing it wrong" message and stick to the "I find this a positive structure for me" message. Otherwise your respectability/credibility as a 'master' because you have trained in that structure is undermined, along with the conflicting message of respecting your teachers but being critical of the culture of martial fantasy they came from and perpetuated.

If the goal is to be contraversial as an attention grabber/advertising strategy go for it. If the idea is that you are being proactive and taking your group in a better direction, then the positive needs to be emphasised over the negative. If the proof is on the floor and in demonstrative skill, words should not be the battle weapon to 'combat' the problem. Also remember, bandits/outlaws/thieves (even in an artistic sense) don't conduct open warfare or draw unwanted attention to themselves, they pick and time campaigns and missions for maximum results from minimal effort.

misusing or misinterpretting the historical inspirations could lead to criticism of just establishing a martial fantasy of a different form whereas a thematic consisitency would reduce that particular chink in your stance/position/presentation.

 

[Flatlander]

Tulisan, I have a question. Is being an instructor full time a future goal of yours, or do you intend to carry it on as a part-time thing? Do you intend for the site to act as a draw for more students (advertising), or more as a public information type thing, as in, buddy asks your student, "what's this martial art you do? who teaches it, what are the details?", and student says "check out the website, its all there."

I think that the intent of the site is an important factor to consider when critiquing the message.:asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

As to Journeymen/women not being teachers, this may be true, on the average. Yet there were many a case when a senior Journeyman would take on an aprrentice to not only help but to also learn what the journeyman could teach him. Agree that said apprentice may not learn as much or as fast as he would under a master of the craft, yet the apprentice could still be taught and still learn.

Just my thoughts
:asian: