The Title of Martial Arts Master

[arnisador]

As for skill to ego ratios, when I was instructing hapkido and kumdo at a Korean school, myself and every other sadan and higher instructor that were there were introduced by the GM as "Master."

...which is not the same as introducing oneself that way. I rarely introduce myself as "Doctor" but am often introduced that way by others. (Physicians are a special case w.r.t. that title as it also signifies their application--indeed, in many Commonwealth countries physicians have baccalaureate degrees but are accorded the title 'Doctor'.) I'm not trying to prohibit anyone from calling themselves what they want. I'm saying that in my experience those who introduce themselves as 'Master' are generally letting me know that they're not strong enough to let their skill speak for themselves. Again, there have been exceptions.

If for a WMA it's the right title, then by all means use it. My experience in this is limited but fencers I have met have been more likely to be addressed as "Maestro"--clearly a nod to the culture of origin--or to say that they're a master-level instructor, not that it's important that I so address them.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

...which is not the same as introducing oneself that way. I rarely introduce myself as "Doctor" but am often introduced that way by others. (Physicians are a special case w.r.t. that title as it also signifies their application--indeed, in many Commonwealth countries physicians have baccalaureate degrees but are accorded the title 'Doctor'.) I'm not trying to prohibit anyone from calling themselves what they want. I'm saying that in my experience those who introduce themselves as 'Master' are generally letting me know that they're not strong enough to let their skill speak for themselves. Again, there have been exceptions.

If for a WMA it's the right title, then by all means use it. My experience in this is limited but fencers I have met have been more likely to be addressed as "Maestro"--clearly a nod to the culture of origin--or to say that they're a master-level instructor, not that it's important that I so address them.

I agree; as I said, there is no context given by the OP for this. Is is in the school only? Or is he demanding it at the ice cream parlor? If he's asking it in the context of his studio, then it is perfectly reasonable. If not, then I'd say he has some issues with blending studio etiquette with everyday etiquette and possibly some ego issues.

 

[lklawson]

Thank you for your input to my post and to my opinion on the matter of "Modesty and humility". As this may seem to be a "uniquely modern concept", I can assure you that back in my beginnings in martial arts, it was not only a requirement, but, a must for personal dojo survival.
The early 60s, when I started my journey,

Perhaps you and I are out of sync on the application of the term "modern." Generally, for me, in terms of Martial Arts, particularly in the West, "modern" is post-WWI or sometimes a bit earlier. Sometimes around the beginning of the 20th Century, depending on what, specifically, we're discussing.

"Modesty and humility" will get a person much more respect then requiring people to call you "Master" anything.

Depends on whether or not you can back it up.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[seasoned]

Perhaps you and I are out of sync on the application of the term "modern." Generally, for me, in terms of Martial Arts, particularly in the West, "modern" is post-WWI or sometimes a bit earlier. Sometimes around the beginning of the 20th Century, depending on what, specifically, we're discussing.

Yes, I was thinking modern as current.

Depends on whether or not you can back it up.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

100 years ago calling yourself "master" could get a person killed under that time frame, but, now a days and in many cases the word foolish comes to mind.
Nice chatting with you Kirk, see you around the board..........

 

[Hyoho]

That would be kinda interesting and funny to come across one of your own students or previous students calling themselves Master. Hey, but maybe that simply means you are the "Grand Master" - congratulations, you finally have credibility in the martial arts community!! : )

Ah but this guy has a Sokeship!

Mr Sullivan has a valid point though. Master is an English word.

The japanese word sensei is grossly overused. Even my dentist is sensei.
Sohke was originally used by Kabuki headmasters. When they started to teach swordsmanship as an art they also started to use the term.

Shihan usually describes people teaching hand to hand techniques ans is more localized term. But its not always the case.

Biggest thing is the self imposed factor. Or who actually gave them that title. Perhaps gave is the operative word in most cases.

 

[Argus]

What is he teaching, at any rate? And how does he use the title?

For the record, in the case of Japanese, it's quite rude to refer to yourself with any kind of honorifics.
You call yourself "Joe." Other people call you "Joe-sensei."

While rules of etiquette regarding this vary across countries / languages, I'd say that even in English it sounds rather arrogant to refer to yourself that way.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Ah but this guy has a Sokeship!

Mr Sullivan has a valid point though. Master is an English word.

Aside from being English, it is also not used in conversation by MA-ists in the way that it is traditionally used by those who hold the title in a western context. I see comments along the lines of, "a master implies that (s)he has learned all that they can; we're all just students, etc."

I'm not criticizing the sentiment, but in a western context, being a master implies the ability to produce master level work and to train up others in the trade, be it the martial arts or carpentry. Originally, a master tradesman had to produce a work of quality that was deemed by his guild to be of master level quality. It did not mean that he couldn't improve or that he couldn't learn anything further.

Master is also commonly used in the context of proficiency; when you've mastered addition and subtraction, you get to learn multiplication.

At least in the martial arts, the term has been misused to imply a level of greatness. This probably comes from the movies coupled with the egos of people who want to be perceived as being some kind of ultimate warrior or some other such nonsense.

In reality, the title of master in the fields where it is relevant is simply someone with a number of years under his belt (usually quite a bit more than it would take for one to reach fifth dan) who has learned his craft well enough to produce high quality work and who is capable of taking on an apprentice or students. Master tradesmen are constantly learning new things, as their trades evolve and they need to continually recertify for different aspects of their trade.

Contrast that to the image of the Asian martial arts master (who may or may not be Asian him/herself) who demands obedience and deference from his/her students and who is held in awe by all around him/her. The two are very different, and outside of the martial arts, the word doesn't carry the kind of baggage that gets discussed here.

 

[Stargazer]

Thank you to everyone who replied. To respond, I've seen three self-titled masters recently, each gave me pause.

1. The Newbie Instructor - a novice teacher, under 30 years old, but did study the art for 10-15 years, wanted to be called in and out of dojo and put such titles in ads, did get a bunch of students from it, not a bad person, but I don't think understood the term

2. Retired Master - called himself Master or something higher, others said he once was very, very good, could not say either way, but did not have skilled students and was dishonest himself

3. Middle Aged Master - Made request to be called Master and would especially insist on it when surrounded by junior martial artists, seemed an ego issue here

In all cases, I did not refer to them as Master. There are true masters out there and maybe it wasn't proper etiquette, but I think the title Master should be reserved for the truly great martial arts teachers.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Thank you to everyone who replied. To respond, I've seen three self-titled masters recently, each gave me pause.

1. The Newbie Instructor - a novice teacher, under 30 years old, but did study the art for 10-15 years, wanted to be called in and out of dojo and put such titles in ads, did get a bunch of students from it, not a bad person, but I don't think understood the term

In his dojo, reasonable. Outside of his dojo, inappropriate; dojo etiquette should not be mixed with normal social conventions.

2. Retired Master - called himself Master or something higher, others said he once was very, very good, could not say either way, but did not have skilled students and was dishonest himself

If he is dishonest, his level of mastery, past or present, is irrelevant. Best to keep such people out of your life.

3. Middle Aged Master - Made request to be called Master and would especially insist on it when surrounded by junior martial artists, seemed an ego issue here

People with ego issues really have an insecurity issue. Unless it is in his own studio, it is probably not appropriate. See dojo etiquette above.

In all cases, I did not refer to them as Master. There are true masters out there and maybe it wasn't proper etiquette, but I think the title Master should be reserved for the truly great martial arts teachers.

True master and truly great martial art teachers is a subjective consideration. I prefer to go by the conventions of their art and their organization if applicable.

A first dan KKW taekwondoist is legitimately titled master in English speaking countries, regardless of their ego. There are master qualifications in different fencing organizations. These are concrete qualifications, not nebulous or subjective ones. I'll leave it to others to parse out whether one is a "true" master or a truly great teacher. If I am contributing in a positive way to my students' lives, then I'm happy.

 

[Stargazer]

Thank you, Daniel. Very well put.

 

[Hyoho]

One more issue involving the title I don't think was mentioned. MONEY.

I'm good at what I do, pay me! Not only that but I'm the only master around.. pay me more. I have certificates

 

[lklawson]

100 years ago calling yourself "master" could get a person killed under that time frame, but, now a days and in many cases the word foolish comes to mind.

Yup, that's part of being able to back it up. Call yourself a "Master" of fencing in 1750 France and see if someone doesn't challenge you to a duel.

Nowadays, there are slightly less lethal ways that you have to back it up, but it can still be put to the test.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

One more issue involving the title I don't think was mentioned. MONEY.

I'm good at what I do, pay me! Not only that but I'm the only master around.. pay me more. I have certificates

Well, that is one of the advantages of being a Master Craftsman. Master Electricians demand (and receive) more compensation than Apprentice Electricians.

The problem with applying it to martial arts is that, even when there are objective standards for skill and knowledge, they apply only within that specific branch of that specific martial art. As I wrote regarding Black Belt certifications, what one art's certifying body considers "Master" should be irrelevant to another art, and the more different they are, the less relevant it should be. A Shotokan certifying body has no authority to judge a Tae Kwon Do student's rank, but we might reasonably believe they could have some insight due to strong similarities between the styles. On the other hand, the same Shotokan certifying body has far less insight, but still some, for Boxe Francaise. Finally, one would expect said Shotokan certifying body to have almost no insight on the certifications for Catch as Catch Can wrestling.

In short, while I may be offended by (and grouse about) some organization that certifies a 15 year old kid as a "Master" after studying for 3 years, it's really not my business to judge it (although I admit, being human, I probably will).

There's only four things to do about it.

First, we could have a Universal Certifying Body which all martial arts must submit to. Can you see this ever happening? Me neither? Nor do I think it's a "good idea." It's a horrible idea.

Second, we could do it the way they did it in the old days. If someone pops up claiming to be a "Master" the local Guild representative would send someone (or several) out to "examine" him. Alternately, some other Master would spontaneously decide to go test 'em out. People died.

Third, we could just accept that, barring the two previous options, different organizations are going to decide whatever they want. Live and let live. Yeah, I don't see this happening either. Just goes against human nature.

Finally, we can continue to gripe about it, debating with friends and various interested communities what constitutes as "Master." But, ultimately, acknowledging we are powerless to address the "issue." Yeah, that sounds like what we'll end up continuing to do. Sucks, but at least no one gets killed in challenge matches.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[arnisador]

I will say this: I have no problem with Master Ken.

More seriously, I suspect the actor chose "Master" in part for the reasons we're discussing here: Describing himself as "Master Ken" let's you know up-front what you're getting.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Eh. My personal feeling is that unless an organization is heavily involved in the grading process, it really comes down to the school. For example, the Kukkiwon sets some measure of grading standards but is not involved in grading at an organizational level until (I believe) sixth or seventh dan. But all of the issues around time to and age of dan graded students are between first and fourth degree.

The FIK and it's national affiliates, on the other hand, require organizational grading for ikkyu (first kyu/geub; the belt prior to black) and higher. So unaffiliated schools not withstanding, you tend to have a more consistent minimum quality in kendo schools (note that by consistent, I do not mean better or worse as compared to other arts).

I don't think that one is necesarilly better than the other; each has its own strengths and weaknesses. Within an art, there is a general sense of what is good and what is great and what is subpar. Merit badges that reflect rank, be it belts, scarves, sashes, or patches, build a sense of expectation based upon what rank they represent, but if you look past the badge and just at the practitioner, you will see simply the quality of their practice irrespective of their badges. The quality is either there or it isn't, in either the instructor or in his/her students. If the quality of the students is consistently high, chances are that the instructor is good. If the quality of the instructor is high, then it is likely that they have earned the rank they claim, but it is no guarantor that they are in any way qualified to teach.

The motivation and goals of the school also come into play. Is it a lifestyle/fitness setting with people who go, enjoy themselves, get some exercise, and then go back to their regular lives? Is the school competitive? Is is self defense focused? Is it geared to kids?

Based on what the school's focus is, I have different expectations. Now, if a lifestyle/fitness focused school claims to be the cutting edge of the modern warrior, or some such nonsense, then I will judge them based on their quality as compared to their stated goals, which will probably not be favorable.

If you're an instructor, be honest about what you are, what you're doing, and what you're capabilities are. I hold my grades in kendo from a non affiliated school and am myself non affiliated. So if you want to make the US Mens kendo team, you will have to go elsewhere or at some point, you will have to leave my school and train in a dojo that is connected to the AUSKF. I'm not a hachidan, I'm not a prolific tournament champion, and I don't hold a grandios title. I do know what I'm doing and if you're familiar with kendo, you will find that I'm not teaching anything off the wall or progressive.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

First, we could have a Universal Certifying Body which all martial arts must submit to. Can you see this ever happening? Me neither? Nor do I think it's a "good idea." It's a horrible idea.

You mean like this organization: http://www.worldblackbeltbureau.com/

 

[Balrog]

Modesty and humility are but a few of the tenants of a student of martial arts. A student is what we ALL are. A master of anything has limited them self and learning stops...........

Not really. I have been awarded the title of Master Instructor, and to my way of thinking, that just means I'm an advanced student.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

A few thoughts on this.

Modesty and humility are but a few of the tenants of a student of martial arts.

In terms of modern (within the past century) martial arts, these are expressed in the tenets of more than one art. But martial arts or no, they are good qualities to have regardless of the field of study. Ever notice how top level athletes who display these qualities are accorded greater respect than similarly skilled athletes who are self important?

A student is what we ALL are.

Agreed. And anyone who thinks that they aren't is missing out.

A master of anything has limited them self and learning stops...........

I disagree with this, not because I think that you're wrong, but because I think you're using the term "master" in a way that goes beyond what the term actually defines. There definitely are people who hold the title who really don't understand it and who hold themselves up as being some kind Shaw Brothers kung fu movie master. These people paint themselves into a corner by espousing their skill and knowledge and by asking for unquestioning loyalty and obedience. This is, of course, to mask any shortcomings.

Such a person may actually be a master, but not any master that you or I would want to study under.

 

[lklawson]

You mean like this organization: http://www.worldblackbeltbureau.com/

The reasons why that hasn't worked are good examples of what I mean.

What I'm talking about, however is more like this:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.martial-arts/regulate$20martial$20arts/rec.martial-arts/Zl5_mm53AHg/X3uHz7dosWoJ
or
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.martial-arts/RDRrFssqiYc[1-25-false]

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[jks9199]

Well, that is one of the advantages of being a Master Craftsman. Master Electricians demand (and receive) more compensation than Apprentice Electricians.

The problem with applying it to martial arts is that, even when there are objective standards for skill and knowledge, they apply only within that specific branch of that specific martial art. As I wrote regarding Black Belt certifications, what one art's certifying body considers "Master" should be irrelevant to another art, and the more different they are, the less relevant it should be. A Shotokan certifying body has no authority to judge a Tae Kwon Do student's rank, but we might reasonably believe they could have some insight due to strong similarities between the styles. On the other hand, the same Shotokan certifying body has far less insight, but still some, for Boxe Francaise. Finally, one would expect said Shotokan certifying body to have almost no insight on the certifications for Catch as Catch Can wrestling.

It's not really very different in the trades. A Master Plumber isn't judged or examined by a Master Carpenter or the Electrician's Union; he's evaluated by other plumbers. The differences between the trades are just more evident than differences between some martial arts.