Let me just append to Ellis' remarks a few relevant facts and glosses:
3) FACT: The Asahi Shimbun provided corporate backing for Hisa's group. GLOSS: Hisa's relationship with Ueshiba, and later, Takeda, was based on OPM -- Other People's Money. Hisa -- not Ueshiba -- was ultimately the gate that stood between Takeda and the Asahi Shimbun's money. Without Ueshiba's services as a buffer or a cut-out, Takeda had two choices: 1) be nice to Hisa or 2) be broke, but for what Sagawa and Horikawa brought in. The choice he made is obvious.
4) Much has been made of Takeda's connections among judges, police, and military circles, with an attendant suggestion that these connections somehow prove that he was a man of good character. To this, one can only say that for every Thurgood Marshall there's a Clarence Thomas, for every Bill Bratton there's a Bernie Kerik, and for every Eric Shinseki there's a William Boykin. The notion that those connections prove anything about Takeda's character is, in a word, silly.
Random musings, take 'em for what they're worth.
Hi Fred no problem with 1 or 2
3 and 4 are as presumptious to imply yet again...a nagative.
To assume Takeda was broke unless he formed that relatonship expresses a knowledge that you simply do not have. His eimoroku clearly shows many 10 seminars happening before and during, and we don't know what else he was doing, his land holdings, and houses. Secondly, and once again from Aikidoka- the argument appeals only to lower motives and drives...by choice without offering or noting more positive possibilities. One dimensional character fiction writing makes bad "B" movies-not research.
I am looking for multiple possibilties until one is proven. Most of the time there isn't even the potential for one in things I have seen. The forgone conclusion before you even begin to read is Takeda is a miscrient in all aspects and has the all the nuance and complexity of a black masked thug skulking in the dark who's only motivation is money.
It would be hard to find such one-dimensional characterizations of Adolh Hitler, much less some Budo guy of Takeda's stature.
And why are we not discussin Ueshiba;s lying?
Why not the possibilty since there is some evidence to support it in the old AJ's including pictures?
Let's just stick to slamming Takeda.
Lets also add a list of modern men of exemplary character who also fit the exmple shall we? As the predominant view is to only slam Takeda. In context, all things being equal, as was the norm, I think he woud have had to comport himself in-keeping with a certain standard of decency. Nothing you have offered would counter that except to suggest a negative without due cause. which seems...silly.
I see no purpose in reaching for a negative that defies the common standard. Except by choice and design - to yet again reach for and maybe fashion a negative conclusion out of thin air.
Most of his life is not known, his behaviour uneventful. What we have are *some* of his outbursts and strong statements, some of his behavious with his son-one son.. We have no knowledge of anything to approach the fullness of the mans life. Opting for either or characterizations; good or bad is premature and presumpitve.
When I see one dimensional views of relationships and people to include teachers and multiple students it smacks of revisionism and aggenda, and questions credibility.
Ellis and Peter have spent a great deal of time researching so it will prove to be an interesting, multi-dimensional view of these complex men and their own relationships. One I hope to see express some fulness of each of their lives.