Chuck Kuske wrote:
So, organizations are important when they function to preserve tradition. They're not at all important otherwise.
I agree, but as a newbie, I would add a second important (and apparently opposite) point: an organization should have the courage to recognize new talents (both in practicing and in teaching) and mantain the teaching and didactical core of the organisation up-to-date.
Since MA organisations are strictly pyramidal and sometimes "genetic" in nature, It seems to me that they unfortuantely tend to stagnate or split too much, focusing too heavily on "fading away" figures or parental links and not supporting in time (or adeguately) new real talents, losing them due to frustration.... as Jim stated, too many pedestals out there.
Tradition is good, but progress and talent are good, too; only a wise mix of tradition and renewing (expecially from a didactical stand point) may keep a MA in good health, IMHO.
Traditions are the roots, but innovations and new practiotioners are the leafs: all of them may fall while roots are still living, but only a strictly cooperation between them makes the tree shine trough decades and sometimes centuries.... and the fallen leafs contribute to the roots strengthening.
No roots and the tree dies; no leafs and the roots cannot survive for a long time. Want a healthy tree? Take care of both.