Article: Thoughts on Bugei Studies by Karl Friday

I want to say that I was hesitant to again re-enter this thread because I sort of made it a self-imposed rule to either not comment at all, or at the most very little, when replies come in "off topic".

In truth, I found Bruce's comments way off topic. For while his comments may be interesting to some (I cannot count myself among these folks), they certainly never addressed the points brought up by this thread.

Kami's position is even more off topic in my opinion. It is silly to assume that my name is not what I say it is, or that Professor Friday and I were personally attacking each other, or that in some way both of these incorrect assumptions on his part invalidate what was being said in my posts. FYI: This is the way that academics talk. Somewhere along all the schooling, you learn to differentiate yourself from your ideas - or at least you better if you want to emotionally survive in an arena where difference and debate are the underlying structure of everything you do. Disagreeing and/or being critical of Professor Friday's ideas is not attacking him personally. It is out of respect for Professor Friday that I took his ideas seriously - enough to truly ponder over them and then to comment upon them to the best of my ability. In short, as a professional scholar, Professor Friday clearly did not leave this thread because he felt "attacked". Rather, as he stated himself, at the beginning of his second post, before he even read my second reply to him, he left because he was both without the time or inclination to continue.

That said, and this is the reason I decided again to reply to this thread, I wanted to (re)point out the truth that Mr. Ledyard put before us all. Namely, that one has the right as prospective reader to not read what is before him/her. I find that to be totally filled with virtue. I too think it would be a great disservice to this forum for individuals to raise criticisms based solely upon stylistic matters (as Bruce and Kami did). We learn nothing from each other if we begin our conversations, or worse end them, with denouncements of writing styles.

And finally - in an attempt to clear his good name. :-) I also wanted to point out that I do consider myself to be on good terms with Mr. Gordan. And I am also sure that we would have a great time training together - based upon his other posts that I have read. I did not at all find his first comment to be objectionable. I took it in the light-hearted manner in which it was offered. For I also find that friendly banter is a nice part of these threads, and I did in fact have nice conversations with him via small posts on this thread. Plus - He is also responsible for bringing Professor Friday back into (for the first time) this thread - one should note. And we should all be thankful for that. I know that I am.

It would be great, now, if we could get this topic going again - or at least get it back on topic. If not - let's all just move on. :-)

Thank you,
DMV ("D" is for David)

Dear Mr. Valadez,

I made a good intentioned commentary but since it was misunderstood perhaps I should clear things a little bit. My post to you was very educated. Yours was agressive (calling me silly do not seem correct for an academic who knows how to differentiate a person from his ideas). Also I never assumed your name was not what you said it was. What I did say was that "SINCE YOUR PROFILE GIVES ALMOST NO INFORMATION ABOUT YOURSELF, I CAN'T EVEN PRESUME YOUR NAME IS REALLY DAVID". As an academic, you should know the difference.
And this is your profile :
First Name David
Last Name Valadez
Location
Dojo
Interests
Primary Teacher(s)
Occupation
Biography
Birthday N/A
Sorry but anyone who hides every information about himself, shouldn't be surprised if we can't be sure about his name... Of course, you have the right to hide all informations about yourself.
Again I did not say you and Prof. Friday were "attacking each other". What I said was "To some people, lists are places for fighting to the death over some ideas and to show people how intelligent we are. To defeat someone else becomes more important than to ponder over ideas." Sorry but that's how I read your posts.
On the other side, you are right : My commentary WAS off-topic, in a way and I never discussed your points, so it's impossible to say that "I was trying to invalidate your points". How could that be since I never did that? My point was :
"Anyway, I believe what that guy was trying to say is this is no place for essays or excessive length writing."
When you stress your academic acumen and the academic viewpoint with which you were conducting this discussion, I believe you made my point. This is a general list with all kinds of people. You do not "raise the level" all of a sudden. That should be a gradual proccess. And anyway, the place for high-level academic discussion is not on this kind of list. There are University Fora that are intended for them. And, please, observe that I did not say I didn't like or understand them. My problem is not personal. Here, the discussion is open and public and, as such, should be conducted preferably in a non-academic way. That does not mean the discussion shouldn't be intelligent. I enjoy that too.

Originally posted by senshincenter Disagreeing and/or being critical of Professor Friday's ideas is not attacking him personally.

KAMI : And where did I say that? Again it seems you presume too much. What I did say was :
"Perhaps, Dr. Friday was wise and retreated from a discussion that was becoming essentially personal, no more interesting to anyone."

Originally posted by senshincenter It would be great, now, if we could get this topic going again - or at least get it back on topic. If not - let's all just move on. :-)

KAMI : Feel free and I really hope you have a return, even if I don't think this should be the place for THIS kind of debate. But I wouldn't dream of trying to stop you, even if I had the power to do that.
I just lament you took it so badly, you felt the need to call me silly. But even so, that's your opinion and you have your right to express it. On my part, no hard feelings, just the observation.
With all due respect

Hey Chuck,

I really wish I had kept that article I saw about the older evidence in North America, might have been USA today magazine?

Anyway, because of Ancestry of my namesakes being lost until a few years ago, I have been looking for clues as to why my uncles and father were so involved in the Indian affairs of Six Nations. Getting caught up on a culture whose history is vertually verbal until the USA comes into being is pretty tough. But when the notes/diarys of Quakers and Jesuit missionarys confirm much of what is spoken from their journals and historical accounts ... I have had to rethink the learn white history or Manifest Destiny verses what actually was an early genocide to Native Americans by the so called settlers of this country.

That aside, I am repulsed to the thought that those studying Aikido have thrown themselves almost to mythical purportions to learning Japanese culture while neglecting the history and cultures of the land you live in? I too am guilty and repulsed at my own ignorance as I continue to read, study and learn, but at least I am trying to see what really was verses the glossy text history book we all get in our school learning?

Maybe I am most guilty of being the independent student (is that what this Bugei thread is about?) who is on one hand the actual student who studies without a teacher, but on the other hand studies Aikido with a teacher? I guess I would rather find the value of trying than being told it is impossible.

In our last one hundred years we have prove we can do the impropable, the impossible just takes longer...

I guess I could pull out my College text of history of Japan and China, but isn't that another partial text with clinical quotes by professors? No, there will always be those who look from inside and outside ... why didn't Donn Draeger write more when he was on the inside, I am sure he would have cleared this up.

ARE we ever going to get a simple three or four sentence explanation of what this thread was about?

Seriously.

I figured four sentences would be about the maximum for confusion, but if it can be done in less ...

I understand the intellectual mind has a hard time actually making a commitment, but maybe it is time to do just that, and accept the consequences?

Thanks.