I've wanted to write a post like this almost for as long as I have been writing my blog. Romanticizing the art is in my mind a huge topic and I'll post from time to time on different aspects as they come into focus. My audience for this foray into romanticization is going to be narrow but I've learned some hard lessons from romanticizing the art and my hope in writing this post is to better understand those mistakes and pitfalls and to hopefully prevent others from making the same mistakes I made.
Let's take a look at the word romanticize - and be clear on its meaning. To romanticize something is, according to Google to: "deal with or describe in an idealized or unrealistic fashion; make (something) seem better or more appealing than it really is." Nothing in Taekwon-Do is more romanticized as the title and rank Master, save potentially by the title Grand Master.
The problem with "Master" is that it is a word full of connotation and in Taekwon-Do is both a rank and a title - so in a way it has double the amount of connotation as it normally does. It is rank, in that the title comes at a specific dan ranking. This is problematic. First, not every individual who gets to a dan rank is the same. Of course the same can be said about 1st dan, but the title of "black belt", I would argue has a compartmentalized connotation that is unique to the martial arts. Its main origin and meaning stems from the martial arts, so it is insulated from external connotation. "Master" carries a connotation from the non martial arts world and more importantly, means many things that the founders probably did not intend. Let's not forget that Sabeom-nim is correctly translated as "honored instructor" which contains nothing regarding a proficiency level. Gwanjang-nim or school owner / highest rank (note, not grand master) is also lacking in a proficiency level on the language of origin side. Yet here many of us are, getting hung up over what amounts to be a mistranslated title. To come full circle, Master is simply a title - since it is given arbitrarily with a rank, but this is where the connotations come in. Some see Master as being fully proficient in a thing. Some go so far as to see a true "Master" as being someone who can make no mistake in the art. In some cases, people genuinely believe that even if they have achieved the rank of master they should shy away from it. They exude a humility that is saintly. That's ok with me, even if I don't agree, I ultimately believe that you can never be too humble. Others though take the rank of Master and wield it like a weapon, oppressing students and committing any number of wrongs in the name of being top dog. This is unacceptable and is clearly a romanticization of the term Master.
My personal experiences with the romanticization of Master saw me lose one of the most influential martial artists in my life to the romanticized notion of Master. Here was a man I would come to learn didn't want to test for 4th because he felt that no one would put the effort in that he would to attain the rank of master, but yet they'd be promoted to the same rank as him. He was exceptional, and maybe was accurate about his abilities and potential training regiments, or maybe was an ego maniac; regardless he was operating from a romanticized concept of Master, and one that was sadly, not at all accurate. He left, a martyr to his own imagined cause. I have no doubt that he wasn't the only black belt ever to fall victim to their own sense of rank and title.
Years and years later when I would find myself late in my time as 3rd dan with the green light to test, I found myself with all kinds of doubt - in my eyes I was no where near as good at TKD as this person who shunned testing and walked away entirely. How could I possibly be worthy of potentially having the title when he didn't test? It wasn't easy; I tormented myself and held myself to a standard which was so high -- too high, but thankfully in the end, I came to my senses. I realized many things were wrong with my outlook on the art, and over time, my thought process changed and I could embrace the challenge of my 4th dan test (in front of our patriarch) and the title it held. Later I realized that it was the deeper self awareness that was the true accomplishment of the entire ordeal. In thinking about this post, I spoke to another friend and master who had a similar tale of self awareness as his indicator that it was time. There is nothing unworldly about a 4th dan and above, in my organization or any org for that matter, with exception for those absolute top members that date back to Korea and the art's inception. I feel pretty confident in saying that my peers and the instructors that came before me would say that the title of master simply means that we put in a lot of hours, and a lot of dedication to both the physical and mental aspects of the art. It means that the art resonated with us, and we found a way to keep coming back, to keep practicing and to keep refining and to keep thinking. Finally we give back, we share our love of the art and our knowledge of it.
This isn't a post to diminish the significance of any rank (be it 4th for my group, or 7th or 8th for others), but rather is an attempt to view the title without romanticization. There is nothing wrong with accepting the title of master and it should be a huge source of pride if you have made it in the art for that long. Just don't make it out to be something bigger than it is, some impossible position which grants incredible powers -- because it isn't that. In the end you're always still a student of the art, no matter how good you are and no matter how long you have practiced it and that equalizes us all.
No comments:
Post a Comment