Rory Miller's Blog, page 47
November 10, 2010
Old School
I was listening to a song today. It was a bit of a spoof, maybe but the music is good, the vocals are outstanding (Frankie Laine) and some of the words. the song was the theme to Blazing Saddles, and the words that got me:
He rode a blazing saddleHe wore a shiny starHis job to offer battleTo bad men near and far
There was a time when people generally recognized that there was good and bad in the world. People were raised with enough of a grounding that most agreed on the basic behaviors that constituted good or bad. And it wasn't enough to try to understand or sympathize. Bad had to be fought. Wherever bad men did bad things the only hope has always been a good man or good woman who will stand up and stop them. Offer battle. The bad guy may back down, but force or the credible threat of force is the only thing that has ever stopped someone bent on violence.
I have my personal definition of bad and evil. A bad guy will hurt someone to get what he wants. Evil will hurt someone even if there is nothing to gain. It's simple, but it works for me... until you get into the whiny bullshit that hurt feelings are the same as being injured or that someone not giving you stuff is the same as someone taking your stuff away.
But there I go, being old school again.
He rode a blazing saddleHe wore a shiny starHis job to offer battleTo bad men near and far
There was a time when people generally recognized that there was good and bad in the world. People were raised with enough of a grounding that most agreed on the basic behaviors that constituted good or bad. And it wasn't enough to try to understand or sympathize. Bad had to be fought. Wherever bad men did bad things the only hope has always been a good man or good woman who will stand up and stop them. Offer battle. The bad guy may back down, but force or the credible threat of force is the only thing that has ever stopped someone bent on violence.
I have my personal definition of bad and evil. A bad guy will hurt someone to get what he wants. Evil will hurt someone even if there is nothing to gain. It's simple, but it works for me... until you get into the whiny bullshit that hurt feelings are the same as being injured or that someone not giving you stuff is the same as someone taking your stuff away.
But there I go, being old school again.
Published on November 10, 2010 12:40
November 8, 2010
First Ever Guest Post
Bad Billy G, Bill Giovannucci sent an e-mail with something he'd considered as a reply to an old post. I think it stands alone.Bill teaches Uechi-ryu karate in Quincy, MA. He's also a nice guy. And laid me out with a football tackle in an Active Shooter scenario a month ago.
Bill Writes:
I've always thought most people were crazy, myself included. I don't think its because normal is relative, but because 'Normal' is obviously not true. It does not exist anywhere else but in our shared descriptions of the world. People will often define their own reality as truth. Entire cultures are constructed around shared ideals, but they are not automatically true, just
a way to convey meaning. Why it happens in people is explicable in psychology I suppose. I'm not sharp there. What is happening though, is a flaw in the reasoning process. Beliefs take hold without ever involving other views and active world experience. We know people can literally think ourselves into believing anything is true.
Our job everyday is to make sense of the world. We are immersed in it with others like us, but each trapped in our own little head. It's scary. It is not comforting to be acutely aware of that all the time. We seek to assign meaning, to understand and organize all the information in order to connect and perceive ourselves, our world. We eventually learn to trust our created meanings because it is too much work to constantly evaluate the accuracy and nuances of our perceptions. We fool ourselves into thinking we've figured it out all the time.
Two posts ago Rory got me thinking deeply about perspective in this way. That was a popular post. I think the only way to acquire new knowledge is to make sure you never really believe you know everything about anything ...I think Socrates. In this, the things you are certain of are convictions. They will always be passing your active tests because you have chosen to observe your active experience in the physical world. Principles, because they can be recognized as commonalities, repeated and tested are key to granting advantage to your knowledge base. It is dangerous to believe in something if you do not fully recognize its working
principles. But, the more you can find them the more intuitive you become. It will be easier to understand new stuff, to recognize what is valuable to your Way. You know if it is something to take or discard. You won't be as inclined to hang onto things you don't need because you know you will be able find them again easily. Perceptions get sharper.
Learning humility probably helps. We don't value or employ that gift nearly enough. People with a healthy degree of true humility tend to have accurate personal realities and other ambitions than claiming righteousness. They keep from losing heir way, unlike those a bit lost inside themselves without real perspective. Other folks misunderstand, or maybe choose to accept personal and shared ideals as true and never perceive contradictions as even relevant.
There are theoretical 'levels of understanding'. I forget them exactly. We switch between these as we process. If you watch, it is noticeable and noteworthy that most people never operate beyond a certain level of understanding about who and what they are within multiple layers of context. We cannot avoid it because we need immediate usefulness of casual thought. It is easier than the effort it takes to get out there and think of everything from every possible perspective all the time. And, if we do know to do it, it is still work to construct a belief system based on both reason AND active experience. Also, as with physical skills, it is essential to maintain your perspective to be sure it is has not become irrelevant.
Bill Writes:
I've always thought most people were crazy, myself included. I don't think its because normal is relative, but because 'Normal' is obviously not true. It does not exist anywhere else but in our shared descriptions of the world. People will often define their own reality as truth. Entire cultures are constructed around shared ideals, but they are not automatically true, just
a way to convey meaning. Why it happens in people is explicable in psychology I suppose. I'm not sharp there. What is happening though, is a flaw in the reasoning process. Beliefs take hold without ever involving other views and active world experience. We know people can literally think ourselves into believing anything is true.
Our job everyday is to make sense of the world. We are immersed in it with others like us, but each trapped in our own little head. It's scary. It is not comforting to be acutely aware of that all the time. We seek to assign meaning, to understand and organize all the information in order to connect and perceive ourselves, our world. We eventually learn to trust our created meanings because it is too much work to constantly evaluate the accuracy and nuances of our perceptions. We fool ourselves into thinking we've figured it out all the time.
Two posts ago Rory got me thinking deeply about perspective in this way. That was a popular post. I think the only way to acquire new knowledge is to make sure you never really believe you know everything about anything ...I think Socrates. In this, the things you are certain of are convictions. They will always be passing your active tests because you have chosen to observe your active experience in the physical world. Principles, because they can be recognized as commonalities, repeated and tested are key to granting advantage to your knowledge base. It is dangerous to believe in something if you do not fully recognize its working
principles. But, the more you can find them the more intuitive you become. It will be easier to understand new stuff, to recognize what is valuable to your Way. You know if it is something to take or discard. You won't be as inclined to hang onto things you don't need because you know you will be able find them again easily. Perceptions get sharper.
Learning humility probably helps. We don't value or employ that gift nearly enough. People with a healthy degree of true humility tend to have accurate personal realities and other ambitions than claiming righteousness. They keep from losing heir way, unlike those a bit lost inside themselves without real perspective. Other folks misunderstand, or maybe choose to accept personal and shared ideals as true and never perceive contradictions as even relevant.
There are theoretical 'levels of understanding'. I forget them exactly. We switch between these as we process. If you watch, it is noticeable and noteworthy that most people never operate beyond a certain level of understanding about who and what they are within multiple layers of context. We cannot avoid it because we need immediate usefulness of casual thought. It is easier than the effort it takes to get out there and think of everything from every possible perspective all the time. And, if we do know to do it, it is still work to construct a belief system based on both reason AND active experience. Also, as with physical skills, it is essential to maintain your perspective to be sure it is has not become irrelevant.
Published on November 08, 2010 14:49
November 7, 2010
On the Table
Maija wins the contest. I am almost 20,000 words into a drill and exercise manual. I hate it already, but that is just my normal reaction to my own writing. It's covering some interesting material, I think, and has more mental exercises than many martial artists may have been exposed to.
Gearing up for Orycon next weekend. It should be fun, and I'll be on at least one panel with Steve, which is always a blast. I also have two early morning Fight Club solo presentations and I'm working out a new (experimental) way to get people without a lot of history or experience to visualize different forms of violence. Motivation, context and goo.
Great news-- One of my LAs (translator) from Northern Iraq has received his special visa. I'm his sponsor, so Dlshad will be coming to live with us possibly by the end of the month. I'm excited, but we have to rush on converting K's office to a guest room.
Will be starting to put together the seminar schedule for 2011 by the end of the month, basically contacting people who have expressed interest and seeing who wants to lock in a date. I expect to do a lot of traveling next year... (BTW, if any readers are interested, contact me.)
Gearing up for Orycon next weekend. It should be fun, and I'll be on at least one panel with Steve, which is always a blast. I also have two early morning Fight Club solo presentations and I'm working out a new (experimental) way to get people without a lot of history or experience to visualize different forms of violence. Motivation, context and goo.
Great news-- One of my LAs (translator) from Northern Iraq has received his special visa. I'm his sponsor, so Dlshad will be coming to live with us possibly by the end of the month. I'm excited, but we have to rush on converting K's office to a guest room.
Will be starting to put together the seminar schedule for 2011 by the end of the month, basically contacting people who have expressed interest and seeing who wants to lock in a date. I expect to do a lot of traveling next year... (BTW, if any readers are interested, contact me.)
Published on November 07, 2010 20:54
November 5, 2010
Johari Window
This came up earlier. I don't know if the Johari window is still taught in introductory psych courses. It's a fairly simple concept.
Imagine a square. In that square is everything there is to know about you.
Imagine a horizontal bar in that square. Above the bar are the things you know about yourself. below that bar are the things you don't know about yourself. There are a million things you don't know about yourself. Some are obvious: how you will act under pressure you have never experienced; things you have never learned to see. Some bring up some deep denial: all the things you think are cool but annoy others; all the times you are playing to an imaginary audience as you interact in life.
Imagine a vertical line in the square. All the things on the left are the things that others know about you. All the things on the right of the line are the things that they do not know. You deeper dreams and fantasies and history and...
It is important to realize that others know things about you that you do not. Who you think we see and who we actually see are not the same and often the person on the outside sees more accurately. the one on the outside doesn't see the voices in our heads making excuses and creating false explanations and rationalizations. They just see what we do.
So the window divides into four quarters, the relative size of each section different for each person:
The things that only we know about ourselves.The things that everyone knows.The things that others know and we do not.The things that no one knows.
On that level, the quest in life is the same: to open the window and see as much about ourselves as possible. We can't see our own blindspots and it is only through friends (or sometimes enemies) that tell us what they see that we get anywhere on our quest.
Imagine a square. In that square is everything there is to know about you.
Imagine a horizontal bar in that square. Above the bar are the things you know about yourself. below that bar are the things you don't know about yourself. There are a million things you don't know about yourself. Some are obvious: how you will act under pressure you have never experienced; things you have never learned to see. Some bring up some deep denial: all the things you think are cool but annoy others; all the times you are playing to an imaginary audience as you interact in life.
Imagine a vertical line in the square. All the things on the left are the things that others know about you. All the things on the right of the line are the things that they do not know. You deeper dreams and fantasies and history and...
It is important to realize that others know things about you that you do not. Who you think we see and who we actually see are not the same and often the person on the outside sees more accurately. the one on the outside doesn't see the voices in our heads making excuses and creating false explanations and rationalizations. They just see what we do.
So the window divides into four quarters, the relative size of each section different for each person:
The things that only we know about ourselves.The things that everyone knows.The things that others know and we do not.The things that no one knows.
On that level, the quest in life is the same: to open the window and see as much about ourselves as possible. We can't see our own blindspots and it is only through friends (or sometimes enemies) that tell us what they see that we get anywhere on our quest.
Published on November 05, 2010 11:54
November 3, 2010
Loving and Caring
I've looked for this story off an on for years. It was right on the edge of the internet age, something I read in the local paper. It disturbed me much at the time and still does.
Police were called to an apartment somewhere in the metro Portland area. Neighbors had noticed a smell. In the apartment they found a baby, maybe two years old, wearing a disposable diaper packed with waste. Bowls of milk and stale peanut butter sandwiches were on the floor.
The mother, it seems, was afraid her new boyfriend would leave her if he found out she had a child. So she didn't tell him and when they went away for a weekend or a week, she would put out bowls of milk and plates of sandwiches. And put on a clean diaper.
She was indignant that she was charged with child neglect, even more indignant at people who said she didn't love her baby. As near as I can remember she said, "Of course I love my baby. Anyone who has seen us together will see that!"
I'm going to make a value judgment here: Immature people confuse their feelings with the world. And feel that the feelings are more important than the physical world. You feel a swelling chest and your throat gets dry when you see your main squeeze. Must be true love, so it's okay if you slap her around occasionally. Bullshit.
Feeling good doesn't make an action good. People who feel pretty damn good about themselves (anti-social and narcissistic personality disorders, for example) leave trails of broken hearts or broken bodies behind them.
It hit me hard in New York City. Everyone I talked to loved the The City. They gushed about it. They told me all the ways it was wonderful.
Not once did I see a single person, except for me, pick up some trash. It may be wonderful, but it was filthy, with people throwing bales of advertising leaflets to the wind and puking in the streets. A lot of people expressing love, no one showing simple caring. Is it really love if it never involves lifting a finger to help? Or is it the natural self-centerdness of people who can feel their emotions and decide the feeling is enough. "I feel love, so I don't need to express it."
Thoughts tangle here-- people who have never volunteered to help in a major disaster but need therapy for that disaster, even though they weren't there and knew no one who was. People who express a rage about a group or political party, but they express a rage about the other's rage that they only imagine, sublimely showing that they are, at a very deep level, what they claim the other to be. Is it their righteousness that makes their animosity and bigotry acceptable in their own minds? Or do they simply not see it? People who want to be loved and appreciated and feel oppressed when asked what they have ever done that is worthy of appreciation...
Dark thoughts, perhaps.
Self esteem, self love, increases violence in people who are already violent. Of course, the counter argument is that high self-esteem that increases violence isn't self-esteem at all but narcissism. Tomayto, tomahto.
Police were called to an apartment somewhere in the metro Portland area. Neighbors had noticed a smell. In the apartment they found a baby, maybe two years old, wearing a disposable diaper packed with waste. Bowls of milk and stale peanut butter sandwiches were on the floor.
The mother, it seems, was afraid her new boyfriend would leave her if he found out she had a child. So she didn't tell him and when they went away for a weekend or a week, she would put out bowls of milk and plates of sandwiches. And put on a clean diaper.
She was indignant that she was charged with child neglect, even more indignant at people who said she didn't love her baby. As near as I can remember she said, "Of course I love my baby. Anyone who has seen us together will see that!"
I'm going to make a value judgment here: Immature people confuse their feelings with the world. And feel that the feelings are more important than the physical world. You feel a swelling chest and your throat gets dry when you see your main squeeze. Must be true love, so it's okay if you slap her around occasionally. Bullshit.
Feeling good doesn't make an action good. People who feel pretty damn good about themselves (anti-social and narcissistic personality disorders, for example) leave trails of broken hearts or broken bodies behind them.
It hit me hard in New York City. Everyone I talked to loved the The City. They gushed about it. They told me all the ways it was wonderful.
Not once did I see a single person, except for me, pick up some trash. It may be wonderful, but it was filthy, with people throwing bales of advertising leaflets to the wind and puking in the streets. A lot of people expressing love, no one showing simple caring. Is it really love if it never involves lifting a finger to help? Or is it the natural self-centerdness of people who can feel their emotions and decide the feeling is enough. "I feel love, so I don't need to express it."
Thoughts tangle here-- people who have never volunteered to help in a major disaster but need therapy for that disaster, even though they weren't there and knew no one who was. People who express a rage about a group or political party, but they express a rage about the other's rage that they only imagine, sublimely showing that they are, at a very deep level, what they claim the other to be. Is it their righteousness that makes their animosity and bigotry acceptable in their own minds? Or do they simply not see it? People who want to be loved and appreciated and feel oppressed when asked what they have ever done that is worthy of appreciation...
Dark thoughts, perhaps.
Self esteem, self love, increases violence in people who are already violent. Of course, the counter argument is that high self-esteem that increases violence isn't self-esteem at all but narcissism. Tomayto, tomahto.
Published on November 03, 2010 18:29
November 1, 2010
November 2010
This is looking to be the quietest month in some time.
I'll be at Orycon 32 at the DoubleTree Hotel in Portland, OR November 12-14, mostly doing panels for writers but with some play time. I'm going to experiment with a new format for getting people who live largely in their heads to envision different types of violence and play with the physical aspects.
There will be another Savvy Authors class on-line, this one on Police Force Policies. It will draw heavily from a book under consideration at my publisher right now.
Other than that, I'm free. Which means some relaxing home time. It also means I'm more available than ever for private lessons and local workshops. I like doing nothing, but I really prefer doing something.------------------------------------------------Enough with the business end. This is the kind of stuff I think about on long drives:
Poetry involves tweaking grammar and convention so that the lines have patterns. The patterns reflect or complement each other. This is meter, and it is one of the artistic pleasures of reading poetry.
Rhyming is arranging the poem so that the last syllable(s) of the words in each line or in a specific pattern of lines sound the same. Alliteration is starting each word with the same sound.
Do people born deaf catch these aspects when they read poetry? When someone's native language is sign, is there an equivalent art like choosing words where the right hand is in a particular position or location at the end of a line (visual rhyming?) Or tweaking the grammar so that there is a rhythmic visual pattern (meter)?
I don't know anyone who was born unable to hear... and I would love to ask these questions. That would be a fascinating conversation.
I'll be at Orycon 32 at the DoubleTree Hotel in Portland, OR November 12-14, mostly doing panels for writers but with some play time. I'm going to experiment with a new format for getting people who live largely in their heads to envision different types of violence and play with the physical aspects.
There will be another Savvy Authors class on-line, this one on Police Force Policies. It will draw heavily from a book under consideration at my publisher right now.
Other than that, I'm free. Which means some relaxing home time. It also means I'm more available than ever for private lessons and local workshops. I like doing nothing, but I really prefer doing something.------------------------------------------------Enough with the business end. This is the kind of stuff I think about on long drives:
Poetry involves tweaking grammar and convention so that the lines have patterns. The patterns reflect or complement each other. This is meter, and it is one of the artistic pleasures of reading poetry.
Rhyming is arranging the poem so that the last syllable(s) of the words in each line or in a specific pattern of lines sound the same. Alliteration is starting each word with the same sound.
Do people born deaf catch these aspects when they read poetry? When someone's native language is sign, is there an equivalent art like choosing words where the right hand is in a particular position or location at the end of a line (visual rhyming?) Or tweaking the grammar so that there is a rhythmic visual pattern (meter)?
I don't know anyone who was born unable to hear... and I would love to ask these questions. That would be a fascinating conversation.
Published on November 01, 2010 08:39
October 29, 2010
Steve's Street Cred
Steve posted on his blog and I got contacted, blah, blah, blah... Steve and I thought it would be good to use it as a jumping off point for some thoughts. The italic stuff will be mine, the regular text is Steve's original post.
Right off, this isn't a debate or an argument. Like any two people, Steve and I see things differently. We also guess about what the other sees, feels or means. There is a lot of potential for learning in the gap between what the guy outside and the guy inside the skin see.
A bit more on the violence thing. Most of you here will assume that when I post such things about the reality guys, I am talking about Rory Miller and Mac and the other hardcore dudes like that.
You're right. I am. But it's not meant to be derogatory when I offer it.And I know this. Steve understands and respects differences in perspective. I don't think he could write convincingly if he didn't
A couple thoughts to clarify things ...
I like Rory, and I believe what he teaches is valid and valuable. I've reviewed all his books, given them raves.This is mutual...except for the valid and valuable, since Steve writes fiction after all... (joke).
I also believe that what he teaches is mostly geared for, and aimed at, people who are apt to find themselves in scuffles regularly. It's from and for people whodeliberately put themselves in harm's way. Soldiers, cops, bouncers, folks who go forward knowing things are about to get active.
No. Not at all. And this is a huge disconnect. The hard-core operators know this stuff. According to e-mails, what they really get from my work is 1) a feeling that someone else 'gets it'. Even within the operator world, it can get pretty isolated. You can be a qualified operator and never be activated. You can be activated and never see trouble...and some people, through luck or inclination or whatever see a lot, and it makes them think. there's comfort when you find other people are thinking the same things.2) I seem to put things into words that they know on a gut level, and that's comforting too and 3) The words make it easier to teach to rookies.But pretty much by definition, if I blow someone's mind, they weren't an operator.
As Rory has been all those things and has not-walked-but-run into the room as the shit hit the fan, I might be excused for thinking that's where he likes to play. I think he gets bored if somebody is not shooting at him -- and barely missing.
He has specialized knowledge, worth diamonds to people who need it. As he points out, he does violence for money.
That's a long way from where most of us live. It colors one's world.Absolutely. I'm not sure if this is the place to express it, but there is no way to get the cumulative experience of violence while living a peaceful life. It does color my world. But the people who won't experience it more than once or twice in their lives will never get the underlying factors, will never even get the adrenaline under control enough to see what happens in so few encounters. Someone who has had sex a hundred times just understands it better than someone who has only had sex once. And way better than someone who has only fantasized about it. It doesn't mean that the lessons can only be understood by gigolos and hookers.
We want him on the wall. We need him on the wall. But on one level, I get the sense that he mostly wants to swap stuff with the other guys on the wall. (You might can add serious martial artists to the teaching pool, in that they are willing to pug in practice, and thus aren't completely against the idea of thumping or sticking somebody, should the need arise. People who could never hurt a fellow human being even in defense of their own lives don't seem to be good candidates for reality fighting.)Absolutely true... for me. Because I get my learning from other guys who have been there. I really can't learn anything useful from someone who has only imagined my world. So, absolutely, I prefer to spend time with operators. Experienced martial artists, not so much. This may be my perspective but many of the 'experienced' are so choked with delusion that it is almost detrimental to talk to them. Back to the sex analogy, collecting belts or collecting porn aren't that much difference. Thirty years of memorizing centerfolds still isn't having sex. (man, I am going to get so many hits for this post off of perverts doing google searches). There are some exceptions, pure martial artists who can improve my body mechanics, but they are damn few.
When he's talking to guys like me, chair-sitters old enough to be his father, or people who hike a long detour to avoid the mean streets, he has to dial it down. We need to know about it, to be sure. We might need some of it someday, and it'll be worth diamonds if we do. But "might" and "surely will" are two different horses.This is another disconnect, cause when things go bad it gets binary very fast. If you have basic common sense, you probably won't need it, but if you do (home invasion, workplace shooting, Bonding GMD) you will need it all, and probably at a level greater than I do. For me it is a surely. For civilians, it is a possibly... but if the civilian needs it the stakes and the obstacles will both be astronomical. There is no middle ground here.
Big attitude change from "this might happen" to "whenthis happens 'cause it's gonna." And that creates an incentive to train smarter, (or, if you want to look at it this way) allows civilians to train stupid and it won't matter a lick...until it kills one or two.
Here's where I keep coming down to it: I can't tell you what it's like to be a soldier, cop, or bouncer, because I've never been one.
I think it's hard for Rory to tell you what it's like to be a civilian, because he's never been one.Sounds cool, but nope. One of the neat things about our society is that there are no castes. Every cop has been a citizen. Every soldier has at least been a high school student. I was the shy science nerd. Mac was the hippie studying library science at Maharishi Mahesh University. We all, at one point, had our first fights. My training was world-class...and I was largely unprepared. What I do with my teaching, is to try to let people in on the stuff that I didn't get from martial training. The holes that left me unprepared. It is a huge list.So my classes aren't mostly composed of cops and soldiers. There are a few and I think it has more to do with camaraderie than anything. But the majority are what you call serious martial artists who are just coming to terms with the fact that they know almost nothing about violence. They have spent decades honing a tool to be used if they are ever faced with violence, and they don't know what an assault looks like, or how to see one coming or what the opponents and attacks they will have to defend against even look like. How do criminals get you alone? How is a knife really used? How does a predator find out where to set up his ambush? What's the fastest way to tell a dominance game from a predatory interview? How do criminals get you to lower your guard? What does it feel like to kill or cripple another human? Why do so many people freeze and what can you do? What does adrenaline really do and how do you compensate for it?
So many questions and most people go their whole martial career and never ask them. That's what I do. Cops know this stuff.
Right off, this isn't a debate or an argument. Like any two people, Steve and I see things differently. We also guess about what the other sees, feels or means. There is a lot of potential for learning in the gap between what the guy outside and the guy inside the skin see.
A bit more on the violence thing. Most of you here will assume that when I post such things about the reality guys, I am talking about Rory Miller and Mac and the other hardcore dudes like that.
You're right. I am. But it's not meant to be derogatory when I offer it.And I know this. Steve understands and respects differences in perspective. I don't think he could write convincingly if he didn't
A couple thoughts to clarify things ...
I like Rory, and I believe what he teaches is valid and valuable. I've reviewed all his books, given them raves.This is mutual...except for the valid and valuable, since Steve writes fiction after all... (joke).
I also believe that what he teaches is mostly geared for, and aimed at, people who are apt to find themselves in scuffles regularly. It's from and for people whodeliberately put themselves in harm's way. Soldiers, cops, bouncers, folks who go forward knowing things are about to get active.
No. Not at all. And this is a huge disconnect. The hard-core operators know this stuff. According to e-mails, what they really get from my work is 1) a feeling that someone else 'gets it'. Even within the operator world, it can get pretty isolated. You can be a qualified operator and never be activated. You can be activated and never see trouble...and some people, through luck or inclination or whatever see a lot, and it makes them think. there's comfort when you find other people are thinking the same things.2) I seem to put things into words that they know on a gut level, and that's comforting too and 3) The words make it easier to teach to rookies.But pretty much by definition, if I blow someone's mind, they weren't an operator.
As Rory has been all those things and has not-walked-but-run into the room as the shit hit the fan, I might be excused for thinking that's where he likes to play. I think he gets bored if somebody is not shooting at him -- and barely missing.
He has specialized knowledge, worth diamonds to people who need it. As he points out, he does violence for money.
That's a long way from where most of us live. It colors one's world.Absolutely. I'm not sure if this is the place to express it, but there is no way to get the cumulative experience of violence while living a peaceful life. It does color my world. But the people who won't experience it more than once or twice in their lives will never get the underlying factors, will never even get the adrenaline under control enough to see what happens in so few encounters. Someone who has had sex a hundred times just understands it better than someone who has only had sex once. And way better than someone who has only fantasized about it. It doesn't mean that the lessons can only be understood by gigolos and hookers.
We want him on the wall. We need him on the wall. But on one level, I get the sense that he mostly wants to swap stuff with the other guys on the wall. (You might can add serious martial artists to the teaching pool, in that they are willing to pug in practice, and thus aren't completely against the idea of thumping or sticking somebody, should the need arise. People who could never hurt a fellow human being even in defense of their own lives don't seem to be good candidates for reality fighting.)Absolutely true... for me. Because I get my learning from other guys who have been there. I really can't learn anything useful from someone who has only imagined my world. So, absolutely, I prefer to spend time with operators. Experienced martial artists, not so much. This may be my perspective but many of the 'experienced' are so choked with delusion that it is almost detrimental to talk to them. Back to the sex analogy, collecting belts or collecting porn aren't that much difference. Thirty years of memorizing centerfolds still isn't having sex. (man, I am going to get so many hits for this post off of perverts doing google searches). There are some exceptions, pure martial artists who can improve my body mechanics, but they are damn few.
When he's talking to guys like me, chair-sitters old enough to be his father, or people who hike a long detour to avoid the mean streets, he has to dial it down. We need to know about it, to be sure. We might need some of it someday, and it'll be worth diamonds if we do. But "might" and "surely will" are two different horses.This is another disconnect, cause when things go bad it gets binary very fast. If you have basic common sense, you probably won't need it, but if you do (home invasion, workplace shooting, Bonding GMD) you will need it all, and probably at a level greater than I do. For me it is a surely. For civilians, it is a possibly... but if the civilian needs it the stakes and the obstacles will both be astronomical. There is no middle ground here.
Big attitude change from "this might happen" to "whenthis happens 'cause it's gonna." And that creates an incentive to train smarter, (or, if you want to look at it this way) allows civilians to train stupid and it won't matter a lick...until it kills one or two.
Here's where I keep coming down to it: I can't tell you what it's like to be a soldier, cop, or bouncer, because I've never been one.
I think it's hard for Rory to tell you what it's like to be a civilian, because he's never been one.Sounds cool, but nope. One of the neat things about our society is that there are no castes. Every cop has been a citizen. Every soldier has at least been a high school student. I was the shy science nerd. Mac was the hippie studying library science at Maharishi Mahesh University. We all, at one point, had our first fights. My training was world-class...and I was largely unprepared. What I do with my teaching, is to try to let people in on the stuff that I didn't get from martial training. The holes that left me unprepared. It is a huge list.So my classes aren't mostly composed of cops and soldiers. There are a few and I think it has more to do with camaraderie than anything. But the majority are what you call serious martial artists who are just coming to terms with the fact that they know almost nothing about violence. They have spent decades honing a tool to be used if they are ever faced with violence, and they don't know what an assault looks like, or how to see one coming or what the opponents and attacks they will have to defend against even look like. How do criminals get you alone? How is a knife really used? How does a predator find out where to set up his ambush? What's the fastest way to tell a dominance game from a predatory interview? How do criminals get you to lower your guard? What does it feel like to kill or cripple another human? Why do so many people freeze and what can you do? What does adrenaline really do and how do you compensate for it?
So many questions and most people go their whole martial career and never ask them. That's what I do. Cops know this stuff.
Published on October 29, 2010 00:25
October 25, 2010
Long Ago, in a Galaxy...
When I started in martial arts, there were lots of hints about mystical bullshit. When you got to your blackbelt level you would gain powers that weren't quite like the ones on TV, but really close. So I was told (often, it was one of my obsessions) that all expert martial artists learned to heal as well as destroy... but the people making that claim had somehow never got around to learning that part of it.There were secret strikes that could only be divulged after your character was tested, but no matter how tested you were it wasn't quite time...and then you might happen to overhear the person withholding the information ask his instructor, and you might even hear him get the same run around. The mystical knowledge wasn't there.
But people want it and they want it bad. People really like magic. And if enough people want something, someone will supply it for money or sycophants or just for ego. And the cool thing about supplying magic is that the people buying it will do all the heavy work, suspending disbelief.
So I was attracted to instructors who not only could do things, but could explain it. If the instructor had amazing skills and his students sucked, he either couldn't teach or was deliberately withholding...and if the instructor sucked and the students thought he was amazing, it was a religion, not a self-defense class.
Brent Yamamoto and Kris Wilder, under the tutelage of Hiroo Ito, are doing some amazing stuff. Stuff that harkens back to the legends I heard as a wee beginner. It's not mystical. It is structure and slaving (in the engineering sense) small motions to big muscles. Applying bone rather than muscle. They are doing the things that the internal stylists talk about, but because they are learning and not parroting, they can apply them moving and even fighting, something I have seen rarely in internal stylists.
And they can teach. Their students are picking it up. Applying it.My reductionist side wants to take it down even further, but that can wait.For now, I know two men in the Seattle area, NW Martial Arts in Bothell and West Seattle Karate, who are teaching some of the things that the instructors in the eighties pretended to know.
--------------------------------------Billings, Montana this Saturday. I'll be going through Spokane Thursday night if anyone wants to meet on the route.
But people want it and they want it bad. People really like magic. And if enough people want something, someone will supply it for money or sycophants or just for ego. And the cool thing about supplying magic is that the people buying it will do all the heavy work, suspending disbelief.
So I was attracted to instructors who not only could do things, but could explain it. If the instructor had amazing skills and his students sucked, he either couldn't teach or was deliberately withholding...and if the instructor sucked and the students thought he was amazing, it was a religion, not a self-defense class.
Brent Yamamoto and Kris Wilder, under the tutelage of Hiroo Ito, are doing some amazing stuff. Stuff that harkens back to the legends I heard as a wee beginner. It's not mystical. It is structure and slaving (in the engineering sense) small motions to big muscles. Applying bone rather than muscle. They are doing the things that the internal stylists talk about, but because they are learning and not parroting, they can apply them moving and even fighting, something I have seen rarely in internal stylists.
And they can teach. Their students are picking it up. Applying it.My reductionist side wants to take it down even further, but that can wait.For now, I know two men in the Seattle area, NW Martial Arts in Bothell and West Seattle Karate, who are teaching some of the things that the instructors in the eighties pretended to know.
--------------------------------------Billings, Montana this Saturday. I'll be going through Spokane Thursday night if anyone wants to meet on the route.
Published on October 25, 2010 15:39
October 22, 2010
A Little Contest
NaNoWriMo, the National Novel Writing Month, begins in ten days. The challenge is to complete a book of at least 50,000 words in thirty days.My writer's group will all be on board, and so I will as well, with the caveat that I don't (generally) write fiction.
So I'm kicking it out to you. We'll make it a contest. You suggest in the comments what you want me to write about next. I'll pick a winner and give myself thirty days to write the first draft of that book. If it falls into a category that my regular publisher will be interested in and it holds up... the person who suggested the subject and title will get a signed copy. If it doesn't fit that category, I'll do it as an e-book and e-mail a copy to the winner.
So, since there's a chance that multiple people might want the same subject, you have to suggest a subject, a title (especially since I suck at titles) and leave enough information in the post that I can contact you (or at least give you a shout out) so I know where to send the results.
So I'm kicking it out to you. We'll make it a contest. You suggest in the comments what you want me to write about next. I'll pick a winner and give myself thirty days to write the first draft of that book. If it falls into a category that my regular publisher will be interested in and it holds up... the person who suggested the subject and title will get a signed copy. If it doesn't fit that category, I'll do it as an e-book and e-mail a copy to the winner.
So, since there's a chance that multiple people might want the same subject, you have to suggest a subject, a title (especially since I suck at titles) and leave enough information in the post that I can contact you (or at least give you a shout out) so I know where to send the results.
Published on October 22, 2010 16:16
October 21, 2010
New Thing

With immense thanks to Steve Perry, I uploaded my first e-book last night at Smashwords.
It's the (much expanded) lessons from the Savvy Authors/RWA class on Violence for Writers from a few months ago. The formatting and uploading were surprisingly easy. The first cover design rocked, but unfortunately I don't have rights to two of the pictures (a friend-of-a-friend's picture from the al-Sadr Hotel bombing in Baghdad and one of a particularly bloody cell extraction)... but my lovely and talented wife came through with a nice cover.
If I get the time, I'll have to add it to my regular website and maybe put a paypal button right here for direct access.
Off to Seattle in a few hours for the two day seminar there. There's still room if anyone is interested. Details are at the usual place.
Published on October 21, 2010 11:07
Rory Miller's Blog
- Rory Miller's profile
- 130 followers
Rory Miller isn't a Goodreads Author
(yet),
but they
do have a blog,
so here are some recent posts imported from
their feed.
