"Secret of the samurai" criticism

Hello everyone. I'm an almost-35 year old male samurai enthusiast.
I'm interested in everything Japanese in general, but in samurai
history in particular. I watch chanbara movies, read Turnbull-
sensei's books, play oriental role-playing games, that sort of things.

I was reading the "Specific ninja misconceptions" page, like a good
newbie, and having a good laugh out of it - even if it's nothing
really new to me, fortunately - when I stumbled upon this sentence:

< Samurai", which is, quite honestly, a pile of pig feces.>>

(source: http://www.geocities.com/klancesegall/Ninja.html )

I own a copy of "Secrets of the Samurai" by Oscar Ratti and Adele
Westbrook, which is, for what I seem to remember, a very informative
and accurate book, packed full of useful info. Maybe I'm ignoring or
forgetting something? I would like to know exactly what's the problem
with this text.

Thanks,

--
C E Z

--- In samuraihistory@yahoogroups.com, "cez_72" wrote:

>
> I own a copy of "Secrets of the Samurai" by Oscar Ratti and Adele
> Westbrook, which is, for what I seem to remember, a very informative
> and accurate book, packed full of useful info. Maybe I'm ignoring or
> forgetting something? I would like to know exactly what's the problem
> with this text.

I have the book, but have never read it, and also didn't write that
"critique", but right now flipping through the book, the only thing I
can assume without actually reading it is that it might severely
overplay the importance of bujutsu and could be based on myths and
misinformation that go along with Bujutsu like cake with ice cream. I
notice that there are some actual history books listed along with
articles out of "black belt" magazine. I don't know of any
university-published books on Japanese history that have anything at
all to do with Bujutsu, so I'm wondering how these books were put to
use in the writing of "Secrets of the Samurai". I'm interested to
hear the opinions of people who have actualy read (and apparently
hated) it.

I must say that the section on "Kiaijutsu" starting on p. 406 gives me
major pause:

"Few details are available about the actual training techniques which
were used to develop that preliminary unification of powers in the
hara which allowed certain bujin to paralyze, kill, or, on the other
hand, save another warriors's life via a concentrated shout."

Um... what? Man, no wonder Hideyoshi couldn't take Korea, he didn't
have enough Kiai-Bujin to yell at the enemy.

--- Kitsuno <samurai-listowner@...>
wrote:

>> I have the book, but have never read it, and also
> didn't write that
> "critique", but right now flipping through the book,
> the only thing I
> can assume without actually reading it is that it
> might severely
> overplay the importance of bujutsu and could be
> based on myths and
> misinformation that go along with Bujutsu like cake
> with ice cream.

I *DID* write the article on ninja, and yes, there you
have it. At the risk of riling up the martial artists
out there, the book definitely overplays the whole
bujutsu/bushido thing. I'm also not the only person
who's been critical of it--the book tries to come off
as a samurai "handbook", and is certainly not an
academic study.

I wouldn't classify my feelings towards it as
"hate"--it's simply a cog in the "Bullshido" machine.

> Um... what? Man, no wonder Hideyoshi couldn't take
> Korea, he didn't
> have enough Kiai-Bujin to yell at the enemy.

No further statements, your honor.



____________________________________________________________________________________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.yahoo.com

>"Few details are available about the actual training techniques which
>were used to develop that preliminary unification of powers in the
>hara which allowed certain bujin to paralyze, kill, or, on the other
>hand, save another warriors's life via a concentrated shout."

Hehehehehe. I see your point.
On the other hand, it doesn't say it actually worked, does it? ;)

--
C E Z