遠近 Enkin (Far Near)
Distance/Perspective
Part 1
(Chicago
Tribune, Monday, 4 January 2019)
Homeless
Artist, Former Gang Member, Found Dead
Born
in Marseilles, Illinois in June of 1958 and orphaned at age 9, Marshall
Marseilles, rose to prominence as a member of Chicago’s notorious Clear River Gang from age 13 until he joined the Army at 17, and then again after
discharge. Following his service, Mr.
Marseilles did not maintain a fixed address and appears to have spent much of
his time living nomadically. His body
was found at the camp near Bullfrog Lake/Palos Preserves where he'd made his
home for the last few years since retiring to semi-seclusion. He was 60.
Marseilles,
who took up writing and various art media later in life, received acclaim for
his autobiographical prose and essays on surviving violence while his sketches,
paintings and sculptures are prized by collectors.
Although
never prosecuted, Marseilles (by his own estimates) injured or killed more than
60 individuals in violent conflicts, starting at the age of 13 when he fatally
bludgeoned a man as part of a gang initiation.
Mr.
Marseilles’ two sons have scheduled a private memorial service and request that
donations are made to Veterans' causes in lieu of flowers.
Does the (fictitious) obituary above
describe a person who suffered from untreated brain-chemistry issues (and
probably PTSD)? Was it someone who
managed to shape a role for himself in a culture of pervasive violence… or, maybe,
it’s the heartwarming story about the redemptive power of art? It is, to some degree, a combination of (and
far more complicated/nuanced than any single one) of these answers. Historically, you may recognize similarities
to the Kensei (sword saint), Miyamoto Musashi*, author of the Go Rin No
Sho (the Book of Five Rings/Spheres) and founder of Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, often
(wrongly) credited with pioneering ryoto (both swords) or nito (two
swords- wielding the long and short swords in tandem).
The obituary helps to illustrate the
(often extreme) dichotomy that most of us experience between how we see people,
based on their proximity to us (physically or temporally), and our perceived
differences or similarities to the person or group. It also points to how critically narratives
affect the way that we view historical figures- for example, who would you rather
find yourself seated next to on a crowded train or bus, a giant** homeless
veteran (with hygiene issues and a history of violence/mayhem/murder) or a wise
master of swordsmanship noted for his keen insight, tactical skill, and
physical prowess? It is complicated to
acknowledge that they are, at least potentially, the same person. Which brings up some questions about that
split in thinking:
1)
Is
it fair to apply modern standards (of conduct, mental health, etc.) to people
from antiquity?
2)
Would
we accept the same level of 'eccentricities' seen in many historical figures in
modern ones? If so, what is a 'bridge
too far' and if not, why?
3)
Can
we find aspects of these figures admirable despite vehemently disagreeing with
them on certain, key, issues?
A. If so, does
it mean that we ought to disregard sections of their works that espouse beliefs
that don't align with our own (or those of our culture)?
4)
Finally,
and possibly most importantly, who is the arbiter in these matters- does it
fall within the orthodox structure of our art(s) or is it the duty of
individual practitioners, to decide for ourselves?
Investigating our arts (and their history) ought not to
be an exercise to find universal answers.
Let’s instead use the process to discover what we actually think
about things (rather than parroting/regurgitating what we’ve heard or been told). This pairs with physical training to develop
a working epistemology, one capable of removing the separation of time and distance. Relying on myths that have persisted for
generations do us no favors and can dissuade future students from finding useful
tools to interact with the world as we find it.
Yours in seeking perspective,
Jigme
Jigme Chobang Daniels, instructor
Aoi Koyamakan Dojo
* Please note: I draw these parallels not to diminish or
impugn his impact and legacy, but because of how widely known his biographical
details are, even among those who aren't terribly familiar with the period.
** The historical Musashi is said to have stood over
6 shaku (6 feet/nearly 2 meters), far taller than average for the time; his hygiene
issues, if true, may have been due to eczema.
No comments:
Post a Comment