"Original Tae Kwon Do"??

pma-ire

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=3148976&postcount=210

Stephen,

Choi was not the only person to develop TKD! There was also his training partner In Nam Tae who has been written out of much of the ITF history. But seems to have been the driving factor of the development of the kicking style in TKD.

Choi had only asked that Tae Kwon Do be used as the name of the new grouping of Korean Martial Arts under the Korean KTA which at the time meant Korean Tae Soo Do Association.

Up until then he had been training and teaching Korean Karate learnt from his Chung Do Kwan and Shotokan training. The demanding of subjection from the other Kwan leaders to his new developing way of teaching over their own meant that he was quickly seen as a bully and was removed from his possition of President of the KTA, and eventually lead to the retraction of his honary 4 dan from the Chung Do Kwan (which was also helped by the fact that he wrote a letter to the leaders of the Chung Do Kwan a year later demanding he be given a 6th dan!!).

What did he really do?

He took the forms learnt from Karate, both Korean and Japanese, and chopped them up and jigged them around!! Heian (Pyong Ahn in Korean) 1-5 are the basis of the first 5 or 6 ITF (Chang Hon) Hyung. Also there are many more direct stolen kata with slight changes made so that they would look more Korean.

In fact, all modern TKD movements were created with this in mind. This was done without any notion of the original movements meanings being understood, and took away some of the practicality in art. Choi's TKD is all about throwing your strikes from A to B as hard as you can. While the original theory was much softer than this idea, and was more open to interpretation.

Tim_Murphy

The RITA seem to use the phrase 'original TKD' as a selling point. What they actually seem to mean is original association. Original TKD, as in what it was like in the '50's and '60's is very different from TKD of today.
I wouldn't get too worked up about the phrase, it's basically just product differentiation, I've seen other associations with ads saying biggest or best association amounst other things.

As long as the Instructor is teaching the art and moral culture that General Choi spent his life developing then organisations dont matter.

I've heard numerous stories about General Choi, quite a lot of them not very flatering. I would be very careful in trying to teach morals to people, it's really not general choi's or anyone's elses place to do it.

Innervision

Tim_Murphy wrote:

I would be very careful in trying to teach morals to people, it's really not general choi's or anyone's elses place to do it.

Surely a martial art that incorporates positive morals can only be a good thing?

dlofnep

Innervision wrote:

Surely a martial art that incorporates positive morals can only be a good thing?

I think Tim's point was that it's not any one man's place to tell you what to do and what not to do.

Cake Fiend

Innervision wrote:

Surely a martial art that incorporates positive morals can only be a good thing?

Even aside from an instructor's right (or lack thereof) to impose his personal moral opinion on a student, let's be realistic - if an adult really wants to use martial knowledge for nefarious purposes, do you really think chanting the Dojo Kun / [whatever the TKD equivalent is] is going to stop that? It mightn't be a bad idea for children, but an adult should know better in the first place - and if they don't, that's hardly going to make them change their spots.

Innervision

dlofnep wrote:

I think Tim's point was that it's not any one man's place to tell you what to do and what not to do.

Yeah I get what you mean, but isn't that a bit strong? I wouldn't class myself as being "told what to do" in Taekwon-Do, more like advised etc. Isn't this making General Choi out to be someone who controlled people totally?!

Clive

Tim´s very correct point is that, since General Choi was a liar, a gambler and a thief, why the hell should anyone listen to moral lessons from him?

Cabelo

Defamation of character right there

But I feel that Choi himself has become beside the point now being discussed. Surely the idea of anyone's morals being imposed on another in any way is wrong? Or is that just a part of life normally? I'm quite sure most people's parents impose their own sensibilities on them.

Is that wrong too?

pma-ire

Cabelo wrote:

Surely the idea of anyone's morals being imposed on another in any way is wrong?

Nothing should be imposed on you! Everyone has the right to live within whatever moral bounds they want (once they don't interfeer with anyone else)! It also must carry on to their MA training. If someone thinks it's crap, then they can only mention it if asked. Not demand an about change due to them being the untimate, original, best, etc..etc..

Choi was a bully! And craved power in the newly developing nation of South Korea. If he only had a bit of humility he might have held the KTA together and not have the splinters in TKD that have developed since.

Cabelo wrote:

I'm quite sure most people's parents impose their own sensibilities on them.

Is that wrong too?

No! If there is anyone that can impose there own values on you it is your parents! But impose is a very strong word. Educate would be bettter, and you just have to hope that it's the right set of morals that is being passed on.

pma-ire

Innervision wrote:

Isn't this making General Choi out to be someone who controlled people totally?!

That was his aim! He raised through the ranks fairly fast due to the fact that a lot of people higher than him were getting killed in battle (the sad fact of war). He was also close to the first President of S.Korea and tried to get Presidental decree to be instilled as the Head of all Korean MA practice. Which he tried to turn into his way thought in the Oh Do Kwan (my way school) the army MA school he and In Nam Tae ran.

The structure of ITF TKD is all about subjection, and a way of getting people to see the higher rank/instructor/master or Choi as a demi God! Yes Sir, No Sir 3 bags full Sir!! Is all crap from the army and really has no place in Martial Arts because it develops a blind acceptance of what is being told to you. If you question this in anyway then you are breaking ranks and will be punished!! Total Bull and it does not develop the individuals own ablities to fight it creates robots, that are nice and compliant.

pma-ire

Tim_Murphy wrote:

The RITA seem to use the phrase 'original TKD' as a selling point. What they actually seem to mean is original association. Original TKD, as in what it was like in the '50's and '60's is very different from TKD of today.

I know Tim! But the RITA are well known (and I'm not saying that Stephen is like this) for saying that anyone that is not with them is not really teaching TKD and are cowboys! :rolleyes:

memphis

pma-ire wrote:

The structure of ITF TKD is all about subjection, and a way of getting people to see the higher rank/instructor/master or Choi as a demi God! Yes Sir, No Sir 3 bags full Sir!! Is all crap from the army and really has no place in Martial Arts because it develops a blind acceptance of what is being told to you. If you question this in anyway then you are breaking ranks and will be punished!! Total Bull and it does not develop the individuals own ablities to fight it creates robots, that are nice and compliant.

Saying Yes sir and No sir is just comman courtesy and respectful of the other person. I don't really think this is something that I learn from TKD, its in fact something that my folks drummed into me from a young age. Its just the era they came from, and the way they were brought up, and it subsequently rubbed off on me. I wouldn't call it bull****. Its just comman courtesy, and damn good manners, something i hope will rub off on my own kids (if I ever have any).

The point I'm tryin to make is although someone may not have the right to IMPOSE something upon you they do have the right to guide you, to lead you. Choi may not have been the perfect role model, but he was a leader, and an advicer, etc. Do you not agree??

Musashi

I'd say I,like most lads here,can see crap when it's being spouted.

Take the tenets as an example,defend myself,fine..............defend others,maybe.unless their kicking was richly deserved.
Defense of the weak? Maybe the weak ought to have looked out for themselves and went for some SD training? Maybe the weak are richly deserving of a beating.I know in these troubled times I'll defend myself,my wife and child,maybe my kid brothers,after that the lads should be able to take care of themselves.

Fair enough you hear stories about women being raped in front of commuters who don't try to help,I'd hate to be the one who stood by and let that happen.I'd also hate to be the guy who had a go,got ****ed up and then my wife and child got hurt because I had superhero fantasies!

You have to weigh up the risks,your first responsibility is to yourself and your family,what good are your skills if wasted in defense of a stranger and then your family needs you? On the other hand if you lead by example maybe some of the other bystanders will get involved and make it a bad day for the scumbags? Who knows? End of the day it is up to the individual how far they want to go or what they are willing to believe, or even risk, in their own lives.

You put up with a certain amount of balls talk in any pursuit in order to gain the knowledge you require.Has no-one here had to put up with a scum bag college lecturer to secure a degree or better? As the saying goes "You have to listen to thunder", not necessarily you have to fear it or heed it at all.

If the signal to noise ratio is poor,move on to where you can learn more with less stupid talk.If there are no closer options ,employ heavy filtration through a critical mind to sort wheat from chaff.

You know that saying "there are no stupid questions", while you are learning and questioning your time isn't being wasted,even if it means that you realise what you are doing is pants and that you need to find a different way/path/sytem or Instructor.

Cabelo

Surely you're not saying that being weak and incapable of self defence warrants a beating? That's vaguely nauseating.

You cad.

Musashi

I'm saying that the weak develop their own survival traits,not linked to a sexy Dan Grade of TaeKwonDo like myself saving them.

If the only response the weak have is "wait until a TMA sees you and beats you out of righteous indignation" they'll have a long feckin wait!

If saving this eejit,prolly from him or her self, costs me nothing,then I'm all for being the caped crusader.
If it will endanger me and mine then nerdlinger needs to learn to shut the hell up and avoid rough folks, or learn to take responsibility for their own safety.The days of knights in shining anything are long gone, we are all on our own.

Surely you're not saying that being weak and incapable of self defence warrants a beating? That's vaguely nauseating.

Not saying it warrants it,but it could lead to it anyhow.Survival of the fittest is not limited to the plains of Africa or the side streets of Brasil. Being weak ,incapable and a lippy smart arse may however lead to a beating.Your world view may dictate otherwise but outside of the chocolate factory real world rules apply.

Seeing as Capoeira is primarily a slave art you,of all people,shouild have a better handle on how the strong treat the weak unless taught otherwise?

Cabelo

As it's taught to us, capoeira is the art that liberated the slaves. Not all of the slaves could do it. Not by a long stretch. The capoeiristas turned up to work injured and with cuts, bruises and slashes, the others looked after them, picked up the slack until they were well enough to work and play again.

Then, the weak having done their part for the weakest among them at the time, they were liberated by their capoeiristas later.

It's a different context. In an atmosphere of slavery and total cultural oppression, the weak had to look after their strong to ensure that they could look out for them. I don't see the parallel.

[Edit] I've been itching to ask. I understand the concept of MMA, but what does TMA stand for?

Musashi

TMA generally stands for Traditional Martial Arts

I'm not even sure what that means any more?

Maybe TMA is the basis for MMA or some lads just like fighting????


If you rely on blades then the High Court awaits you!!

vasch_ro

Musashi wrote:

Maybe TMA is the basis for MMA

mma is a combination of 2 or more TMA's

pma-ire

memphis wrote:

Saying Yes sir and No sir is just comman courtesy and respectful of the other person. I don't really think this is something that I learn from TKD, its in fact something that my folks drummed into me from a young age. Its just the era they came from, and the way they were brought up, and it subsequently rubbed off on me.

Memphis man! Your lucky to have the instructor and know the group of instructors involved with him! There all sound heads, and I know that Ruairi don't go in for the SIR thing in his own class. But it is an ego inflation to many guys that float around with there ranks as a reason to bow down to them.

memphis wrote:

I wouldn't call it bull****. Its just comman courtesy, and damn good manners, something i hope will rub off on my own kids (if I ever have any).

God help us

I want my kids to respect everyone and there rights to be themselves. Then if anyone proves themselves unworthy of that respect then treat that person accordingly (disassociate and disengage). I don't mind calling someone by there second name (Mr. o'Leary), thats formal and best suited to someone you don't have a personal relationship with (like visiting instructors and the like).

memphis wrote:

The point I'm tryin to make is although someone may not have the right to IMPOSE something upon you they do have the right to guide you, to lead you. Choi may not have been the perfect role model, but he was a leader, and an advicer, etc. Do you not agree??

They have the right to lead you only if you have given them permission!

Choi was a leader. But much of what he (and other Korean Masters) came out with was not really truthful, and only served there own interest.

memphis

pma-ire wrote:

They have the right to lead you only if you have given them permission!

It migyt be a good idea to highlight this point. This is something I missed earlier. The point is Choi may have been a leader, but he lead without permission, right?

Sorry for my above ramble, but that's just my stance on courtesy and integrity. Its nice to be respectful, and it costs nothing to be mannerly. I'll leave it there. Thats my 2 cent

pma-ire

memphis wrote:

It migyt be a good idea to highlight this point. This is something I missed earlier. The point is Choi may have been a leader, but he lead without permission, right?

Sorry for my above ramble, but that's just my stance on courtesy and integrity. Its nice to be respectful, and it costs nothing to be mannerly. I'll leave it there. Thats my 2 cent

your totally intitled to your opinions man

Choi tried to use his millitary and government connections to force his way (bloody called his MA school Oh do Kwan!! Which means My Way School!! Either he was into Old Blue Eyes before his time? Or he had a massive ego!!). The guy who seems to have had the most developmental ablilities in MA's was In Nam Tae! It is documented from interviews of early Korea MA'ers that Tae was a much more able MA'ist than Choi, and Choi used Tae's loyality to keep him in the dark. Which is probably why we don't really hear about him in ITF TKD history. He is even thought to have developed most of the Hyung of Chang Hon (ITF) while Choi had only developed 3 hyung originally??

Nice man that Choi! To wipe out his close friend so that he himself can take all the credit :rolleyes:

The Tennets of TKD can be great for kids as a way of getting them to comply. But they should be a part of everyones ideal. But we are not all perfect!!

pma-ire

I've found an interview with Nam Tae Hi (I had mis-spelt his name :rolleyes:). Even up to the end he supported Choi. while it is evident that he was the one with the practical ablity that was to promote TKD.

Nam Tae Hi
Chung Do Kwan's Quite Man
By Earl Weiss
Published in the Taekwon-Do Times September 2000

In 1946 a young Korean named Nam Tae Hi began his martial arts training. He would leave school at 3:30 p.m. and go to the Dojang and train, not returning home until midnight. This was a 5 day a week regimen. Tang Soo Do training continued under Won Kuk lee at the Chung Do Kwan, and classmates included, Sun Duc Son, and Uhm Woon Kyu (the current head of the Chung Do Kwan in South Korea.)

In those days the only belt colors were White, Brown, and Black. There were eight levels or “Gups” of colored belt before reaching Black Belt. Promotion tests were held every six months and students usually tested and were promoted two gup levels at a time. It therefore took him about two and one half years to reach first degree Black Belt. His junior students then included the late Grandmaster Han Cha Kyo, and Jhoon Rhee.

In 1954 there was a military demonstration before the President of South Korea, Syng Man Rhee. This demonstration included Artillery, other weaponry and martial arts. Nam Tae Hi, then a second degree Black Belt Broke 13 roofing tiles with a downward punch. President Rhee was so impressed by the demonstration that he asked for it to continue after the planned program was over. Since nothing was planned, Nam Tae Hi and Han Cha Kyo assembled materials and did a variety of breaks. President Rhee even examined Nam Tae Hi’s hands to see how he was able to perform the breaks.

After the demonstration which so impressed President Rhee, he ordered all military personnel to receive this martial arts’ training. General Choi recruited instructors from the different Kwans to train people. This was the impetus for creating the new military gym, the Oh Do Kwan.

I asked Grandmaster Nam the meaning of the term Oh Do Kwan (widely translated as “The Gym of My Way”) and why this name was chosen. His answer was very interesting. He told me that since there were instructors from various established Kwans, if an established name was used an instructor may have been reluctant to train or teach at another Kwan and their could be some confusion. (For instance, a Chung Do Kwan instructor may not want to teach his art at a Moo Do Kwan gym.) So the name Oh Do Kwan meant our gym, or the gym for all of us. (Books on Korean translation substantiate this meaning. ) Or perhaps, it reflects someone speaking in the first person whereby each person could consider it the gym of their way. (My idea.)

Although somewhat inactive from teaching Taekwon-Do for the last few years, Grandmaster Nam accepted my invitation to teach a class, (April 6, 1998) during which he reflected on the days of his training preceding the formation of Taekwon-Do, and the early days of Taekwon-Do. These reflections included the introduction of the Blue Belt by General Choi (later leading to the current 10 Gup Color Belt system), and how he performed the physical part of the new patterns as General Choi was mapping them out. He made an analogy saying that it was as if General Choi wrote the script and was the director, and he was the actor. Perhaps that is why he is referred to as “General Choi’s right hand man” in the General’s books.

I could not help but thing that a certain amount of credit goes to Grandmaster Nam for the art we practice today. Had he and the others performing the demonstration for President Rhee been unimpressive, the president would not have ordered instructing the troops in martial arts, Taekwon-Do would never have been formed and the Korean government would not have been so supportive of Taekwon-Do spreading throughout the world. All of us practicing Taekwon-Do might very will be doing another Martial Art (or none at all) right now.

Students from the International Taekwon-Do Federation, Universal Taekwon-Do Federation (Founded by the late Han Cha Kyo) and students with no large organizational affiliations took advantage of an opportunity to hear some history of Taekwon-Do from someone who lived it. It is not often that many people can listen to someone who’s martial arts’ experience spans over 50 years.

memphis

Nice read that. Interesting!!!