Kukkiwon History

[Ty K. Doe]

Sorry I moved this to the TKD forum.

Administrators may delete this.

[Ty K. Doe]

I was looking over the kukkiwon web site and read the history of tkd. The style of tkd that I practice is the Jhoon Rhee system which was influenced by the late General Choi Hong Hi. Which means it is essentially ITF in nature without the politics.

From my experience here in the mid-west most people who practice tkd are essentially in the same boat as me (basically ITF in nature). Which means we all acknowledge the Gen. as the founder of tkd.

I'm concerned that the lengthy history lesson at:

http://www.kukkiwon.or.kr/eng/tkbook/tkhistory.asp?div=2

refuses to even mention the Gen. at all. Has the kukkiwon or the WTF created a mass conspiracey to totally eliminate General Choi and his involvment of tkd completely from history?

My concern is, now that General Choi has passed, that in merely a few years from now any remembrance of General Choi, or even his involvment will be labeled a fabrication of those in the ITF.

Does anyone else feel concerned about that, or am I making a bigger deal out of nothing.

[cali_tkdbruin]

Politics aside, I'm a WTF practitioner, and I can't speak for anyone else from my side of the fence, however, I would like to say that I have respect for General Choi and for what he did to try to advance our Martial Art. Hopefully sometime soon the ITF and WTF will be able to put their differences aside and come together without any further animosity... :asian:

[cali_tkdbruin]

Politics aside, I'm a WTF practitioner, and I can't speak for anyone else from my side of the fence, however, I would like to say that I have respect for General Choi and for what he did to try to advance our Martial Art.

Hopefully sometime soon the ITF and WTF will be able to put their differences aside and come together without any further animosity... :asian:

[Zepp]

Choi wasn't the sole founder of TKD, but there's no denying that he was very important in the art's recent history.

From the little bit of research I've done on TKD history, I understand that the General was on rather poor terms with many of his peers when he stepped down as president of the Korean TKD Association (which later expanded into the WTF). Since some of his political enemies are still around, I think it may be quite some time before Kukkiwon gives him the acknowledgement he deserves.

(I take it you've read the other thread on this forum about General Choi?)

ITF folks shouldn't be too offended by this. I train with the World TKD Association. Our Grandmaster, Duk Sung Son, who is also still around, was formerly the head of the Chung Do Kwan, and even awarded Choi several black belt ranks, but he gets the least acknowledgement of anyone.

Politics suck.

[Ty K. Doe]

By Zepp:
Choi wasn't the sole founder of TKD

This is where I get kinda get confused by history. I know that in Korea there were several kwans that combined under the umbrella of tkd. Which leads me to believe that after the name tkd was instituted, several different variations of tkd may have exhisted. However, wasn't it the General's knowledge of taekyon and shotokan that was taught to those with him in prison, and the same combination of styles (Oh Do Kwan) taught to his troops in the millitary?

I once read an interview of the General's where he stated that he brought the teachers of the other kwans into his house to agree on a standardized name. When the others did not want to use the name tae kwon do (after taekyon) he pretty muched forced them to do so.

So maybe he's not the sole founder, but wouldn't he be considered the sole instigator of creating the art?

[Ty K. Doe]

By cali_tkdbruin:Hopefully sometime soon the ITF and WTF will be able to put their differences aside and come together without any further animosity...

This may just be a conspiracy theory of mine but...

Now that there's an international court system in place, I can see one side or the other try to coin the term Tae Kwon Do, and anyone who is not following the system will be forbidden to use the name (by an international court order). Especially now that General Choi is gone and because there is so much animosity.

I do find it ironic though that there is so much negativity between the two federations that it kinda goes against the tenents of tkd (not by the practicioners but the political heads).

[Zepp]

Originally posted by Ty K. Doe
So maybe he's not the sole founder, but wouldn't he be considered the sole instigator of creating the art?

At the risk of getting into an argument over semantics, I'd have to say no. Howabout if we say he was the driving force behind the unification of the kwans and the internationalization of Tae Kwon Do?

I think you're you're right about the name though Ty. Choi did have to pretty much force it on everyone. I think the fight about the name was just because everyone else wanted the credit of naming the art.

I believe he also trained under several of the other kwans before founding his own Oh Do Kwon. I know that he headed the Chung Do Kwan for a while too, after Mr. Son left.

You really think the WTF and ITF would sue each other over the name "Tae Kwon Do?" That'd be a sad day for martial arts indeed.

[arnisador]

Thread moved and merged.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-

[MichiganTKD]

Choi and his assistant Smithers, er, Tae Hi Nam were both students of Chung Do Kwan under Won Kuk Lee. After GM Lee left Korea, many of his students, Choi included, went on to found their own schools. The name "Tae Kwon Do" was definitely coined from within the Chung Do Kwan, and was far from universally accepted because of that. The other Kwan leaders felt excluded. Anyway, Choi says he coined it, while Son Duk Sung claims he did. Only those two would know for sure.
Gen. Choi was, to be sure, a major force as far as unifying the kwans per orders from the Korean government, and was certainly instrumental in promoting it worldwide. But I think he has tried to take credit for something he didn't create. What we call Tae Kwon Do is actually an umbrella art of different styles created by merging the kwans and their approaches to unarmed fighting. This is why you have Japanese influences, Chinese influences, Korean kicking etc.

[terryl965]

Well it has been a couple years now since his passing and I still feel he is remembered from the entire TKD world, What is everyone elses take on this?

[dancingalone]

My TKD is through Jhoon Rhee's line, so naturally I hold him in higher respect than General Choi. Certainly Choi influenced Rhee and talked him into adopting the Chang Hon forms, so I have to give a nod to the late General for that, but our day-to-day practice never tilted towards his world. My studio and those in our family were never members of the ITF and we never wanted to be.

[terryl965]

My TKD is through Jhoon Rhee's line, so naturally I hold him in higher respect than General Choi. Certainly Choi influenced Rhee and talked him into adopting the Chang Hon forms, so I have to give a nod to the late General for that, but our day-to-day practice never tilted toward's his world. My studio and those in our family were never members of the ITF and we never wanted to be.


I can certainly understand that, but I was just talking about how he or if he is remembered.

[dancingalone]

Well, he's not remembered for much in my lineage other than creating the Chang Hon forms, 'going North Korean', and 'inventing' and promulgating sine wave movement. I don't think of the General at all in my daily practice. Not trying to dishonor the man's memory, but he's not at the head of the TKD pantheon from my perspective at all. I can certainly understand why those who practice the ITF style might feel differently.

He's sort of like Gichin Funakoshi to me: a figure from the past who probably influenced what I practice today at least peripherally, but not someone I really put at the head of MY table.

[terryl965]

Well, he's not remembered for much in my lineage other than creating the Chang Hon forms, 'going North Korean', and 'inventing' and promulgating sine wave movement. I don't think of the General at all in my daily practice. Not trying to dishonor the man's memory, but he's not at the head of the TKD pantheon from my perspective at all. I can certainly understand why those who practice the ITF style might feel differently.

He's sort of like Gichin Funakoshi to me: a figure from the past who probably influenced what I practice today at least peripherally, but not someone I really put at the head of MY table.

I can understand that as well

[Kacey]

Well, I don't think about him in a daily basis, certainly - but I am occasionally reminded of seminars I took with Gen. Choi, or hear stories from my seniors, who went to more seminars than I did, and knew him better.

History is written through the lens of the person(s) writing it - only in recent times, as multiple viewpoints on events have become available, has a less subjective rendering of history been possible, and even with that, different people who see the same event will write different things. Only by combining as many perspectives as possible can you come close to the truth - and even then, "truth" is subjective.

[terryl965]

Well, I don't think about him in a daily basis, certainly - but I am occasionally reminded of seminars I took with Gen. Choi, or hear stories from my seniors, who went to more seminars than I did, and knew him better.

History is written through the lens of the person(s) writing it - only in recent times, as multiple viewpoints on events have become available, has a less subjective rendering of history been possible, and even with that, different people who see the same event will write different things. Only by combining as many perspectives as possible can you come close to the truth - and even then, "truth" is subjective.

You are absolutely right Kacey

[Miles]

I was looking over the kukkiwon web site and read the history of tkd.

...I'm concerned that the lengthy history lesson at:

http://www.kukkiwon.or.kr/eng/tkbook/tkhistory.asp?div=2

refuses to even mention the Gen. at all. Has the kukkiwon or the WTF created a mass conspiracey to totally eliminate General Choi and his involvment of tkd completely from history?


Does anyone else feel concerned about that, or am I making a bigger deal out of nothing.

The history section at the Kukkiwon website mentions none of the Kwan founders, several of whom reportedly had more martial arts experience than did Gen. Choi.

It is not a conspiracy but rather an acknowledgment that Taekwondo as practiced in Korea, was a group effort.

Miles

[YoungMan]

Considering all the promotion that Gen. Choi did for Tae Kwon Do, he had surprisingly little martial arts experience. Other than a black belt in Shotokan (and even this is debatable depending on your sources), he had not much experience. This is one reason why I don't have as much respect for him.
Contrast this with several Kwan Founders (Lee, Yoon, Hwang etc.) who had many years of experience. Many of them undoubtably resented being arm-twisted by a guy like Choi who didn't have the same level of experience they did.

[Kacey]

Considering all the promotion that Gen. Choi did for Tae Kwon Do, he had surprisingly little martial arts experience. Other than a black belt in Shotokan (and even this is debatable depending on your sources), he had not much experience. This is one reason why I don't have as much respect for him.
Contrast this with several Kwan Founders (Lee, Yoon, Hwang etc.) who had many years of experience. Many of them undoubtably resented being arm-twisted by a guy like Choi who didn't have the same level of experience they did.
So... only those with greater experience can promote an art? What do you think would have happened without that level of promotion? I'm being totally serious here - had those practitioners who were "arm-twisted by a guy like Choi who didn't have the same level of experience they did" not been "arm-twisted", would TKD be where it is today? Perhaps it would; perhaps it wouldn't - but competition and promotion can have a significant effect on any activity and how wide-spread it becomes. So he had less experience... so what? Does that make the amount of the time and effort he put into promoting TKD less meaningful?

Like many of his contemporaries, Gen. Choi was a Korean patriot - he devoted his early life to fighting for the freedom of his country, a dream that has only been partially recognized. He devoted his later life to promoting a particular aspect of his national culture. So he had less formal training, less experience, than the others you mention. So what? How does that minimize what he actually did? Why does his promotion of TKD deserve less respect because he spread what he knew instead of waiting for someone else who knew more to promote TKD? How is that bad? I truly do not understand why his "lack of experience" should denigrate the time and effort he put into promotion.

[YoungMan]

Kacey,
I'm not saying he didn't play an important role in the promotion of Tae Kwon Do and its unification. He was very important in that aspect. But as far as being respected as an Instructor who advanced the ART of Tae Kwon Do, he was not. Quite simply, he would never have had success had he not convinced the Chung Do Kwan black belts to follow him.
I've read interviews with CDK Founder Lee, and from an Instructor point of view, Lee was much better than Choi. Choi was simply the face of Tae Kwon Do at that time. It was guys like Lee who gave it substance.

[exile]

Considering all the promotion that Gen. Choi did for Tae Kwon Do, he had surprisingly little martial arts experience. Other than a black belt in Shotokan (and even this is debatable depending on your sources), he had not much experience. This is one reason why I don't have as much respect for him.
Contrast this with several Kwan Founders (Lee, Yoon, Hwang etc.) who had many years of experience. Many of them undoubtably resented being arm-twisted by a guy like Choi who didn't have the same level of experience they did.

I don't want it to seem as though we're ganging up on you, YM, it's not that. You've read my posts, you know that I think that Gen. Choi played ruthless hardball in the down-and-dirty MA politics of the era; you've read (or should have read) Gm. Kim's interview in the January Black Belt... so you know that no one's trying to portray the General as a saint or savior. BUT... he was instrumental into fashioning TKD into a devastatingly effective battlefield combat system that won the sincere respect of South Korea's communist enemies in two very nasty, drawn out wars, the first of which saw the ROK's survival on the line, and looking pretty unlikely at several points. Gen. Choi's initiative was essential in making TKD a terrifically effective tool in those wars. I've read enough testimony from independent sources to convince me that Tae Hi Nam played a far more important role in the development of military TKD than most practitioners are aware of these days, and was invaluable to Gen. Choi as an expert on the technical content of TKD, but it was Choi's clout in the Korean army which made the technical contributions that THN and other virtuouso practitioners worked out available to thousands of ROK soldiers.

As for Gen. Choi's own rank, this is what Dakin Burdick, probably the most authoritative historian of modern KMAs, has to say here (http://ryanshroyer.tripod.com/dakin_burdick.html):


Hong Hi Choi, the future "father of Taekwondo," was meanwhile busy learning Shotokan Karate. To further his education, he was sent to Kyotoo in 1937, where he met Mr. Kim, a Korean instructor of Shotokan Karate. After two years of "concentrated training," Choi gained his 1st Dan. He then went on to the University of Tokyo where he continued his training and gained his 2nd Dan, after which he taught Shotokan Karate at the Tokyo YMCA. When the Second World War began, Choi was "forced to enlist in the Japanese army."

You have to remember that Gen. Choi stirred very strong feelings both ways, he made a lot of bitter enemies and plenty of people with possibly quite legitimate grievances against him were nonetheless probably happy to say anything about him to discredit him once he fell from power because of his attempts at initiating a TKD-based rapprochement with the North Korean government. It's any but simple, what happened at that time. This is one of those cases where the truth suffers greatly at the hands of both those who want to canonize Gen. Choi and those who want to demonize him. My advice is, don't be too quick to rush to judgment here...

[terryl965]

Exile the way I see ir you either love him or hate him there is not much in between anymore.

[IcemanSK]

Another way to see the General was to say he was who he was. As GM Lee, Byung Moo (his right hand man for many years) said about him: (something to effect) that he was passionate about TKD. And sometimes that passion made him more forceful & less compasionate. (This was in the January 2008 issue of TKDTimes).

I'm betting that a lot of beloved politician's own children would say the similiar things about their political parent. "Everyone loved them, but they were never home."

Gen. Choi did great things to advance TKD: but he wasn't always kind in the process.

[YoungMan]

Unfortunately, that ruthlessness resulted in the current ITF-WTF split. Who knows where we'd be if things had turned out differently or if Choi had been a little more flexible.

[exile]

Unfortunately, that ruthlessness resulted in the current ITF-WTF split. Who knows where we'd be if things had turned out differently or if Choi had been a little more flexible.

Very strong personalities, people who are absolutely sure that they're right, very often sow the wind and then reap the whirlwind, or their descendents do; that's what happened here, I'd say. There seems to be an incredible amount of bad blood involved. Karate doesn't seem to have anything like this: there isn't nearly the same level of anger and resentment among the different styles. The whole contrast between the Okinawan/Japanese MA scene and the Korean scene is very deep and striking; I attribute a lot of it to the emergence of the KMAs in the forge of occupation and then a desperate war for survival, and the resulting incredibly 'loaded' symbolic weight that TKD has to carry.

I myself don't mind the WTF/ITF split per se, in terms of different emphases and methods. Try 'em all out and see what works, is the idea; in the end, it's all good for the practitioner. What bothers me about the organizational split between the WTF and ITF is the same as what bothers me about the split within the ITF itself: the huge investment of energy in anger and resentment that could have been put to use in building up the art. Exploring multiple hypotheses is the way we find out the right answer, but sectarian faction-fighting usually just ends up leaving rubble.

[YoungMan]

In a way I can't blame him. 35 years of occupation and then freedom; not surprisingly he and many of the others wanted all traces of the Japanese influences removed. Can't say it wouldn't have turned out any differently.