What do you guys think of the martial artists who go off and change the traditional forms. What gave them that right? These forms were created long ago, and now some local guys have decided to just change, add, and delete some moves. What nerve?
Rex Kwon Do and all alike.
- Thread starter tko4u
- Start date
I think TaeGuek IL Jang should have a 540 in it. I think all yellow belts need to know how to do that technique.
Sorry, I'm punchy:boing2:
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
if, and this is important, if the instructor has a solid base of experience, and wants to change the forms to emphasize a different element, or take out a technique he sees as silly, or impractical, thats fine.
life forms which do no innovate and adapt go extinct
life forms which do no innovate and adapt go extinct
BrandonLucas
3rd Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2007
- Messages
- 902
- Reaction score
- 41
For me, there are several things here on several levels...
I don't have a problem per se with someone wanting to take things from other arts and combine them to make a different art, such as what Bruce Lee did....as long as they are profecient enough in whatever arts they are trying to take from.
What I DO have a problem with is people who think they can acheive rank in one art, and decide that they don't really need to dedicate any time to learn a seperate art, and think they can create something new just because they think they're good enough to do it.
I know this is slightly off topic from the original post, but it just bugs me anyway.
Now, with people changing the traditional forms around in a specific art, such as TKD, but still claiming that they are teaching traditional TKD, I would have a problem with. If they let people know that these are revised forms, and they aren't under any federation or governing body, then sure, I guess...as long as they're practical.
I don't really know why someone would want to change the traditional forms around, though...I agree that they're there to serve a purpose.
I don't have a problem per se with someone wanting to take things from other arts and combine them to make a different art, such as what Bruce Lee did....as long as they are profecient enough in whatever arts they are trying to take from.
What I DO have a problem with is people who think they can acheive rank in one art, and decide that they don't really need to dedicate any time to learn a seperate art, and think they can create something new just because they think they're good enough to do it.
I know this is slightly off topic from the original post, but it just bugs me anyway.
Now, with people changing the traditional forms around in a specific art, such as TKD, but still claiming that they are teaching traditional TKD, I would have a problem with. If they let people know that these are revised forms, and they aren't under any federation or governing body, then sure, I guess...as long as they're practical.
I don't really know why someone would want to change the traditional forms around, though...I agree that they're there to serve a purpose.
Rex kwon do: the way of the king fist.
Given that many students are required to create their own forms after a certain level, I hardly find this surprising. After all, they put the work into it and have an attachment to it. Besides, somebody created the Palgwes, Taekeuks, Chang Hons and Pinans. Some, as in the case of the taegeuks, are quite recent. What gave any of them the right?
For me it depends upon the reasoning. I am a firm believer in keeping the traditional forms intact; a master who wants to change things should create their own forms and variations and teach them in addition to the traditional forms. This maintains the link to the past, while innovating the art.
Regarding masters creating their own forms or variations on existing forms, if there is a good reason, and if there is an applications based reason, then I believe that it is a good thing.
Daniel
Given that many students are required to create their own forms after a certain level, I hardly find this surprising. After all, they put the work into it and have an attachment to it. Besides, somebody created the Palgwes, Taekeuks, Chang Hons and Pinans. Some, as in the case of the taegeuks, are quite recent. What gave any of them the right?
For me it depends upon the reasoning. I am a firm believer in keeping the traditional forms intact; a master who wants to change things should create their own forms and variations and teach them in addition to the traditional forms. This maintains the link to the past, while innovating the art.
Regarding masters creating their own forms or variations on existing forms, if there is a good reason, and if there is an applications based reason, then I believe that it is a good thing.
Daniel
I read an interesting article about forms in Black Belt Magazine.
I am paraphrasing and cutting a long story short:
The idea of anchient forms is complete bull. Forms where a means to practice various techniques. Masters composed the forms as they saw fit, the techniques they preferred in a combination that seems logical.
As the Masters changed or styles, or the Master aged or whatever, forms changed along. Including, but not only the fact that each following Master put a different emphasis on the elements of the form. More block or more punch, or kick or whatever.
I need to clean house, if I caome across the mag, I let you know which it was, I think last year's September issue.
I am paraphrasing and cutting a long story short:
The idea of anchient forms is complete bull. Forms where a means to practice various techniques. Masters composed the forms as they saw fit, the techniques they preferred in a combination that seems logical.
As the Masters changed or styles, or the Master aged or whatever, forms changed along. Including, but not only the fact that each following Master put a different emphasis on the elements of the form. More block or more punch, or kick or whatever.
I need to clean house, if I caome across the mag, I let you know which it was, I think last year's September issue.
Like everything alse inside martial arts form poomsae or Kata's need to eolve as well, when they where developed it was for that timeframe. I love trditional forms but seeing different takes on forms also gives me other ideal when practicing those forms.
Is that how all the major styles came around! I dont recall Kano, Choi, Oyama etc learning lots of different arts.. they simply felt they could improve on the ones they already did!
Whats worse is someone doing a bit of this, a bit of that and thinking they can devise the ultimate art with limited knowlege in any others!
Stuart
As a long time practioner of TKD I always teach and practice forms (to the best of my ability) the way my instructor taught me. To me, changing (addining or subtracting) the form is bastardization of it. If you want to add something or take something from the Poomse, you should tell the student, This is a modified version.(my modified version) True, martial arts is constanly evolving and changing. I have never been so presumtouis to change a TG or CH form. (because, "I think it looks better this way." )
Even at 5th dan (KKW&WCDK) I consider this way out of my pay grade. Now, for demostration pourposes the rules change. I encourage my student to remain traditionalists. However that does'nt mean thay can't come up with their own form. You can't change a TG or CH on your on and still call it a TG, CH or any other traditional form-Let the 9th dans do that. Not some rouge 1st, 2nd or 3rd degree.
Even at 5th dan (KKW&WCDK) I consider this way out of my pay grade. Now, for demostration pourposes the rules change. I encourage my student to remain traditionalists. However that does'nt mean thay can't come up with their own form. You can't change a TG or CH on your on and still call it a TG, CH or any other traditional form-Let the 9th dans do that. Not some rouge 1st, 2nd or 3rd degree.
dancingalone
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 5,322
- Reaction score
- 281
I understand where you are coming from, but I fear you're being a bit misguided with your ire. Consider this:
1) Anko Itosu, the Okinawan karate master, who designed the Pinan kata, from which arguably the Chang Hon and Palgwe forms descended from, taught his students differently according to their body types and abilities. It's partially this reason why so many versions of Bassai are floating around today as his students passed on what they learned from him, not knowing or more likely not caring that their version was different from that taught to another. To the Okinawans, kata wasn't something static that is inscribed into the stone tablets. At one point it was both taught and practiced organically.
2) Look at the Shotokan Heian forms and compare them to the Shorin-ryu Pinan kata of Itosu. Note their differences. Now look at the Pyung Ahn forms used by the original Korean karate people before the name TKD was coined. Note the (slighter) differences. Now compare the Chang Hon and Palgwe forms to their clear source of inspiration, the Pyung Ahns. Note the dramatic rearrangement of choreography even if many of the same sequences will seem familiar.
The point is that you're on a slippery slope when you use adjectives like "traditional", since at some point in your lineage, your founder was probably untraditional himself. That's how "styles" begin.
My suggestion is to just train hard and learn all you can from your teacher. Don't worry about what others are doing - if they want to "change" a form around, so what? They're just following another time-honored tradition themselves.
At some point if you have practiced well, you will have internalized what the form is teaching anyway and you won't need the form, other than as a useful way to practice and instruct others. Spoken another way: I am studying goju ryu karate today from a very good sensei. We are both goju ryu men and we practice the same kata. Will my kata or karate look exactly like his? It cannot. We are different people and we will express ourselves differently. Sensei might prefer soft blocks and redirection to my my more direct approach. But that's OK. Both possibilities are within the kata after all. I became a much better martial artist once I realized pattern practice is not about duplicating my teacher's movements perfectly. It's about learning the principles of movement and balance and being comfortable within my own skin.
kailat
Green Belt
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2006
- Messages
- 199
- Reaction score
- 17
My opinion is pretty 1 sided concerning kata. I started korean karate back in 84'/85'. So our kata has been the same for nearly 3 decades.
WHITE-YELOW: Basic 1, 2, 3, -Chon-ji
YEllOW-BLUE : DO-SAN, PINAN shodan
BLUE-GREEN: PINAN nidan, PINAN sandan
GREEN-PURPLE: PINAN yondon
PURPLE-BROWN3: PINAN godan
BROWN3-BROWN2: Naihanchi sho
BROWN2-BROWN1/BLACK1: BASSAISHO
now that I have that outta the way.. I've seen over the years these same forms taught, and ran in and out of competition, promotion, and in class from school to school differently. I in fact sat on a black belt board at a tournament and watched a kata that was BASSAISHO ran that was not the same Bassai I learned years ago. So in fact these kata are evolving for whatever reason. I think mostly to enhance and look "prettier and catchier" to judges in the tournament scene moreso than any other reason. THey want a form that stands out from the rest, that shows strength, power, technique and control. Some kata have this element others do not.. Traditional kata was not taught for competition.. ( Ive seen where students of our local dojo's of those who still compete by running these older traditional kata for competition just cannot place or even stand out to the judges any more... NO matter how perfect they are.. The more glamorous and eye catchy these kata's are ran in competition seems to always over ride the traditional kata anymore... this is really one of the things that has steered me out of the competitional field
Traditional Kata was taught for self defense technique guidelines as well as a form of control on breathing and stamina..
Today's tournament is not the same as tournament of the 60's, 70's, 80's, and even the 90's. WHICH is why I have discontinued competition...I don't have the desire to learn and keep up w/ these young kids and more sophisticated dojo's who are creative for nothing more than winning a trophy for fame.. Thats cool that they do that.. As I love to watch these XTREME MA competitions etc... But that stuff would of never of flown back when I was competing.. Oh HOW TIMES have changed...
One of the reasons I have left the traditional arts behind me, such as Korean Karate is because it is no longer sought after as a sake of studying.
Today you have either: COMPTITION MA / or COMBAT MA it's one or the other that people are getting into.. I for one have decided to follow the more realistic approach and self defense, combative side of martial arts, as competition does not excite me any more. And my student base is law enforcement officers from Police, correctional, security, military, bouncers etc... and these guys have no desire to ever A) earn a black belt, or any rank for that matter, B) wear a traditional GI or any other sort of oriental pajama from the ancient and C) want to ever compete as their only source of competition is the mere truth that what I teach them and they use, allows them to go home safely to their families after work.
SO to the original topic, I SAY TO EACH THIER OWN, and NOTHING WRONG W/ EVOLVING THE KATA TO BETTER SUITE THEM FOR WHATEVER THIER PURPOSE IS!!! it's all fun and games in the end anyway...
WHITE-YELOW: Basic 1, 2, 3, -Chon-ji
YEllOW-BLUE : DO-SAN, PINAN shodan
BLUE-GREEN: PINAN nidan, PINAN sandan
GREEN-PURPLE: PINAN yondon
PURPLE-BROWN3: PINAN godan
BROWN3-BROWN2: Naihanchi sho
BROWN2-BROWN1/BLACK1: BASSAISHO
now that I have that outta the way.. I've seen over the years these same forms taught, and ran in and out of competition, promotion, and in class from school to school differently. I in fact sat on a black belt board at a tournament and watched a kata that was BASSAISHO ran that was not the same Bassai I learned years ago. So in fact these kata are evolving for whatever reason. I think mostly to enhance and look "prettier and catchier" to judges in the tournament scene moreso than any other reason. THey want a form that stands out from the rest, that shows strength, power, technique and control. Some kata have this element others do not.. Traditional kata was not taught for competition.. ( Ive seen where students of our local dojo's of those who still compete by running these older traditional kata for competition just cannot place or even stand out to the judges any more... NO matter how perfect they are.. The more glamorous and eye catchy these kata's are ran in competition seems to always over ride the traditional kata anymore... this is really one of the things that has steered me out of the competitional field
Traditional Kata was taught for self defense technique guidelines as well as a form of control on breathing and stamina..
Today's tournament is not the same as tournament of the 60's, 70's, 80's, and even the 90's. WHICH is why I have discontinued competition...I don't have the desire to learn and keep up w/ these young kids and more sophisticated dojo's who are creative for nothing more than winning a trophy for fame.. Thats cool that they do that.. As I love to watch these XTREME MA competitions etc... But that stuff would of never of flown back when I was competing.. Oh HOW TIMES have changed...
One of the reasons I have left the traditional arts behind me, such as Korean Karate is because it is no longer sought after as a sake of studying.
Today you have either: COMPTITION MA / or COMBAT MA it's one or the other that people are getting into.. I for one have decided to follow the more realistic approach and self defense, combative side of martial arts, as competition does not excite me any more. And my student base is law enforcement officers from Police, correctional, security, military, bouncers etc... and these guys have no desire to ever A) earn a black belt, or any rank for that matter, B) wear a traditional GI or any other sort of oriental pajama from the ancient and C) want to ever compete as their only source of competition is the mere truth that what I teach them and they use, allows them to go home safely to their families after work.
SO to the original topic, I SAY TO EACH THIER OWN, and NOTHING WRONG W/ EVOLVING THE KATA TO BETTER SUITE THEM FOR WHATEVER THIER PURPOSE IS!!! it's all fun and games in the end anyway...
I think the more modern idea is that forms are not to be changed. Go back 50 years and you'll start seeing a string of people who likely all changed things to suit themselves and their goals.
There is value in some traditional things and I think it's good form to try to pass along what you learned as you learned it rather than alter things a great deal. And I think that for several reasons, among them being that altering things as they suit each person can foster ill feelings and superiority issues between schools under the same umbrella rather than an appreciation of individuality.
That said, arts need to evolve - to some degree, at least - though the origin of forms will be hotly debated for as long as meatbags like us still rely on our own mobility as a main source of short-distance transportation.
Forms have their place so long as it's not too big a place. Just like opinions. Mine isn't that big - rather ambiguous, really, but if I had to lean one way or the other, I'd lean towards keeping things a bit more traditional.
That said, arts need to evolve - to some degree, at least - though the origin of forms will be hotly debated for as long as meatbags like us still rely on our own mobility as a main source of short-distance transportation.
Forms have their place so long as it's not too big a place. Just like opinions. Mine isn't that big - rather ambiguous, really, but if I had to lean one way or the other, I'd lean towards keeping things a bit more traditional.
kailat
Green Belt
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2006
- Messages
- 199
- Reaction score
- 17
Ok so tonite, I decided to venture into a friend of mines karate school. As I walked in, he made sure to bow me in and announce who i was to those who have not met me etc..
So to my surprise, they were runnng thru kata tonite... So as I sat there and made my way thru the floor helping out I noticed there was one student who stood out from the others. He was a former student of well, an instructor who is no longer allowed to teach as he was found guilty of having an affair w/ an underage student and his school was closed down.
So i guess that all good and dedicated students have to go somewhere. So at anyrate, I noticed that he was running the exact same kata as the rest of the students however, his form was totally different. Totally acceptable seeing how he was taught from another teacher.. So as I stood there and watched him.. he had excellent form and great technique and stances. So, as he was kinda throwing the rest of the group off, I was challenged to announce that he is not doing anything wrong he is doing kata just as he was taught. This gave me a great opportunity to exactly open up to this topic as we've been discussing in this thread!!
I allowed him to run his kata as he was taught and my friend asked me my opinion as to should he allow him to run is kata the way he was taught or change for the sake of the other students? I said well ultimetly thats your decision for its your school. I personally don't see anything wrong w/ it.. In fact it could help his other students see another way the forms can be produced... He used more deep stances, and used alot of slow moving, power techniques w/ hard breathing in certain areas where as the other students were not taught that way. Personally I feel for competition level the other student was doing a very unique strategy and was not right or wrong in his teachings..
It also allowed for me to end the class w/ examples of both ways thru doing BUNKAI.. which really ended the class w/ alot of good oooh's and ahhh's ; ) i enjoy mixing class up and sharing truth of kata instead of a basic understanding.
all in all it was agreat visit, although I no longer do traditional karate any longer im sure I'll make my way back again to help this group out. As my friend really enjoyed my showing up and helping out..
So i guess that all good and dedicated students have to go somewhere. So at anyrate, I noticed that he was running the exact same kata as the rest of the students however, his form was totally different. Totally acceptable seeing how he was taught from another teacher.. So as I stood there and watched him.. he had excellent form and great technique and stances. So, as he was kinda throwing the rest of the group off, I was challenged to announce that he is not doing anything wrong he is doing kata just as he was taught. This gave me a great opportunity to exactly open up to this topic as we've been discussing in this thread!!
I allowed him to run his kata as he was taught and my friend asked me my opinion as to should he allow him to run is kata the way he was taught or change for the sake of the other students? I said well ultimetly thats your decision for its your school. I personally don't see anything wrong w/ it.. In fact it could help his other students see another way the forms can be produced... He used more deep stances, and used alot of slow moving, power techniques w/ hard breathing in certain areas where as the other students were not taught that way. Personally I feel for competition level the other student was doing a very unique strategy and was not right or wrong in his teachings..
It also allowed for me to end the class w/ examples of both ways thru doing BUNKAI.. which really ended the class w/ alot of good oooh's and ahhh's ; ) i enjoy mixing class up and sharing truth of kata instead of a basic understanding.
all in all it was agreat visit, although I no longer do traditional karate any longer im sure I'll make my way back again to help this group out. As my friend really enjoyed my showing up and helping out..
- Thread Starter
- #17
Form allows the beauty of the "art" To shine. Indeed, Form is, by nature an "individualistic" endeavor, it allows the practitioner to shine as well, putting their personal flair and signature on it.
Having said that, Lets say I am at a seminar with GM Hae Man Pak, VP of the Chung Do Kwan - he's been around for awhile!, as a matter of fact, he helped author the TG patterns. So he is teaching a group of us Jitae. He is NOT going to allow you to change, for example, a low block for a high block. And if he says, this move is supposed to be done in a front stance and you decide to do a back stance, then its just free-style, why even bother to learn Jitae from him, just create your own. I remember he stayed on me one time for 10 minutes on a turn in Geumgan- to make sure I was able to do the movment the way He wanted. And to me, doing "exactly" what he wanted was my mission. There was no, "Sir, I don't like doing it this way.
I completely respect his authority in CDK TKD regaurding regaurding form. Aflter he leaves- I never think, ya know. I'll just throw what he said out the window and do it the "way I like it" I do the form the way he showed me. Hence, keeping it as traditional as possible.
I realize, as I have stated before, from school to school there are slight difference in the over all apperance of the poomsea, Some movements of the same form may be fast, or the same move could be done with tension.
So, at least in my mind either you are doing a traditional form (in it's current state of evolution) or if you change the pattern itself (movements and stances)- you re doing a creative poomse.
I am not referring to doing deeper stances or things of this nature. Deeper stances with flud transitions between them is always a plus! (if the form calls for it)
Having said that, Lets say I am at a seminar with GM Hae Man Pak, VP of the Chung Do Kwan - he's been around for awhile!, as a matter of fact, he helped author the TG patterns. So he is teaching a group of us Jitae. He is NOT going to allow you to change, for example, a low block for a high block. And if he says, this move is supposed to be done in a front stance and you decide to do a back stance, then its just free-style, why even bother to learn Jitae from him, just create your own. I remember he stayed on me one time for 10 minutes on a turn in Geumgan- to make sure I was able to do the movment the way He wanted. And to me, doing "exactly" what he wanted was my mission. There was no, "Sir, I don't like doing it this way.
I completely respect his authority in CDK TKD regaurding regaurding form. Aflter he leaves- I never think, ya know. I'll just throw what he said out the window and do it the "way I like it" I do the form the way he showed me. Hence, keeping it as traditional as possible.
I realize, as I have stated before, from school to school there are slight difference in the over all apperance of the poomsea, Some movements of the same form may be fast, or the same move could be done with tension.
So, at least in my mind either you are doing a traditional form (in it's current state of evolution) or if you change the pattern itself (movements and stances)- you re doing a creative poomse.
I am not referring to doing deeper stances or things of this nature. Deeper stances with flud transitions between them is always a plus! (if the form calls for it)
Last edited:
BrandonLucas
3rd Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2007
- Messages
- 902
- Reaction score
- 41
I think part of what is said here is where the grey area is: If you are doing a set form, say, Chon-Ji, and you replace a low block with a high block, then you are drastically altering the form. But, if you execute the block as a concentration block, then that isn't as drastic a change.
I can agree to slight variations on set forms, as each person is going to learn from a different teacher. If I was taught to perform Chon-Ji with destructive power, but Johnny from up north was taught to perform Chon-Ji with concetration techniques, neither way is wrong. It's just the INTERPERATATION of the form.
Now, if Johnny from up north were to perform Chon-Ji with 2 flying sidekicks in the middle of the form, then the form would no longer be Chon-Ji.
And it's not that this is necessarily a bad thing, either. I do understand that things need to evolve. But the form should not be labled or taught as the original Chon-Ji; instead, it should be renamed and taught in addition to the cirriculum that is set.
Now, one big question that I'm not sure how to answer myself would be how would it be legit if an instructor changed the entire cirriculum of his school specifically to revolve around the altered forms? Would he need to clear this with any federation? What if he's not affiliated with any federations? Can an instructor just make up totally new forms and still teach TKD?
I don't know that it would change the art, per se. It would still be TKD in the sense that the moves themselves would be traditional, but the forms have been altered. But it still raises some interesting questions. Any thoughts?
Who has the experience and qualifications to change them?
It seems most people become "qualified" after the fact, largely due to having been successful instructors who's students go off and open schools and a generation or two later, they have their qualifications inflated.
Have a look at some of the great masters, and exactly what experience they had when they started changing things and teaching things different then what they had been taught. In most cases there are quite a few people here with far more experience then they had.
So I doubt it's background or experience that gave them that right.
Jigoro Kano had about 5 years training and was in his very early 20's when he broke Jujitsu training and went his own way.
Most of TKD's founders where fairly low ranking black belts in Karate, and deviated from that to make a korean martial art.
I'd be surprise if you could find a style founder that made there changes after 20+ years training, most seem to have done it with 5-10 years training and when they where still fairly young.
