CDKJudoka
Purple Belt
Great job and congrats on your test TF.
the first couple videos from my test
- Thread starter Twin Fist
- Start date
What? What'd I say?
Carol, I blame this on you.
miguksaram
Master of Arts
Ok...I have to join in on this because, well I have been rewriting competition rules, getting things together for 2 national tournaments and creating bylaws, so I am extrememly bored. 
Which is great. If you want to practice very traditional forms that's awesome. Now who is to say that book is right? It may have been right at the time of the author putting it out, but things change perspective changes, etc.
If they can justify the turing of a different direction other than what is written in a book then why is it wrong?
Just as Choi's group doesn't want to look deeper into his questionable background in martial arts.
The reason I am joining in this, is because our school will sometimes be told by others that we are performing a kata wrong. They tell me they learned it exactly how the founder taught it and that is the correct way. Cool. Guess what, I don't care. The way that we are being taught is working out fine. We do the forms and even justify our movements with bunkai. My point is that instead of coming on here telling him he is wrong because the book says its wrong, why not just find out more about why they do it that way and leave it at that, or dig deeper and contact GM Cho and ask him personally why he does the pattern wrong. After all TF is just doing what he was taught. The source of his information is still alive. Go to the source.
Which is great. If you want to practice very traditional forms that's awesome. Now who is to say that book is right? It may have been right at the time of the author putting it out, but things change perspective changes, etc.
If they can justify the turing of a different direction other than what is written in a book then why is it wrong?
Just as Choi's group doesn't want to look deeper into his questionable background in martial arts.
The reason I am joining in this, is because our school will sometimes be told by others that we are performing a kata wrong. They tell me they learned it exactly how the founder taught it and that is the correct way. Cool. Guess what, I don't care. The way that we are being taught is working out fine. We do the forms and even justify our movements with bunkai. My point is that instead of coming on here telling him he is wrong because the book says its wrong, why not just find out more about why they do it that way and leave it at that, or dig deeper and contact GM Cho and ask him personally why he does the pattern wrong. After all TF is just doing what he was taught. The source of his information is still alive. Go to the source.
When discussions take the turn towards disagreements on detail, it is important to take a step back and remember what kata in a given martial art are for.
In koryu arts such as MJER, each movement is an integral part of a technique that makes up part of the art. They are the method by which the swordsman learns that which he or she needs to react to a given circumstance. For such arts, the transmission of the technique is supposedly assured by the very nature of how koryu styles structure themselves and changing, inventing or otherwise altering the techniques is sternly restricted. That does not mean it does not happen, however. The trick is to make sure that the changes that creep in, as technique passes from sensei to sensei, do not undermine the fundamental practicality of the style, nor render it unrecognisable as that style.
TKD does not operate under such a milieu; as far as I have been able to ascertain, those very things that my art would frown upon and prevent are actively encouraged. I might be wrong on this and mean no insult to TKD but surely an art where reasonably high-ranking students are encouraged to invent forms of their own should be one in which disagreements over the minutiae of provenance have no place?
If that is so, then picking over one such students efforts, performed in accordance with his schools current thinking, is somewhat rude?
Miguk said it well in closing above, I just wanted to add my amplification to his words.
In koryu arts such as MJER, each movement is an integral part of a technique that makes up part of the art. They are the method by which the swordsman learns that which he or she needs to react to a given circumstance. For such arts, the transmission of the technique is supposedly assured by the very nature of how koryu styles structure themselves and changing, inventing or otherwise altering the techniques is sternly restricted. That does not mean it does not happen, however. The trick is to make sure that the changes that creep in, as technique passes from sensei to sensei, do not undermine the fundamental practicality of the style, nor render it unrecognisable as that style.
TKD does not operate under such a milieu; as far as I have been able to ascertain, those very things that my art would frown upon and prevent are actively encouraged. I might be wrong on this and mean no insult to TKD but surely an art where reasonably high-ranking students are encouraged to invent forms of their own should be one in which disagreements over the minutiae of provenance have no place?
If that is so, then picking over one such students efforts, performed in accordance with his schools current thinking, is somewhat rude?
Miguk said it well in closing above, I just wanted to add my amplification to his words.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2009
- Messages
- 3,585
- Reaction score
- 929
.
Which is great. If you want to practice very traditional forms that's awesome. Now who is to say that book is right? It may have been right at the time of the author putting it out, but things change perspective changes, etc.
If they can justify the turing of a different direction other than what is written in a book then why is it wrong?
The reason I am joining in this, is because our school will sometimes be told by others that we are performing a kata wrong. They tell me they learned it exactly how the founder taught it and that is the correct way. Cool. Guess what, I don't care. The way that we are being taught is working out fine. We do the forms and even justify our movements with bunkai. My point is that instead of coming on here telling him he is wrong because the book says its wrong, why not just find out more about why they do it that way and leave it at that, or dig deeper and contact GM Cho and ask him personally why he does the pattern wrong. After all TF is just doing what he was taught. The source of his information is still alive. Go to the source.
The form was created by Gneral Choi during perhaps with the assistance of several accomplished martial artists at the time. Since it was his creation or done under his authority he has the right to stipulate how the pattern was performed. From the 1965 publication thru the time of his death it did not change. So, if you do not follow the stipulated parameters, it is wrong. It has not changed.
If you knowingly make a change, that is fine. If you unknowingly perpetuate an error, that is not a good idea. If you knowingly make a change to something and continue to represent itt as the original that is fraud. This is one reasoon many Ryus were formed, becuse, successors did not want to represent what they were doing as something else.
You can justify turning hoever you want. You are then doing something than the original.
I have sent 2 e-mails to AIMAA . He Il Cho's group. I asked if it were an error or intentional change. So far no response.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
They're probably ignoring you.
It was a mistake in interpitation and that was told to me years ago. But looking forward to some input from the group.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2009
- Messages
- 3,585
- Reaction score
- 929
Kudos to you for taking the initiative. I believe GM Cho himslef moved to Hawaii a couple of years ago.
