Original Taekwondo

puunui

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
4,378
Reaction score
26
Ok not to be disagreeable, but you can be right. Many people will trace much of what became TKD to the CDK, there is little doubt about that.
However when I use the term "Original TKD" I am referring to Gen Choi's TKD that they started to develop in the ROK Army. By that I mean it was the ORIGINAL or 1st system of Korean Martial Art to apply the name TKD to it, continuously from 1954/5 to present day.
So it can really boil down to both semantics & definitions of how the term is applied or used.


It may be semantics George, but even under your definition, Oh Do Kwan doesn't apply because they did not use the name Taekwon-Do continuously. The Oh Do Kwan, like all the other Kwan that was part of the Korea Taesoodo Association, used the name Taesoodo to describe their art from 1961-1965.

In fact, GM NAM Tae Hi and GM KO Jae Chun were members of the group that created the Korea Taesoodo Association.

Modern History: "Since then, the representatives from each Kwan finally decided to gather to have a Unification Conference at the Korean National Sports Auditorium on September 14, 1961. Participants of this Conference were YOON Kwe Byung (Jidokwan representative), UHM Woon Kyu (Chung Do Kwan representative), LEE Nam Suk (Chang Moo Kwan representative), HWANG Kee (Moo Duk Kwan representative), RO Byung Jick (Song Moo Kwan representative), NAM Tae Hi (Oh Do Kwan representative), PARK Chull Hee (Kang Duk Won representative ), and LEE Kyo Yun (Han Moo Kwan representative). Also in attendance were LEE Chong Woo (Jidokwan/Han Kuk Che Yuk Kwan), LEE Byung Ro (Jidokwan/Han Kuk Che Yuk Kwan), KO Jae Chun (Oh Do Kwan) and LEE Young Sup (Song Moo Kwan)."

On September 20, 1961, the name Taesoodo was voted and agreed upon. GM NAM Tae Hi, as Oh Do Kwan Jang, participated:

Modern History: "The next part was the most sensitive topic of the meeting, which was the naming of the art. NAM Tae Hi said "I strongly suggest that the name has to be Taekwondo because the name Taekwondo was passed when the meeting had been held in 1959." UHM Woon Kyu agreed with NAM Tae Hi but YOON Kwe Byung said: "We agreed on the name Taekwondo unanimously because the Ministry of Education decided on the name
Taekwondo, so it was not agreed unanimously." YOON also said, "And so we suggest Kong Soo Do be the name." YOON Kwe Byung was serious and his idea was that the name ong Soo Do (Karate Do) was the name recognized internationally, which was his strong argument. RO Byung Jick and LEE Nam Suk agreed with this. Because YOON Kwe Byung realized that the situation was going to messed up, he suggested Tae Soo Do, which came from Tae (Taekwondo) and Soo (Kong Soo Do). After the voting, the result was Taesoodo, which had 4 votes for and 2 votes abstention."

The first President of the Korea Taesoodo Association, General CHOI Myung Shin, was at the time Chairman of the ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff. If you were President of the Taesoodo Association, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, would you continue to have the art called Taekwondo in the ROK military, or would you instead choose to call the art Taesoodo, which is what the organization that you are president of calls it?

In November 1962, the KTA had its first promotion test. Participating from the Oh Do Kwan were CHOI Myung Shin, HYUN Jong Myung, KO Jae Chun and BAEK Joon Ki, among others.

Modern History: "The first Promotion Test was held at the Kuk Min Hwe Eui Dang on November 11, 1962. The Korea Taesoodo Association supported the event, along with the Korean Amateur Sports Association (KASA), the Daehan Jaekeon Kukmin Un Dong Bonbu (political party) and the Dae Han Ilbo Sa (Korea Newspaper Company). There were 25 judges and they included: CHOI Myung Shin, LEE Nam Suk, LEE Chong Woo, UHM Woon Kyu, PARK Chull Hee, LEE Young Sup, HYUN Jong Myung, HONG Jong Pyo, KIM Soon Bae, KIM Soo Jin, LEE Byung Ro, KO Jae Chun, LEE Kyo Yun, BAEK Joon Ki, among others."

At this test, the Chang Hon tul were used to test applicants from the Oh Do Kwan.

Modern History: "CHOI Hong Hee's Chang Hon Ryu forms Ge Baek and Choong Moo used at the Oh Do Kwan was included in this promotion test."

This means that Oh Do Kwan members were given Korea Taesoodo Association dan certificates. Over and above all of this is the universal understanding that the Oh Do Kwan was a close annex kwan of the Chung Do Kwan, and the two pretty much did things in unison, including but not limited to use of the name Taesoodo. This goes farther, because the GM HYUN Jong Myung (not Myun) was a member of the KTA committee that created the Palgwae, Taeguek and Yudanja poomsae. By including an Oh Do Kwan representative, then all factions were included in the creation of the new forms, which served to eliminate any objections to use of these forms.

Therefore, Oh Do Kwan did NOT as you erroneously state, use the name Taekwondo continuously. Looks like you are going to have to change the name of your dojang George.
 
OP
P

puunui

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
4,378
Reaction score
26
In fairness to Karatemom, she is not the first person that I have heard use the term 'original' taekwondo to describe ITF TKD. I don't care. I know that Kukki taekwondo as I train in it, is modern taekwondo. If someone else wants to call whatever it is that they do 'original' then so be it. Doesn't change the fact that the Kukkiwon is the largest single organization or that it is the taekwondo that was included in the olympics.


Use of these kinds of terms, "original" or "classic" or "traditional", like the use of the term "sport" or "non-sport" or "self defense" become tools to be used to divide Taekwondo when no such division exists. It is an attempt to carve out a some sort of labeled niche, because someone feels left out or excluded from Taekwondo. The fact of the matter is that no one is excluding them, they are in fact excluding themselves by use of modifying label. There is only one Taekwondo, and we are all part of it. We don't need labels or adjectives to modify that. Taekwondo is a term of inclusion, and we do not need to change that concept with exclusionary terms and adjectives.
 

Daniel Sullivan

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
6,472
Reaction score
269
Location
Olney, Maryland
Use of these kinds of terms, "original" or "classic" or "traditional", like the use of the term "sport" or "non-sport" or "self defense" become tools to be used to divide Taekwondo when no such division exists. It is an attempt to carve out a some sort of labeled niche, because someone feels left out or excluded from Taekwondo. The fact of the matter is that no one is excluding them, they are in fact excluding themselves by use of modifying label. There is only one Taekwondo, and we are all part of it. We don't need labels or adjectives to modify that. Taekwondo is a term of inclusion, and we do not need to change that concept with exclusionary terms and adjectives.
I have only ever heard the term 'original' used to denote ITF taekwondo as developed by General Choi. Generally, I see this as a sideways attempt at saying, 'true' taekwondo by some.

In Manny's 'Sinatra' thread, the term 'classic' was used to denote the taekwondo that he learned in North America in the seventies (the era that most of us think of when the term 'classic rock' is used). Most everyone knew what he was talking about when the term was applied to it.

When I use the term modern (as in the post that you quoted), I mean Kukki taekwondo as it is practiced today, meaning current forms, current sparring rules, etc. I wouldn't have used the term at all had the whole 'original' thing not come up.

So long as such terms are used to facilitate communication and clarify meaning, I don't see a problem in their usage.

Daniel
 

andyjeffries

Master of Arts
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Messages
1,969
Reaction score
272
Location
Stevenage, Herts, UK
It may be semantics George...Looks like you are going to have to change the name of your dojang George.

Did I miss a post?

KarateMomUSA = George (someone)?

Not that it really matters what someone calls their online persona, it's just that I feel like I missed an episode of my favourite show on TV...
 

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
Quote:Originally Posted by KarateMomUSA
Ok not to be disagreeable, but you can be right. Many people will trace much of what became TKD to the CDK, there is little doubt about that.
However when I use the term "Original TKD" I am referring to Gen Choi's TKD that they started to develop in the ROK Army. By that I mean it was the ORIGINAL or 1st system of Korean Martial Art to apply the name TKD to it, continuously from 1954/5 to present day.
So it can really boil down to both semantics & definitions of how the term is applied or used.

Oh Do Kwan doesn't apply because they did not use the name Taekwon-Do continuously. The Oh Do Kwan, like all the other Kwan that was part of the Korea Taesoodo Association, used the name Taesoodo to describe their art from 1961-1965.
In fact, GM NAM Tae Hi and GM KO Jae Chun were members of the group that created the Korea Taesoodo Association.
No sir I am sorry but you may have missed my point & certainly did not address it.
Please check again, as I re-quoted my comment above in this reply.
I didn't say the ODK, I said Gen Choi's TKD. So in fact your reply actually supports my contention. As you know, Gen Choi was forced out of the military when Gen Park was consolidating his power in 1962. Gen Choi was sent to Malaysia as Ambassador. The country was in turmoil from at least April of 1960.
When Gen Choi was in Malaysia, he introduced TKD there. He with the assistance of Kim Bok Man & Woo Jae Lim, worked on the 1st English book ever on TKD, which was completed by 1965. In fact, he used this as a selling point to pressure them to adopt the name of TKD, as the books were already being printed & would be distributed on the Kukki TKD Goodwill world tour that he got the govt to sponsor. Mr Kim & Mr Woo were also busy setting up the Malaysian TKD Federation, which was 1 of the 9 member countries that would form the ITF in 1966. From there GM Kim Bok Man spread TKD to southeast Asia, with the help of others who were following Gen Choi & getting dispatched over seas as official TKD instructors with that job title entered into their passports as early as 1964.
Vietnam, the 3rd home to TKD, after Korea & Malaysia, was also getting TKD instructors sent there from Dec of 1962, led by Nam Tae Hi, who stayed there a year before being replaced. As Gen Choi was finishing more of his Tuls, he sent them to Vietnam, even traveling there himself at least 1 time before 1965.
It is clear that they were using TKD continuously, even if some others did accept & use the name Tae Soo So.
Gen Woo Jong Lim also opened a civilian ODK gym. he set up the 1st TKD tournament ever. That was in 1962, after the others were using the Tae Soo Do name.
Also keep in mind Col Nam Tae Hi, did not want to use the Tae Soo Do name. he wanted TKD. He was out voted & he himself did not vote for the name Tae Soo Do.
 

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
Modern History: "CHOI Hong Hee's Chang Hon Ryu forms Ge Baek and Choong Moo used at the Oh Do Kwan was included in this promotion test."
Yes & they also used HwaRang Tul, ChungMu Tul, UlJi Tul & SamIl Tul, all devised by Gen Choi & his team, who did use the name TKD continuously from 1954/5.
In fact they shouted Tae Kwon, when they saluted each other as well.
 

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
Use of these kinds of terms, "original" or "classic" or "traditional", like the use of the term "sport" or "non-sport" or "self defense" become tools to be used to divide Taekwondo when no such division exists. It is an attempt to carve out a some sort of labeled niche, because someone feels left out or excluded from Taekwondo. The fact of the matter is that no one is excluding them, they are in fact excluding themselves by use of modifying label. There is only one Taekwondo, and we are all part of it. We don't need labels or adjectives to modify that. Taekwondo is a term of inclusion, and we do not need to change that concept with exclusionary terms and adjectives.
Agreed. There is 1 TKD. We are all TKD. However there are some obvious differences in styles or emphasis, focus, sports rules, patterns used etc.
TKD is a term of inclusion & its history should reflect that inclusion as well.

I for one do not fell left out. But would point out to actually be inclusive, we have to include. For instance, there are only 2 major ways to balance the budget, raise taxes or cut spending (govt), for families & businesses raise revenue/income or cut spending.
So working together is not inclusive if 1 side says I think we should raise revenue/taxes/income, so agree with me. Inclusive may be better if we try to cut some spending & raise some revenue, a compromise of sorts, working with the other side to some extent.
 

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
I have only ever heard the term 'original' used to denote ITF taekwondo as developed by General Choi. Generally, I see this as a sideways attempt at saying, 'true' taekwondo by some.
Just to clarify, I use the term original to simply state that it was the 1st style or system that actually used the label TKD.
True TKD to me is an individual things, which I addressed on another thread.
Because I say that Gen Choi used the name from its inception to his passing & hs followers still do, that does not mean that it is true or better in any way, shape or form. In fact the opposite is often true, Kukki, Olympic or WTF TKD is the TKD that most think of when they hear TKD. It is the larger, more powerful & more popular TKD.
 

ralphmcpherson

Senior Master
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
2,200
Reaction score
48
Location
australia
I think a lot of people attach words like 'self defence', 'old school', 'classical' etc to try to explain to the general public what they do. I know when I first started tkd and my mates found out they would say "isnt that the one you see in the olympics with all the kicking?" or "I did tkd but there was no punching so I changed to karate" or "oh, I could never do tkd, there are too many high, flashy kicks" etc. It got frustrating because they thought I was doing something different to what I was actually doing so I started to subconsciously say things like "I do a self defence related form of tkd" or "original tkd", it wasnt because I felt segregated from tkd, or I had anything against sport tkd, it was just my way of trying to better describe what I did.
 

Daniel Sullivan

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
6,472
Reaction score
269
Location
Olney, Maryland
When I first stepped into a taekwondo class, the class was called a self defense class. You know, "When you take Jhoon Rhee self defense, then you too can say...."

Until fairly recently (within the past decade) I considered all martial arts to be simply be self defense in a different idiom. Taekwondo was Korean striking self defense. Hapkido was Korean striking and grappling self defense. Karate was Okinawan striking self defense. You get the idea.

Now, I call them all fighting systems with both self defense and sport applications, with the primary difference between sport and SD having more to do with the individual school and the focus of the student than with the art.

Daniel
 

Daniel Sullivan

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
6,472
Reaction score
269
Location
Olney, Maryland
Yes Sir it would make some sense to move that debate, but I kept it here as this is a debate about the history of TKD by Gen Choi. I am also aware that many people may not be as interested as others, myself included are about details of TKD's history. So I felt it may be best to limit it to this thread, which has been pretty extended with some good info.
Anyone can take issue with anything that is posted on a public discussion forum such as this. The debate is facilitated & info shared, when posters stay on point & respond with specific contrary info to counter or additional info to support.
It is pretty clear that while some may not agree, there really has not been evidence to counter. I think that Puunui's use of the Modern History supports my point. The Modern History does really confirm this. I can go back & bring forward the specific counter points I responded with, if needed, or those interested can simply go back a page or 2.
I didn't say anything about moving it. I said that it was a pointless arguement.

But since a thread devoted to the topic has been started, I'll respond.

You're talking about a term that was retroactively applied to what the first five kwans were doing, so who used it first and who used it continuously has no substantive meaning with regards to originality.

So Gen Choi used ther term continuously to describe his Chang Hon system. With respect, so what?

Unless you are willing to argue that what what the five early kwans were doing was not taekwondo (which neither General Choi nor the Kukki pioneers were wiling to do), then calling Chang Hon 'original taekwondo' is a misapplication of the word original and only serves to generate...

...pointless argument.

Daniel
 
OP
P

puunui

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
4,378
Reaction score
26
Did I miss a post?

KarateMomUSA = George (someone)?


Yes, KarateMomUSA is an ITF practitioner named George Vitale, who some describe as "renowned scholar of Taekwon-Do history". I find that description strange, given the fact that he wants me to continue to teach him about history.
 
OP
P

puunui

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
4,378
Reaction score
26
No sir I am sorry but you may have missed my point & certainly did not address it. Please check again, as I re-quoted my comment above in this reply. I didn't say the ODK, I said Gen Choi's TKD. So in fact your reply actually supports my contention.

If you say so. I am tired of responding to your nonsense George. You make this ridiculous statements and when people bring up facts that prove you wrong, you narrow or qualify your ridiculous statements to a narrow definition of your own choosing, to fit your "original" ridiculous statement. When the name Taekwondo was created in 1954 (not 1955), there was no Chang Hon tul; therefore the art that was being called Taekwondo at that time by the Chung Do Kwan and Oh Do Kwan was the Chung Do Kwan curriculum. That, was what Taekwondo was, originally. The Oh Do Kwan didn't use the term Taekwondo when the KTA used the name Taesoodo. Therefore it wasn't being continuously used in Korea. So what if General Choi may have used it in Malaysia during his exile there. That doesn't count, anymore than GM LEE Won Kuk's time outside of Korea doesn't count (which you stated).

Mr. Vitale, if you wish to be the founder and original President of the Benedict Arnold Love and Admiration Society, that really is your business. But I would think that a "renowned scholar on Taekwon-Do history" would have more integrity than to do what you are doing, which is to misrepresent things and twist facts to serve your obviously biased spin on things, and you making small concessions regarding the lies General Choi told over the years doesn't change that. You may think he did great things, but certainly the pioneers don't, and it is nuts to expect the pioneers to give him the same admiration that you do, in much the say way that it is nuts to expect George Washington, Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson to join your Benedict Arnold Love and Admiration Society.

And by the way George, it's been at least a week, and you still haven't answered my questions to you regarding your experience with General Choi, the same questions that you asked me, and the same questions that you said you would answer but never did.
 

Daniel Sullivan

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
6,472
Reaction score
269
Location
Olney, Maryland
Yes, KarateMomUSA is an ITF practitioner named George Vitale, who some describe as "renowned scholar of Taekwon-Do history". I find that description strange, given the fact that he wants me to continue to teach him about history.

So Glenn,

Are you saying that KaratemomUSA is actually this gent?

http://www.lacancha.com/georgevitale.html

Sheesh. This site should do what E-Budo does; require members to either post under their real name or to put their real name in their signature.

Daniel
 
Last edited:

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
Unless you are willing to argue that what what the five early kwans were doing was not taekwondo (which neither General Choi nor the Kukki pioneers were wiling to do), then calling Chang Hon 'original taekwondo' is a misapplication of the word original and only serves to generate...
...pointless argument.
I am not sure it would be a productive argument, but it would shed some additional light on how TKD developed & branched out along different paths.
Just to note: Gen Choi did make this argument starting at least as early as 1972 & did get more vocal over time as the divisions widened & became more contentious.
ITFers must realize that they were only giving 1 side to a partial story. They must remain open to learn more, especially from the other side. I think Puunui does a great job with that & has provided much valuable info.
There are 3 sides to every story, side "A" & side "Z", with the truth or more complete side being somewhere in between "A" & "Z"!
Lets call that side the "More Fuller Side". In order to get closer to that, we must listen to & evaluate all input & info from as many sources as possible.
 

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
You're talking about a term that was retroactively applied to what the first five kwans were doing, so who used it first and who used it continuously has no substantive meaning with regards to originality.
Yes but I am not talking about originality, but rather who originally used the name & continuously applied it to a system that they were developing.
(I know splitting hairs & some very fine hair at that, sorry)
 

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
So Gen Choi used ther term continuously to describe his Chang Hon system. With respect, so what?
Exactly! And with respect, it is just a statement about an inane aspect of our Art's shared history. Nothing more, nothing less. Apparently it has struck a chord with some.
 

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
You make this ridiculous statements and when people bring up facts that prove you wrong, you narrow or qualify your ridiculous statements to a narrow definition of your own choosing, to fit your "original" ridiculous statement.
No it is an attempt to refocus so we can get to the crux of the matter.
Generally speaking, the more broad a statement is, the more that generalizations can be drawn that can be all over the spectrum. The more confused the replies can get.
I will do my best to narrow statements so a more pedantic & hopefully a more productive discussion can be had.
 

KarateMomUSA

Black Belt
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
552
Reaction score
3
When the name Taekwondo was created in 1954 (not 1955), there was no Chang Hon tul; therefore the art that was being called Taekwondo at that time by the Chung Do Kwan and Oh Do Kwan was the Chung Do Kwan curriculum. That, was what Taekwondo was, originally.
I do realize that the name was offered in the last month of 1954 & approved in April of 1955. The Chang Hon Tul were started before then & 2 were completed in 1955.
I also know that TKD was more of an umbrella term for what they were doing in the early kwans in 1954/5.
However my statement still remains that Chang Hon TKD was NOT original TKD, BUT the 1st system of TKD to apply the name to what they were doing AND use it non-stop since that time.
 

Latest Discussions

Top