Taekwondo History ignored?

[IcemanSK]

I've noticed a lot of tv shows, magazines & other sources tending to ignore the men & women & history of Taekwondo. Even the MA History Museum that just opened up in my town focuses on almost every other country, style & histical figure than Koreans & TKD.

Why do you all suspose this is so? Is it because TKD isn't that old? That a lot of TKD history is in dispute? The folks with the ink don't like TKD? A combination of things? Something else?

 

[Steel Tiger]

I have a feeling that the youth of TKD is a definite factor. In the MAs I have noticed a decided bias, or at least an attempt to create a bias, toward old. As TKD is still less than 100 years old and has a very popular sports aspect I think a lot of people have no respect for it.

The sports aspect may well be the largest contributing factor to this apparent ignoring of the art. It is possible that many lay people view TKD as a martial sport not as a martial art. Afterall, martial arts are these mystical things that kill poeple aren't they? TKD doesn't do that does it?:wink1:

The little I have read of TKD history leads me to believe that it is actually very interesting. It is certainly much more accessible than the history of mine own art, which is not in dispute but is way too convoluted and confusing.

 

[bignick]

Aikido is relatively new, on the same time frame of taekwondo and you probably don't see this. Judo is also pretty new on the scene really.

I would say it is because a lot of people like to spin their own little history of taekwondo. There is a strong nationalism that likes to eliminate any influence or part Japanese styles had in the birth of taekwondo and I would say this leads to a lot of the confusion and controversy around the history of taekwondo.

 

[dortiz]

I would bet thats exactly it. Ask about Aikido and you get a quick story about why the founder created it from the style he learned from Takeda and its a clean story with reasons for the styles ways. Take TKD and you are asking for many arguments about where its roots where...then which Kwans started what style and even after a bunch of sorting out there you have two camps on opposite sides. Its just a tough story to make feel good documentary about.

 

[exile]

I think the above posts have got a very large chunk of it. I would just add one further thing: the North American images of Korea, as vs. Japan and China. The US has almost no... engagement with Korea, compared with the other two; we don't have a mental icon of it, we're not really sure what's happened there or very much else about it. Most people know only one thing about it: the Korean War. Here's an experiment you can do at home: ask ten of your (non-MA!) friends who the Koreans fought for during WWII, Japan or Japan. I would predict no more than one or two will look at you in perplexity and say, well, Korea didn't actually fight one way or the other—they were occupied by the Japanese, so they didn't have an army of their own. And if you ask these two people how long, and under what circumstances, the Japanese occupied Korea before 1945, I'd bet neither of them would know.

We have a rich mental iconography for China and Japan, with very complex attitudes toward the latter especially. But Korea is for most of us closed book. Some of that, I suspect, is what's fueling the indiference that Tom is talking about....

 

[Steel Tiger]

I think the above posts have got a very large chunk of it. I would just add one further thing: the North American images of Korea, as vs. Japan and China. The US has almost no... engagement with Korea, compared with the other two; we don't have a mental icon of it, we're not really sure what's happened there or very much else about it. Most people know only one thing about it: the Korean War. Here's an experiment you can do at home: ask ten of your (non-MA!) friends who the Koreans fought for during WWII, Japan or Japan. I would predict no more than one or two will look at you in perplexity and say, well, Korea didn't actually fight one way or the other—they were occupied by the Japanese, so they didn't have an army of their own. And if you ask these two people how long, and under what circumstances, the Japanese occupied Korea before 1945, I'd bet neither of them would know.

We have a rich mental iconography for China and Japan, with very complex attitudes toward the latter especially. But Korea is for most of us closed book. Some of that, I suspect, is what's fueling the indiference that Tom is talking about....

This is a very interesting point. I have known a lot of Korean students travelling in Australia and really it is as you say, I don't have an image of what Korea, or a Korean, is. Strange isn't it?

As something of an indication of Korea's anonymity, the Korean War, in which Australians fought some fierce battles, is known here as the Forgotten War. Our veterans are fully recognised now but it took a long time, longer than for Vietnam vets.

Is this a symptom of the old Hermit Kingdom days?

 

[exile]

This is a very interesting point. I have known a lot of Korean students travelling in Australia and really it is as you say, I don't have an image of what Korea, or a Korean, is. Strange isn't it?

Yes, it's almost as though one alluded to a Manchurian, or a Siberian... the mental image corresponding to those descriptors will be, the hearer's mind, probably a perfect blank. I think with `Korean', it's only slightly more fleshed out.

As something of an indication of Korea's anonymity, the Korean War, in which Australians fought some fierce battles, is known here as the Forgotten War. Our veterans are fully recognised now but it took a long time, longer than for Vietnam vets.

Similarly for here. Our vets have complained bitterly that people in this country have only the vaguest idea that we actually did fight a war over there.

Is this a symptom of the old Hermit Kingdom days?

Yes, in part. I think it's connected to the fact that during the 19th c., there was that incredible vogue of Japanese `picturesqueness' that Gilbert and Sullivan spoofed so wonderfully in Patience—remember where the Oscar Wilde figure, Reginald Bunthorne, is confessing in a solitary monologue that `in short, my Mediævalism's affectaaaaation, Born of a mordbid love of admiraaaaaation', in the course of which he notes that, among aspects of his sham, `I do not long for all one sees/That's Japanese'. The tea ceremony, the strange parallelisms between classical Japanese feudalism under the castle warlords on the one hand and Eurpean feudalism, samurai/knight, and the like... all that made Japan a place, which Europeans could relate to their own ideas of æsthetics and historical romanticism. Korea, though, was an alien place, without points of entry, with information never flowing into European circles of discussion and taste-making. And that hasn't changed much. I have to say, a lot of Americans don't even realize TKD is a Korean art. I didn't, until I started studying it; I thought it was just another style of Japanese karate (now I know better, that it's a style of karate but not a Japanese style! :lol

That lack of a distinct identity in European and American thinking is, I'd suspect, the major reason for what Iceman noticed and wrote about in his OP....

 

[IcemanSK]

Yes, it's almost as though one alluded to a Manchurian, or a Siberian... the mental image corresponding to those descriptors will be, the hearer's mind, probably a perfect blank. I think with `Korean', it's only slightly more fleshed out.



Similarly for here. Our vets have complained bitterly that people in this country have only the vaguest idea that we actually did fight a war over there.



Yes, in part. I think it's connected to the fact that during the 19th c., there was that incredible vogue of Japanese `picturesqueness' that Gilbert and Sullivan spoofed so wonderfully in Patience—remember where the Oscar Wilde figure, Reginald Bunthorne, is confessing in a solitary monologue that `in short, my Mediævalism's affectaaaaation, Born of a mordbid love of admiraaaaaation', in the course of which he notes that, among aspects of his sham, `I do not long for all one sees/That's Japanese'. The tea ceremony, the strange parallelisms between classical Japanese feudalism under the castle warlords on the one hand and Eurpean feudalism, samurai/knight, and the like... all that made Japan a place, which Europeans could relate to their own ideas of æsthetics and historical romanticism. Korea, though, was an alien place, without points of entry, with information never flowing into European circles of discussion and taste-making. And that hasn't changed much. I have to say, a lot of Americans don't even realize TKD is a Korean art. I didn't, until I started studying it; I thought it was just another style of Japanese karate (now I know better, that it's a style of karate but not a Japanese style! :lol

That lack of a distinct identity in European and American thinking is, I'd suspect, the major reason for what Iceman noticed and wrote about in his OP....

Leave it to exile to quote Gilbert & Sullivan to make a point about the history of the Arts:ultracool! Do other forums offer such depth? I think not.

And yes, the lack of distinct identity is (in restrospect) what I'm noticing.

 

[matt.m]

Ah Gee, You know I have read a lot of "Perceived" and "Handed down" History. I have talked a lot to high ranking grandmasters and masters in tae kwon do, judo, and hapkido.

I have read He-Young Kimm and Marc Tadeschi's books, "The Hapkido Bible" by Kimm, and the big hard backs on Tae Kwon Do and Hapkido by Tadeschi.

It just seems to me that the old saying "The winner writes the history" when talking about war is just as apparent as "The one with the best media draw tells the story" when concerning Korean Martial Arts. Hapkido and Tae Kwon Do just top the scale of who did what etc.

When reading the interviews that Tadeschi did with Ji Han Jae and Bong Soo Han respectively, followed by his interview with He-Young Kimm respectively all contradict each other in pieces when talking about origin, etc.

The reason for this I believe is the students perception of what was going on. Different starts, different time periods etc. That is just with hapkido, and until Choi's daughter releases all of the attendance ledgers, payment records etc. then the whole truth will never be known.

Now, with TKD you have the ITF that has (3) seperate parties all saying they are the governing body of the ITF, you have the WTF, IOC influence, and the KKW.

Now for the point: If you cant get a dozen grandmasters to agree on what hapkido truly is, and the only thing they agree on is "Choi founded HapkiYulSool or Yawara that eventually became named hapkido". Then how on earth are you going to get the powers of TKD to do any better?

 

[WMKS Shogun]

I have said it before, I will say it again: Tae Kwon Do has become like karate and we need to let people know that. Tae Kwon Do has the Chang Hon style (ITF) the Taeguk/Palgwe style (WTF), the Song Ahm style (ATA), Jhoon Rhee style (Jhoon Rhee's martial ballet, etc.) and probably a few others. Instead of trying to get them all to agree to being one thing, why not let each be their own style?

 

[bluemtn]

I have said it before, I will say it again: Tae Kwon Do has become like karate and we need to let people know that. Tae Kwon Do has the Chang Hon style (ITF) the Taeguk/Palgwe style (WTF), the Song Ahm style (ATA), Jhoon Rhee style (Jhoon Rhee's martial ballet, etc.) and probably a few others. Instead of trying to get them all to agree to being one thing, why not let each be their own style?

Now, that's a good idea! Especially considering how the history of TKD (for sake of exactness) is a bit hard to peg for many organizations that are out there. Too many people what to make what some view as false claims on where theirs come from, too many that are "confused" (in a sense), and too many that find it hard to document.

 

[DArnold]

Now, that's a good idea! Especially considering how the history of TKD (for sake of exactness) is a bit hard to peg for many organizations that are out there. Too many people what to make what some view as false claims on where theirs come from, too many that are "confused" (in a sense), and too many that find it hard to document.

I find that the Korean history has deffinatly played an influence on the mental attitude that the Korean founders took. This attitude has been passed down through their actions (not necessaraly teachings).

The struggle to validate themselves from the occupation(s)
The struggle to put a bowl of rice on the table
The dealing with people who know nothing of martial arts.

Today you still see these attitudes flourishing (how people were raised)

Everyone knows people who think that the piece of paper they receive is more important than the knowledge or ability that they have.

Even when I confronted General Choi with the obvious, our heritage of Shotakan, he adimantly denied it. Or that ITF flourished because he had power and resources (military) where the other Kwan leaders did not.

Who knows why, his stuggle against the nay-sayers. His struggle against the divisions even within his own house, a feeling of weakness if he did tell the truth...

The beliefe that you must always be positive about what you do did show a crack in what he was doing.

I understand their thought process but all 3 ITF factions and the WTF seemed to have moved forward under the premisis that they will become the true TKD if:

They have more students
They have more masters
They have more $$$
They yell louder from the rooftop that they are the one
They write history their way

As if any of the other factions will go away because of the above. LOL

And what is the result on TKD.
How many independents do you see?
Those that actually ask the question, "What am I getting from these organizations (other than a piece of paper)"

The sad part is you never see the organizations tout what they can do for the school/instructor/student, when in reality the whole organization is the school/instructor/student.

 

[IcemanSK]

I find that the Korean history has deffinatly played an influence on the mental attitude that the Korean founders took. This attitude has been passed down through their actions (not necessaraly teachings).

The struggle to validate themselves from the occupation(s)
The struggle to put a bowl of rice on the table
The dealing with people who know nothing of martial arts.

Today you still see these attitudes flourishing (how people were raised)

Everyone knows people who think that the piece of paper they receive is more important than the knowledge or ability that they have.

Even when I confronted General Choi with the obvious, our heritage of Shotakan, he adimantly denied it. Or that ITF flourished because he had power and resources (military) where the other Kwan leaders did not.

Who knows why, his stuggle against the nay-sayers. His struggle against the divisions even within his own house, a feeling of weakness if he did tell the truth...

The beliefe that you must always be positive about what you do did show a crack in what he was doing.

I understand their thought process but all 3 ITF factions and the WTF seemed to have moved forward under the premisis that they will become the true TKD if:

They have more students
They have more masters
They have more $$$
They yell louder from the rooftop that they are the one
They write history their way

As if any of the other factions will go away because of the above. LOL

And what is the result on TKD.
How many independents do you see?
Those that actually ask the question, "What am I getting from these organizations (other than a piece of paper)"

The sad part is you never see the organizations tout what they can do for the school/instructor/student, when in reality the whole organization is the school/instructor/student.

I agree that it seems as tho way too many folks have "rolled their own" history & that $$ & power have played a huge roll in the histories that we do have. I guess my question is, "do we have any agreed upon history that we can be proud of to share with the rest of the MA community?"

 

[DArnold]

I agree that it seems as tho way too many folks have "rolled their own" history & that $$ & power have played a huge roll in the histories that we do have. I guess my question is, "do we have any agreed upon history that we can be proud of to share with the rest of the MA community?"

Based on the disdain from other martial arts, YES. I find that when people come after you to try and sell what they are doing, it is usually because they are going after someone good. You don't see Bouncers who write books try to validate themselves by talking down Ti Chi do you?

Based on my interaction with Koreans, and this includes my own heritage under the General, NO! Every version of history I have every read has been skued by the writer. The more you read/study, the more pieces you pick up and start to form a view of the middle ground. Most that tout their view is "the view" are usually juniors enamored with thier art/instructor or trying to sell you something.

Just like it's amazing, now that the general has died, that these so called, pioneers are coming out of the woodwork to claim they invented TKD. One must ask where they were 10 years ago and what is their motive now?

 

[IcemanSK]

Based on the disdain from other martial arts, YES. I find that when people come after you to try and sell what they are doing, it is usually because they are going after someone good. You don't see Bouncers who write books try to validate themselves by talking down Ti Chi do you?

Based on my interaction with Koreans, and this includes my own heritage under the General, NO! Every version of history I have every read has been skued by the writer. The more you read/study, the more pieces you pick up and start to form a view of the middle ground. Most that tout their view is "the view" are usually juniors enamored with thier art/instructor or trying to sell you something.

Just like it's amazing, now that the general has died, that these so called, pioneers are coming out of the woodwork to claim they invented TKD. One must ask where they were 10 years ago and what is their motive now?

I fear that you are right. And it's sad. There are many people who have made incredible (no pun intended) contributions to the art & science of Tae Kwon Do. Your background lifts up Gen Choi: mine lifts up GM Uhm Woon Kyu as movers & shakers. Frankly, these 2 men made outstanding contributions to make TKD what it is today. They trained together for crying out loud. Both students of GM Lee, Won Kuk. It's sad that we major on the differences rather than what they shared.

 

[zDom]

I have said it before, I will say it again: Tae Kwon Do has become like karate and we need to let people know that. Tae Kwon Do has the Chang Hon style (ITF) the Taeguk/Palgwe style (WTF), the Song Ahm style (ATA), Jhoon Rhee style (Jhoon Rhee's martial ballet, etc.) and probably a few others. Instead of trying to get them all to agree to being one thing, why not let each be their own style?

I agree.

It is getting to, or is already at, the point where you can't just say "taekwondo" anymore.

You really need to say identify what KIND of taekwondo, just like you should indentify what kind of karate.

 

[DArnold]

I fear that you are right. And it's sad. There are many people who have made incredible (no pun intended) contributions to the art & science of Tae Kwon Do. Your background lifts up Gen Choi: mine lifts up GM Uhm Woon Kyu as movers & shakers. Frankly, these 2 men made outstanding contributions to make TKD what it is today. They trained together for crying out loud. Both students of GM Lee, Won Kuk. It's sad that we major on the differences rather than what they shared.

This is not sad!

It is said that the opposite of movement is death.

Therefore, the student who does not change,
the art that does not change,
the student who does not stand up for their beliefs,
the student who does not try to surpass their instructor...

all these are sad

Once MA's get past their adolesence they learn to rejoice in the differences.
Parallel lines do meet on the horizon.
You do honor to your heritage.
There is no honor in organizations, nor patches, nor schools.
These are symbols.
The honor is within the individual.

Now that I think of it there is something that most flavors of TKD have to be proud of:
That is their moral cultural heritage, TKD represents this.
The tenets and student oaths that we teach people to use as a guide in their life. It is the heart and sole, the spark, the love you can not explain.
It is the DO (You have followed the teachings and not the man)

I have never in my life worked out with someone from a differnt style, organization, different upbringing, different phylosophy... and regreted it.

Instead, I felt like a miser who had just found another coin!