# Hapkido - Tang Soo Do link



## Moo D (May 7, 2004)

On the Hapkisool website there is a mention that the founder of the Moo duk Kwan Tang Soo Do, DJN Hwang, kee was once a student of Hapkido under Choi, Young sool in the 1950's.

I have read a lot of DJN Hwang,s books and never found a reference to this, Does anyone know more about this?? Length of time DJN Hwang trained with DJN Choi??

It would help some of the history research I am doing in Tang Soo Do. I am not familiar with Hapkido, therefore are there any techniques that are shared between Choi's Hapkido and Hwang's Tang Soo Do??

Yours in Martial Arts,


----------



## glad2bhere (May 7, 2004)

Dear Moo: 

Wish I could help you but everything I have found to date seems to indicate that Choi has become something of a lightening rod for people who want to validate what they do. I'm sure part of it stems from the fact that he was illiterate and probably out of touch with most communications other than what his students brought to him. It also might stem from the fact that most students were with him only a relatively short time so the turnover must have been pretty heavy over the years. Whose to say WHO studied with HIM and who studied with a student, who studied with him. But ask around and everyone who needs authentification all studied with the Master. Far as I'm concerned if that were true he would have died a very rich man indeed!!

What we do know is that he spent time in Japan, that he learned something there and that he brought that something back to Korea and taught it to some people there. No set curriculum, no documentation and damn few records, though I understand that his family has some of the enrollment books.  Taking a look at Hwang Kee there are some of the same problems. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Moo D (May 7, 2004)

Thanks Bruce,

I agree, DJN Hwangs past is quite patchy, even in his own writings on his history. The problem is that even in our Hosinsul we do not seem to share the same techniques as Choi's Hapkido, and not the philosophy. Therefore, I can't see why DJN Hwang would not use the techniques he learnt from Choi within Tang Soo Do, if you know what I mean???????

Tang Soo!!


----------



## Moo D (May 9, 2004)

Also, DJN Hwang kee history is disputed by many. However, the evidence that is seen in the TSD curriculum is that there is a Japanese, Chinese and Korean influence. The fact that the Hyungs Yuk ro and Hwa Sun are translated from the Muye Dobu Tonji give the korean influence in TSD as well as the favouritism for High and Jump kicking (Tae Kyon).

But as you say, there is very little documentation pre 1945 and the formation of the Moo Duk kwan, that supports the experience in MA's gained by DJn Hwang. All I can say is that TSD has a great depth in both technique and philosophy that must have been gained by DJn Hwang in his travels!!

Regards,


----------



## kwanjang (May 9, 2004)

Greetings:
Perhaps Master McHenry (out of TX) has some more info on this to share with you.  He has a lot of info on his website, and he is part of the USKMAF group.


----------



## Moo D (May 10, 2004)

Thanks rudy,

I'll check that source out!!

Regards,


----------



## dosandojang (May 10, 2004)

I asked Master Mac, and he said while anything is possible...He does not think this ever happened. Neither do I....


----------



## kwanjang (May 10, 2004)

Same old problem.  It is extemely difficult to find out what really took place in Korean martial arts of any kind.  That is why I don't envy the likes of Bruce who tries so hard to figure it all out.  That has to be frustrating.


----------



## glad2bhere (May 10, 2004)

Dear Rudy: 

Actually, it not all that bad--- at least not from an academic point of view. The history can be very cut and dry. Where the static comes in is when a person suddenly is revealed for having constructed things in a way that facts don't support. Witness Joo Bang Lee and the WHRDA people. Nasty business that. So, for instance, I can say that Korea has had its own martial traditions for generations and the pro-Japanese tradition side says, "no they didn't-- its all Japanese stuff repackaged." Then along comes some thing like the MYTBTJ and suddenly the pro-J tradition people shut-up in a hurry because now there is a historical provenence. In this way its not the research that causes most of the chaos but the regular conflicts between what facts are and the way people want Korean martial traditions to be. I can point out over and over again that there is no documentation supporting Choi mastering DRAJJ or training under Takeda but if thats what people want to believe  whats a person going to do, right? I still laugh when some magazine reprints that old garbage about Chinese Boxing starting at the Shaolin Temple, but its the way people want their history to read. :idunno: 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## kwanjang (May 10, 2004)

Yep, folks will always believe what they want to, and seldom do they take heed to what stares them right in the face.  For me, I most often rely on my gut instinct backed up by whatever historical data that makes sense.  Whenever something concrete comes along, I'll change my mind.

FWIW, I did see the books GM Suh speaks of; however, one big problem, I can't read them.  Hence, it could have been other things.  Last time he and I spoke of the books, he said he was about to open the third one.  With that he means to his organization... not the public.  This was his greatest concern, as he felt like the Korean martial art world was just waiting to pick up his stuff.

One thing I know for sure.  His son, Master Sung Jin Suh is doing stuff that I have never seen other WKSA Masters do (Korean or Caucasian).  So, there IS more stuff, but it is guarded.  It will be interesting to see what his son will do with the "secret" material when he takes over


----------



## Moo D (May 11, 2004)

It is interesting as to why the Koreans feel that they need to have a long tradition in Martial Arts. The Muye Dobu Tonji shows that a martial tradition has existed in Korea for the last 300-400 years and some earlier paintings have shown some martial arts. However, the quest to have a more in depth martial history seems to dominate korean martial arts.

It seems a shame to me, because of the KMA in existence, most have many virtues without the need for a 2000 year history. What does it matter if it is only 60 years old, as long as it adds something to your life then 'what the hell' if It is just as good as any other martial art with a 2000 year history.

Making the history jaded only adds to the scepticism by the masses of what is true. If by saying that DJn Hwang was a student of Choi young Sool is not actually factual, then the only reason for the historic fiction is to validate the art itself. Similarly with DJn Hwang and some of his claimed personal history that has been disputed over the years by other senior masters. It leaves the fact that all Korean Martial Art history in the 20th Century is either true, false or somewhere in between.

The real proof is the depth within the MA itself and not how many millenia of history it has. If it is indeed incorrect that DJN Hwang was ever a student of Choi, young sool, then this only does a disservice to Hapakisool as a MA.

Regards,


----------



## glad2bhere (May 11, 2004)

Dear Moo D: 

I tend to agree with your sentiments. An art, or martial science for that matter, does not have to go back centuries to be valid. FWIW the O-Gae (Five Tenents) is traditionally ascribed to the Three Kingdoms Period and is still an influence in many modern dojangs around the world. However, as a researcher I tend not to go back before the Mongolian incursion of the Yuan Dynasty as just about all documentation is found in and through the Yi Dynasty of Korean history. So, whats the point? The point, as I see it,  is that since the Japanese Occupation advocates for Japanese traditions have regularly disparaged the Koreans and their martial traditions. In fact, during the Russo-Japanese War, Korean soldiers were not used for fighting but rather as porters and teamsters for transporting Japanese materials to the front in Manchuria. It also did not help that many Korean traditions were repressed while Japanese arts imposed on the Korean culture during the Occupation. It also does not help that even Korean nationals returning after the War brought Japanese traditions with them. It seems that these Japanese imports soon surplanted any chance for the Korean MS to reassert themselves. I tend to be a cheer-leader for refocusing on the arts and skills of the Korean MS rather than continuing to emphasize material brought into the country from elsewhere. What confuses me is how very little the Koreans themselves seem to be invested in retaining and examining these traditions. Its almost like practitioners here in the States care more than they do! FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Moo D (May 11, 2004)

I totally agree Bruce,

The loss to the Koreans is the neglect to look at what they have achieved with their flavour of MA's. Though the Japanese influences in the Korean Penisula have been the predominant drive for their current MA's, the reality as I see it is that the Japanese portion of the KMA has a distinctly Korean flavour. I have been studying TSD for the past 8 years and before that TKD for 7 years (a ten year gap in between) and I can say with all honesty the remants of Japanese influence has been taken over by the korean flavour. TSD is quoted as the Korean version of Shotokan Kara-te, and that it may be. However, if anyone is to look at the techniques used, stances and variations on Kicks in TSD then they would realise that it is far away from the Shotokan style, as is today. It has been Koreanised and added to by some more tradtional aspects of KMA, especially the High Kicking (and flying kicks) taken from Tae Kyon.

I guess in reality, that the measure of the MA, regardless of it's roots, is the development of the person and not the origin of the art. Though the Koreans have successfully transformed what they were force fed to by the Japanese during the occupation and made it of a distinct and 'Korean' Style.

Regards,


----------



## glad2bhere (May 11, 2004)

".....However, if anyone is to look at the techniques used, stances and variations on Kicks in TSD then they would realise that it is far away from the Shotokan style, as is today. It has been Koreanised and added to by some more tradtional aspects of KMA, especially the High Kicking (and flying kicks) taken from Tae Kyon......" 

Yes, and this is Big ***** #2 of mine right behind the one I mentioned in my previous post (Big ***** #1 --Ignoring Koreas' Past Traditions). 

The Korean culture has had a rough time of it for generations and one of their best-developed survival tools has been the ability to examine material at home and abroad, select what they want from a pragmatic point-of-view and use it to their best advantage..... to survive. Some people might see this a culturally shallow and mercenary and maybe it is, I don't know for sure. What I will say is that the approach is deeply ingrained in Korean culture, and it works. Big ***** # 2 addresses the idea that some folks, particularly cousins on the other side of the Sea of Japan, don't see this as a successful survival technique for a culture. Rather I get the impression they see it as a bastardization of THEIR Japanese traditions. Now, nobody I know said the Japanese bastardized Okinawa-te when it came to Japan as "Funakoshis' Karate. And I can't find anyone who says the Japanese "bastardized" Tang beauacratic models when they adopted these to the Japanese court. Therefore I have a real problem with folks beating on the Koreans for "borrowing" what they learned during the Occupation and adding their own pragmatic spin on it from past traditions. Now, there is ONE caveat that I would throw in here. When the Koreans "borrow something" from another culture I think they would be better off if they do something more than just change the names. I have seen Kumdo people who still use Kendo rules, kendo dress and Kendo armour for competition but swear the art they practice is indigenous to Korea. I think this only adds to the confusion. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Moo D (May 11, 2004)

Well said Bruce,

Honesty about ones past and own history is a virtue based in all doctrine of MA's. It is sad to see that the modern MA history of Korean MA is so cloudy, though the tenets for all MA is to be loyal, honest, just and modest. Yet time and time again, it is hard and sometimes near impossible to find the real History of TSD, SBD, HKD or TKD.

All martial arts have borrowed something from somewhere or someone at some point in their history. We all know that MA did not start in Japan or Okinawa, yet the insistence that Korean MA is just a copy of what the Japanese have done is again not following the practice which is preached.

However, clouding the history of any martial art to steer thought in a different (maybe incorrect) direction is not really Mudo anyway!!

Regards,


----------



## kwanjang (May 11, 2004)

Moo and Bruce:
IMHO, martial arts started with the first need to gather food and keep it along with the plot folks liked to call their own.  It is not a thing that got started as an art, it simply was a survival tool.  As such, people everywhere tried to increase their skill in order to best the next guy looking at their food or shelter to make it his own, and this effort did not have boundaries or conditions.  Heck, we did not even HAVE boundaries when fighting skills were being developed.  Fighting and survival skills flourished everywhere there was a need, and if one saw a better skill somewhere else it was adopted immediately to improve the person or group's survival rate.

To assume that one country did not beg, borrow, or steal the best technique they ran across is akin to burrying your head in the sand in the hope that no one sees you.  Today, we look at fighting and survival skills as an art form, and this may have prompted a need or desire to catalogue it.  I believe we are talking about two different entities altogether, and I think we can't just lump the "art" and the "survival of the fittest, best armed, and most skilled in order to remain alive and well fed" together to suit our quest for documentation.  Thoughts?


----------



## glad2bhere (May 11, 2004)

Dear Rudy: 

I think you are right on the money as I have seen many a discussion of martial arts and martial science come exactly to this point. 

As you say, on the one hand is the pragmatic side of the martial experience-- call it science if you want to---- where people are interested in survival, plain and simple. On the other hand is the "art" side where people have the luxury of codifying, catgorizing and long-term development. I think the thing that drives me is the idea I can't escape that we (of the modern world) somehow took a wrong turn somewhere along the way. Not that its entirely our fault. Technology in the form of guns and smart-bombs seem to have passed we martial artists by. Even the paid military of today depend much more on their weapons than on 1:1 encounters. But one of the things that has not been taken from us is the choice as to whether we toss out the old ways or not and the traditionalist in me fights this. In a way its a bit like when they tear down some old home in a neighborhood to make way for a new strip mall. Somehow I feel as though the KMA is just that little bit less for having lost that bit of swordwork, or staff, belt or stick because people can't be bothered with something thats not flashy or current enough. 

Now, Ill be the first to agree that these old arts are not for everyone. There are more than a few who would forego old technologies for the ease and freedom of what we have today. I just think that we are somehow diminished when these skills are allowed to fall into disuse and be forgotten. Even my form work reflects a desire to keep older ways alive. Certainly I train in the hyung of my kwan, but I don't let that stop me from delving deeply into the Okinawan kata or the Chinese forms for what benefits it can yeild to my Hapkido training. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## kwanjang (May 11, 2004)

Hello Bruce:
You and I are on the same page.  I LOVE the traditional martial arts of Korea; however, I understand that there are different views on what people consider traditional.  In this, I simply tell myself that we must allow folks to interpret the situation to the best of our ability given the information that is available.  So, I don't fool around with dropping or adding things from the curriculum I learned from my GM; however, I continue to search for more knowledge, and I allow my students the freedom to seek good technique wherever they can find it.

As a man who needs to keep his dojang doors open, I also must provide my consumers with THEIR needs, so I give them what they want in the hope I can interest them in the full monty down the road.  I will not sell rank, and therefore I'll never get rich, but so far this approach has kept my dojang doors open for thirty years.  I can't ask for more


----------



## glad2bhere (May 12, 2004)

Dear Rudy: 

Many thanks. 

BTW: Check your e-mail when you get a chance, would you? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller (May 12, 2004)

Part of the problem is that most people want a quick fix martial art where they can learn how to do everything needed for self defense in a short time without any commitment.  The fact is that it takes many years of hard training before you develope high level skills.  This is where role models are crucial for lower belts to pattern themselves after!  Nothing beats hard and correct training for developing self-defense and charachter skills.

Take care
Todd Miller
Korea Jungki Hapkido & Guhapdo Assc.
www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere (May 12, 2004)

Dear Todd: 

And if I can add to your thought, it does NOT help when influential people, say the leaders of some arts, come across with the idea that what you are describing IS possible. It does NOT help when people who only want to use a martial art in some sort of competitive venue teach the simple physical aspect of the most basic techniques and then deride anything that moves deeper into the art as a whole. It does NOT help when other people learn the basic physical execution of even more sophisticated material and then deride any examination of that same material from a more sophisticated level. 

There was a recent exchange on E-BUDO Net regarding a personality who has represented himself as a DRAJJ teacher but who is apparently not generally  recognized by the DRAJJ community. The arguement seems to be that while this persons' execution appears to be DRAJJ when observed from afar, it may not be incorporating the aspects of DRAJJ in its actual method. I think that Hapkido arts generally suffer from exactly the same issue. People do not regard the Hapkido arts as arts. Instead they seem to see the Hapkido arts as some nebulous conglomeration of whatever they put together. Personally, I think this is the reason that most Hapkido organizations and their material never gets beyond the "yu sool" level of training.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Moo D (May 12, 2004)

Rudy,

Well said, the need for all arts to remain progressive and to develop is a must, however as you feel and as I do, the need to remain true to tradition is also a must.

Todd,

I agree with you entirely that sticking to the path will bear the fruits of hard and corect training. Too many seek the quick fix, or to be world champion or to earn $50,000 a year from a martial art. None of this is worng for that individual, but it is not the art that is being studied any more.

Regards


----------



## kwanjang (May 12, 2004)

Hello Bruce, Todd, and Moo D:
I totally agree with your ideas.  I just want to make sure I have a chance to "introduce" folks to traditional martial arts before they leave for some McDojang before I have a chance to "convert" them


----------



## Moo D (May 13, 2004)

Best of luck Kwang Jang Nim in your quest.

Unfortunatley, it seems that the 'quick fix' and 'cross training' are the demand of many, where a lifetime of study is just too long.

Give me the lifetime study any day!!

:asian: 

Regards,


----------



## kwanjang (May 14, 2004)

Hello Moo D:
I hear you, but then there are always the good students with an attitude like you have.


----------



## glad2bhere (May 14, 2004)

FWIW: 

I personally have come to believe that there is a special "blessing" hidden inside the idea of not working for a large financial return on ones' KMA efforts. 

For my part I have been teaching for some 6 years now and have yet to spend money on rent or a lease, lights, heat or all of the other big expenditures including advertising. People know who I am and a great deal of the time I go to where they are (along with a truck full of folding mats and other equiptment) and we have a session. Some of those sessions have turned into on-going classes. Sometimes I get compensated gas or taken out to dinner. Mostly I don't and I spend more than a little time sleeping on someones' couch in lieu of getting a hotel room.  I mentor two Hapkido clubs at the local junior college and also teach a survey course on the Hapkido arts to the tune of about $600US a semester. The reason I share all of this is to say that I think that THIS is the way the Hapkido arts need to be practiced. One does not need a big school and a hundred students. Why should I want to support a real estate company,Ill Gas or Edison Electric. On the other hand the folks who invite me in don't have to be sold on what I have to share and there is no threat of having to make a long-term committment. If they lose interest or have gotten their fill, they just stop asking me back. 

I guess I share all of this just as a counterpoint to all of the big commercial-driven stuff that turns up so often. Most MA teachers across a range of arts usually taught out of a backroom in their shop, or clinic or even their house--- and that includes people like Yong Sul Choi, himself! I support the idea of an itinerant teacher going to where people have expressed an interest rather than sitting in one spot waiting for somebody to walk in the door of a studio. The only trick I have found to all of this is to make sure that you are honestly commited to having people learn---- and they know this is true about you. IMVVHO. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Moo D (May 14, 2004)

Bruce,

Another excellent post, the real point of all MA's to to enlighten and free the spirit. Your post has shown that you are well on the way to this, I wish that all MA's, organizations, federations, clubs, etc.. would unite and understand what you have posted.

Best Wishes,


----------



## Moo D (May 14, 2004)

Kwang Jang Nim,   :asian: 

Many thanks for your kind words sir. I am but a student of the MA's and of life, in which I aim to learn and give where required.

Tang Soo!!


----------



## Master Todd Miller (May 14, 2004)

and that includes people like Yong Sul Choi, himself! I support the idea of an itinerant teacher going to where people have expressed an interest rather than sitting in one spot waiting for somebody to walk in the door of a studio.

I think the important thing is:  Where is the Instructors heart?  It is not wrong to be paid to teach desired skills or to pay to learn those skills!

There are many in the Martial Arts bussiness that are in it to make money and those are pretty easy to identify with some research!

Take care
Todd Miller
Korea Jungki Hapkido & Guhapdo Assc.
www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Moo D (May 14, 2004)

I agree Master Todd,

Everyone must earn a living in this society. Unfortunately, in the world today, the necessity to earn money to live is a must. However, you are right in saying that those who are only in MA to make money are easy to identify.

You should be paid to teach MA, however, the humble person should only take what is necessary to live.

regards,


----------



## kwanjang (May 14, 2004)

Interesting views and subject.  I have had a "commercial" school for thirty years now (if having a storefront means commercial).  All of this time, this school has just met its obligations, and there was never enough left over to pay the teacher... it is still like that today.

Now that I am on workers comp. (a mere pittance), and I am on the downside of my lifespan, I rely on doing seminars to earn SOME money (I only charge about a third of what most other Masters charge) to supplement the income I derive from rent I charge to my school.  I could in all likelihood get more if I rented to someone else, and I would also not be the one left out when the bills are larger than the income.  Yet, I keep on doing it because I love what I do.  I am not crying the blues here, it WAS my choice to teach martial arts, and I KNEW the pay in our area would not amount to much.  

As I look ahead, I can see clearly that I will be on poverty row while my students for the most part are living in relative comfort.  My wife took the high road long ago, because martial art life IS rough on families.  No one to blame here, I WAS in the arts before we maried, and I told her how it was.  Hence, I don't blame myself.  I also don't blame her, because I can clearly see teaching martial arts (the way I teach) is NOT for a married couple.

Why am I sharing such personal information?  Well, I have never been one to worry about what anyone thinks of me, so tarnishing my image is of no concern.  I DO want to share it with others who might follow a similar path, and I caution you against it.  The way Bruce and I would LIKE to teach is simply not realistic unless you have a full time job that pays for your expense.  You and I both know that NOT having a full time job does bring many problems to the table, especially if this is a long term situation.

Last.  Teaching martial arts is IMHO an honorable profession, and good Instructors do a lot of good in this world.  Why is it that we must look old age in the face without the luxury of a pension?  Why does this honorable job not provide enough sustenance to keep a family together?  Why is it that the very people to whom we teach our beloved art forget about us when we are no longer able to do 6' high spinning kicks.  If you can give me some positive answers to these questions, I'll perhaps encourage folks to teach martial art for the love of it.  Until then, I say DON'T, unless you are prepared to live the last years of your life in poverty and alone.


----------



## iron_ox (May 15, 2004)

Hello All,

I'm sorry, but what is all this "take only what you need grasshopper" crap - the fact is that a good instructor is a good instructor - regardless of what he is paid.  Choi, Yong Sul charged different prices for different students - some paid a lot more that others - some got paid to help out around his dojang.  

Getting paid well is good business, it allows schools to grow - period.  Cut out this pitiful "I am the poor instructor stuff"  - that is your decision, based I think on watching too many episodes of "Kung Fu" in re-runs.  

America - where I live is a capitalist country, nothing is free here, my school will grow only if I can support it and myself, and why not live well in the process?

If you want to teach for free and support yourself with another job, great, but for those of us that want to live from the proceeds from teaching because we do that well, don't assume we are belt mills or McDojangs - that is simply not the case.

"Take only what you need" was tried - and failed in the USSR - I'll stick to the good old fashioned American model - be fair, sell well, control costs and everyone is happy.

The fantasy model of the travelling instructor that trained people for food and fought for the good of the community is a great pipe dream or television series - but it is a lousy way to run a business and try to live.  

A bankrupt instructor is good for no one, himself or his students since he cannot run a school let alone be prepared to teach in one...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## kwanjang (May 15, 2004)

Mr. Sogor writes: 
snip< Cut out this pitiful "I am the poor instructor stuff"  - that is your decision, based I think on watching too many episodes of "Kung Fu" in re-runs.  > end snip

FWIW, I neither complained nor insinuated I support the grasshopper theory.  I do what I do because I love it.  You do what you do, and more power to you if it makes you rich.  I simply wanted to make sure people don't start off on the same path I chose without giving them some stark reality.  BTW, I really don't have time to watch TV.


----------



## Moo D (May 16, 2004)

Mr Sogor,

No one here has said that you should not be paid for what you teach. What is being discussed here is the responsibility as a MA to live what is preached. I have been involved in Martial Arts for around 15 years and have never been taught Marketing and Business Management as part of my training. If it was in there then fine and many profitable schools I would have. But my training has been in martial skills and self development, and I CHOSE not to make a large amount of money from MA's but to give freely to my students and only cover the costs for the dojang. This is my understanding of the 'way'.

This is not to say that if people want to make a lot of money from MA's they can, however they should give a lot in return. This will balance their karma.

MA's are a way of life, not only a vocation.IMHO.

regards,


----------



## iron_ox (May 16, 2004)

Hello all,

A few interesting points have been brought up, so what the heck, I'll respond.

You are both right, kwanjang and moo d that it is very important to give back to students, but STOP making it seem like training and teaching is for monks - giving is one thing - but to do it without the ability to live is silly.

And yes, Hapkido is a way, but frankly, I never had to have any instructor tell me how to live - I got that at home - honesty, integrity, perseverance, were all well learned lessons before I stepped into a dojang - and I make it clear to my students that I am no paragon of virtue - I just do my best - if they choose to follow my example, I will lead as best I am able.

Finally, Business classes are not generally part of a martial curriculum, but if you plan on running a successful business, where your students can come back for years, maybe it would behoove you to take a few classes in commerce.

Commercial instruction pays to live and train, it also pays for those students who cannot afford to pay.  You cannot preach giving back until you have the ability to donate...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## kwanjang (May 16, 2004)

Mr. Sogor:
I guess I did not make my post clear enough.  I also advocated people to think twice before teaching martial arts for a pittance.  Just because I happen to do so, does not mean that I believe I am right.  It is just a nasty habit left over from teaching it as a hobby.  I not only believe that a good Instructor should make a decent living, I also believe that a student who does not pay (or pay enough) most often is one who does not appreciate the art and/or its teachers.  Just my experience with that.

As far as learning business practices.  I went back to University at age 52, and I did so for two reasons.  One was to learn more about Exercise Science, and the other was to get a minor in business.  I graduated with a B.Sc. at age 56 with a 3.56 average, applied what I learned about proper exercise in my classes, and apparently threw all I learned about business right out the window (because I am still teaching like it is my hobby.

FWIW.  I also don't think much about quasi Instructors who ask a lot of money for teaching crap they don't even understand the principles of... let alone good martial art technique.  I believe some of the comments made here were adressed to the likes of that, and I do agree with that opinion.  IMHO, these "Instructors" take unsuspecting consumers to the cleaners and turn them off martial arts forever.  This is as much of a problem as the problems you mentioned in another thread about bad organizations that make good Instructors look silly.


----------



## dosandojang (May 17, 2004)

Kwang Jang Nim Timmerman will NEVER sell out...And he will continue to be rewarded for his good heart and mind because of this fact....


----------



## Master Todd Miller (May 17, 2004)

I think Kwang Jang Timmerman hit on an important point that has been hashed and rehashed!  Teachers that teach without proper understanding of an arts principles are most often the ones with the McDojangs and belt mills!  This is bad for the Mudo community!

A good instructor desearves to be paid for there knowledge and experience and guidence.  The sad truth is that it takes money to keep dojangs openand good instructors around for the next generation.  

I think we all have to ask the question "Am I being fair to my students, my family, my dojang, my art and myself?"

This is always tough for true mudoin but very important for keeping balence.

Take care
Todd Miller
Korea Jungki Hapkido & Guhapdo Assc.
www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere (May 17, 2004)

I have kinda lost track with where I fit in here but I thought I would make sure that folks knew that I was not disputing the role of paid instruction. Certainly if a person offers a good product and can induce people to pay a living wage for it, I say "more power to them". The view I was pressing was that historically this has not been the case and that the model has been closer to MA instruction as  avocation than as vocation. Taken a step farther I have seen more cases of commercial teachers diluting their curriculum, even their art, in an effort to sell their services. Most schools I am familiar with sooner or later become ersatz "day care centers" in which young childeren are recruited for after-school programs and lesser versions of the art are organized to create the impression that the young child is learning a grown-up art. As I have read in other posts, even in Korea the majority of practitioners are children rather than adults yet the art remains an adult art and is not appropriate for children in its true form. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Moo D (May 17, 2004)

I think my post may have been lacking in understanding. Bluntly, I was saying that for me personally I like to follow the virtues as I have become accustomed to in TSD and make a humble living from teaching, earning only what I need to carry on teaching. The key is that I choose to do this, and not that everyone should follow this.

There is no problem with someone earning a lot of money from MA's but the responsibility I was talking about is regards to the quality of instruction given. I agree with KJN Timmermand and Bruce on this. This has become an interesting diversion from the original thread. Should we pick this up on a new thread????

:idunno: 

Regards,


----------



## iron_ox (May 17, 2004)

Hello all,

Bruce, couldn't agree more - martial arts schools are more and more becoming day care centers - shame really.

Moo D, I understand your point, but it is important to stress that this is a choice and not some fantasy "martial code" - but as your choice, I do agree with that.

Probably would make an interesting thread...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## kwanjang (May 18, 2004)

Looks like I missed some of the fun.   In any case, it seems like we all agree that in order to teach or keep a school open you either need: some personal wealth, to be happy living as a pauper, or to charge students a fair price.  The price will naturally vary from one area to the next.

As far as selling out.  I believe Dosan experienced first hand that I am kind of picky when handing out accolades or rank, and I see by his actions here that he does not seem to hold a grudge.  I simply try my best to keep honor and hard work a major part of training and giving recognition.  Just my way, and I am glad that there are many others doing exactly the same.


----------



## kwanjang (May 18, 2004)

I think Mr. Sogor has exposed a real serious issue here about Day Care being a large part of martial arts these days.  Bruce also hinted that teaching kids an art that was designed for adults is an issue.  IMHO, these are MAJOR issues, and I just wonder how others deal with it.  Thoughts?


----------



## Kodanjaclay (May 18, 2004)

I have mixed feelings about the Day Care issue. I think though that there is nothing wrong with it in the sense that we are teaching a future generation, and helping to instill discipline in a troubled generation... assuming that that is the case.

Some of the stats that I have just heard from practitioners living in Korea is that children make up the largest segment of practitioners there. It would seem somewhat consistent.

Then again, how much can possibly be transferred to a child in a "day care" setting?


----------



## Disco (May 18, 2004)

From all that has transpired and is still ongoing, several things have come to light. 1) Korea itself no longer practices what we in the states practice (the arts are for children). Schools are/have become day care centers to a large degree. 2) Since Korea dosen't seem to care, because they have invested their time in education not mudo, why then are they so interested in controling the U.S.? 3) Why, since many people already are aware first hand of what has been going on, does the people in the U.S. allow this to continue? Surely even a blind person can see a stepchild being abused. 4) Does unquestionable allegence to old school ties have any merit, when there is no more old school? Which inturn translates to who do/would you serve, a kwan or an organization? One can't serve both, because there is/will be a conflict of interest. Where does one's true integrity lie, to their current students or to past relationships that may just be onesided?


----------



## glad2bhere (May 18, 2004)

Dear Disco: 

I feel sorta swamped by so many important questions! Since I do not teach children (High School and Under) I won't speak to that particular item. But the point about Kwan versus Organization is one very serious issue that simply HAS to be addressed. 

Nobody, I'm sure, is surprised that I support the kwan approach to MA education. It is the traditional venue and proceeds from a very close relationship with ones' teacher. I am not saying that a person can't have a close relationship with a teacher within an organization only that the kwan approach proceeds from such a relationship. There are also a number of other qualities that arise from this particularly unique model. 

1.) Unlike the Japanese "ryu" with which it is often confused, the kwan does NOT have "soke" or "kyoshi" or "shihan". Yes I know that many people use the term "kwan jang" but this is a relatively new innovation not unlike the use of the term "grandmaster". In a kwan the leader is gnerally identified by the membership as that person most highly accomplished in furthering the goals of the kwan. This is VERY different from a person assuming a role to himself and compelling others to defer to his authority. 

2.) A kwan is as much philosophical as technical in its underpinnings. Perhaps this is why so many folks found it easy to use this model for MA education. Many folks seem to conclude that "Kwan" is synonymous with "style" and this can be a dangerous assumption. Most "styles are not separated by differences in technique or execution but in priorities held by the group. SOME of those priorities may translate into variances in execution but for the most part the priorities have to do with what the goals of the kwan are and how to reach those goals. For instance, in Yon Mu Kwan an observer watching from the edge of the mat would see few differences between many of the joint-locks and throws we do and those done by the Sin Mu folks. Philosophically, however, the difference is significant in that Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido focuses to a great degree on delving into the most traditional implications of what we do. 

3.) An organization very often seems to speak to a quid pro quo of sorts usually involving revenues and commerce. The kwan is very much about contributions. Put another way organizations seem to speak to what the memberships can take away while the kwan looks to what members bring to the group. A simple metaphor might be that an organization might be the equivalent of a  Pancake Breakfast Fundraiser and a "kwan" would be a Pot-luck Dinner. 

I have taken this time in the hopes that people might gain some insight into the differences between these two institutions. I know the one I favor but that does not mean the other is bad or worthless. I only mean that we need to be careful not to confuse the two as people are quickly disappointed to find that they thought they were joining one and it turned out they were caught-up in the other. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## dosandojang (May 18, 2004)

No Sir, I hold no grudges against you. I have nothing but the utmost respect for you.


----------



## kwanjang (May 19, 2004)

Thank you Dosan.   I think I just did not get the right info at the time.


----------



## dosandojang (May 19, 2004)

Thank you Sir. I have devoted my entire life to KMA, and I do my best keep its good name. I am very happy that you recognize my sincere efforts. I continue to learn a lot from each day...


----------



## Moo D (May 19, 2004)

It is nice to see such good martial spirit and humilty on this thread. I applaud all those who have contributed.


:asian: 

Regards,


----------



## dosandojang (May 19, 2004)

Thank you. Same to you Moo Do!


----------

