Glass ceiling for non-Koreans, or a time issue?

[Brad Dunne]

Miles, appriciate your reference to the other thread. I didn't see anything different from what we already have discussed, with one glaring exception. That would be your statement that the Kukkiwon does not recognize Kwan rankings. I find that more than ironic. The kwans come together, for the so-called good of TKD and then are rebuffed, by the creation they lent their support to. No wonder there's so much confusion and latent hostility surrounding TKD. The difference that I have determined in regards to Kwan vs Kukkiwon and the above statement lends itself to the perception that currently, the Kwans really don't care about the Kukkiwon and visa versa. TKD via the Kukkiwon has been driven into the sports arena and the Kwan heads apparently either didn't expect that to happen or they assumed that it would have only been a minor faction of the TKD curriculum. The Kwans by the way are alive and kicking (pun intended) and can be located within the new USTW. Their montra is to make TKD a "martial art" again and the majority of the officers are Korean Masters. I just find it interesting and somewhat relevent, that these folks find/found it necessary to implement yet another organizational venue for folks to continue in their TKD journey. My personal opinion on the distinction between Kwan/Kukkiwon is that Kukkiwon represents sport/athletics and the Kwan represents true martial arts training. :asian:

 

[TraditionalTKD]

I would disagree with that actually. The Kukkiwon was built as the physical headquarters of the World Tae Kwon Do Federation, and that's what it remains-the Secretariat and Central Gymnasium of the Art of Tae Kwon Do as practiced in the land of its birth-Korea. The reason why we have the WTF/Kukkiwon in the first place is to encourage unification of the nine recognized Kwans of Tae Kwon Do. The Kwans served a purpose in their day. They each brought something to the table in what would become Tae Kwon Do. But you can't have nine different schools each making their own decisions and practicing their own curriculum. Chaos and factionalism would reign, which is exactly what happened prior to the formation of the KTA/WTF. Do we really want that?
My organization is Chung Do Kwan based. I am proud to be a Chung Do Kwan student. But I also realize that for Tae Kwon Do to flourish, it must have a semblance of unity among its members. or nothing would get accomplished.
Does that mean I agree with everything the Kukkiwon does? No. I am not a champion free fighter and will never go to the Olympics. But the Kukkiwon also promotes forms (Palgue, in our case), self defense, the Hanmadang, and traditional Korean philosophy. So while I am thankful to have practiced Chung Do Kwan-style, I also am grateful that Korean TKD has the Kukkiwon to help unify it.

 

[DArnold]

There are two major problems facing world Tae Kwon Do Instructors (actually more than two, but two I'll address):

1. Rank inflation
2. Credibility of Instructors

As Brad stated, he kwnows boatloads of Instructors passing themselves off as 7th, 8th, and 9th Dans. A quick glance of any Yellow Pages, and I do mean any, will quickly show many Instructors, Korean and non-Korean, passing themselves off as 7th, 8th, and 9th Dan Masters and Grandmasters. Many of these guys are not that old either. There are a plethora of claimed high Dan Instructors. Legitimate Dan holders is another matter.
Keep in mind, it is not hard at all to forge or obtain forged and phony certificates, and get shady Instructors to vouch for you. World Head of Family Sokeship anyone? Pay the fees, and presto, you have the backing the best Instructors money can buy. Which leads to me to point 2.
2. Having an Instructor claim 7th, 8th, and 9th Dan is one thing. Having an Instructor with the proper credibility to justify those ranks is quite another. How many Instructors have I met or read about who created their own organization, then certified themselves through it? Many. Very easy way to obtain 8th and 9th Dan. Simply create the _______ Tae Kwon Do League/Brotherhood/Association/ etc., issue your certificates through it, and you get all the ego building of claimed 9th Dan recognition without all the anoying credibility building over 50 years that goes along with it.

But isn't the orginization with the most highest ranks more valid?
Aren't they more credible?
Isn't that a great selling point to the unknowing?

Didn't one of the guiding phylosophys come from the movie "Jerry McGuire"...

SHOW ME THE MONEY

LOL:shooter:

I've watched many Koreans who were white belts when I was a 4th degree already make Master (7th Degree).
Things that make you go HUMMM.

I think westerners take testing timelines literaly while the Koreans think of it more as a guideline - Kind of like the ""Pirates code" in "the Pirates of the Carabean" SP?

 

[D.Gaul]

I think it's some of each... I know that GM Sereff started TKD in the early 60's; Master Lang (VIII Dan) started in 1965 - they were two of the very first to start in the ITF. There are also quite a few master instructors in the USTF (which, per ITF guidelines, means 7th Dan and above) - although I'm not quite sure how many, as I left the USTF some time ago.

Just a note GM Sereff started Tang Soo Do in the early 60's and did not switch to ITF untill 66 or 67. This is not ment to take anything away from GM Sereff just clarifying.

 

[TraditionalTKD]

I'll be the first to admit, the Kukkiwon system of Tae Kwon Do is undergoing some problems right now:
1. Grandmaster Instructors who are merely ex-jocks (retired tournament fighters), without a thorough grounding in Tae Kwon Do the martial art as opposed to Tae Kwon Do the tournament style.
2. Reduced focus on the traditional aspects of Tae Kwon Do, as opposed to sparring techniques.

However, having said that, the Kukkiwon does serve a valuable purpose. As I said before, it brings together the nine major Kwans, with their various philosophies and approaches to technique and training. I prefer Chung Do Kwan, but each has something to offer. Keep in mind, the first thing that happened after the death of Gen. Choi was something I predicted would happen in the first place: the ITF factionalized without his unifying presence. That can't happen with the Kukkiwon because there is no cult of personality keeping things together. Bickering and problems to be worked out? Sure. But in the long run no one individual has a final say, and varied ideas are allowed to be brought to the table and given a chance to work.
Kind of like the U.N. Not perfect and with problems, but ultimately beneficial.
Is there a glass ceiling for non-Koreans? I doubt it. Realize, the Koreans who have risen to the top of the world TKD community have spent decades traveling, teaching, promoting, and being spokesmen for TKD. It is a source of national and cultural pride for them. I just don't see many Americans and/or non Koreans as having the same level of dedication. I think for most of us, it is just a form of sporting recreation.

 

[Kacey]

Just a note GM Sereff started Tang Soo Do in the early 60's and did not switch to ITF untill 66 or 67. This is not ment to take anything away from GM Sereff just clarifying.

No problem; I was typing away from my notes, but I do know that Master Lang started in 1965 - at least, that's what he told me the last time it came up.

 

[exile]

I'm probably going to regret doing this... but as Oscar Wilde (is said to have) remarked, I can resist everything but temptation. I'd like to go back to TraditionalTKD's post and see if there really is any advantage to a `united' TKD, and if so, advantage to whom. This isn't off-topic, I don't think, because if there is a `glass ceiling' as per the original thread question, it's essentially a creation of this one particular organization, so the existence of that organization, and justification for its existence, are parts of the background to the original post.

The reason why we have the WTF/Kukkiwon in the first place is to encourage unification of the nine recognized Kwans of Tae Kwon Do. The Kwans served a purpose in their day. They each brought something to the table in what would become Tae Kwon Do. But you can't have nine different schools each making their own decisions and practicing their own curriculum. Chaos and factionalism would reign, which is exactly what happened prior to the formation of the KTA/WTF. Do we really want that?

I'm not sure I follow this point at all. Why can't you have nine different schools each making their own decisions and practicing their own curriculum. Chaos and factionalism? Well, there's nothing in Karate, so far as I understand it, like the Kikkiwon, but I'd hardly call the state of Karate, with its zillion different styles/ryu and case-by-case dojo curricula, a model of chaos and factionalism. On the contrary, what I regard as the greatest technical breakthrough in a long time in TKD—the beginning of realistic and effective bunkai and oyo (I use the Japanese terms in lieu of any generally agreed-on Korean equivalents) in the work of people like Simon O'Neil and Stuart Anslow—is basically a gift to us from the brilliant work of karatekas in the UK, US, Australia and other parts of the karate galaxy. The recovery of combat applications for kata, the elaboration of general rules for retrieving these apps that relate the tactics involved to more general MA principles, and the elaboration of very hard combat-realistic methods for training these apps—things we can take directly into our practice due to the origins of our hyungs in Okinawan/Japanese fighting system—have all come from the insights of individual practitioners, not the technical directorate of a huge central governing body. I've seen the supposed `effective' bunkai for KKW/WTF hyungs on their website, and they are about as unrealistic and ineffective as possible, for the kinds of reasons discussed in great detail in much of the literature on realistic kata bunkai; try applying those supposed apps in a streetfight with even a moderately sober attacker and you'd wake up in a hospital on life-support—if you were lucky. So far as I can see, karateka do a great job in promoting the advancement of their art as an effective fighting system; I don't see anything like chaos, factionalism or the like. Bear in mind, factionalism is far more likely within a single organization riven by competing subgroups fighting for influence within than within a community of mutually unaffiliated schools each of which goes its own way in terms of curriculum and orientation. If the schools have nothing to do with each other, where are any `factions' going to come from? Factions withing what? I'd say now that that there's probably a not more factional antagonism within the ITF than there is between the ITF and the WTF at this point. The two big orgs basically ignore each other and run their own programs; in the ITF, all the friction and heat comes from suborganizations each wanting to run the show and claim sole legitimacy.

My organization is Chung Do Kwan based. I am proud to be a Chung Do Kwan student. But I also realize that for Tae Kwon Do to flourish, it must have a semblance of unity among its members. or nothing would get accomplished.

Well, what has been accomplished, apart from the enormous growth and spread of sport TKD (and the concommitant neglect of the CQ/H2H fighting component)? What you seem to be sayng is, we wouldn't have an Olympic scale competitive sport with a worldwide tournament organization network if we didn't have `unity among its members'. True, perhaps— but if you don't think the sport aspect of TKD is all that important or that the emphasis on it is healthy for TKD as a street-effective fighting art, then that whole line of argment is going to be pointless. Look at Tang Soo Do—they do very well as a martial art without an extensive tournament foundation; and typically—as I've seen on several different threads—seems to have a lot more credibility as a fighting art than TKD does in the larger MA community, because of the combat emphasis in their training—although, in the kwan era, there was no radical distinction between what those later affiliated with TSD and those affiliated with TKD were doing (so look at Moo Duk Kwan, a single kwan which split down the middle, half going to TKD and the other half TSD—the same people, the same curriculum! The separation was purely institutional and political; the technical content of MDK at the time of the split was uniform for everyone in the kwan).

Does that mean I agree with everything the Kukkiwon does? No. I am not a champion free fighter and will never go to the Olympics. But the Kukkiwon also promotes forms (Palgue, in our case), self defense, the Hanmadang, and traditional Korean philosophy.

The KKW makes arbitrary changes in the forms of hyungs, drops whole families of hyungs from its curriculum (the Pyang-Ahn forms first, along with a numbe of others derived from O/JMA), relegated the Palgwes to marginal status at best, and promotes the Taegeuks heavily as, I suspect, because the walking stances introduced in that series correspond to optimal point-scoring practice in Olympic-style competition. The self-defense? ... don't get me started! And as for promoting `traditional Korean philosophy', you can study that on your own, much more effectively, than you can get it through the KKW, I would think, if for some reason you're interested in that. I'm not sure what form this promotion of Korean philosophy takes, but I have to say, I can't see that anything critical hangs on having a huge centralized bureaucracy for a martial art promote a particular national philosophy. Karate organizations don't promote Japanese Buddhism, so far as I can tell, for the most part; Arnis/Silat schools don't invest an awful lot of energy promoting indigenous Filipine philosophy or religion... I guess I just don't see why this aspect of it is relevant, unless one is a serious student of Korean philosophy—which is probably a very tiny minority of those who study TKD.

So while I am thankful to have practiced Chung Do Kwan-style, I also am grateful that Korean TKD has the Kukkiwon to help unify it.

Again, enforcement of uniform competition practice and skewing of technical content in competition-oriented directions seems to be what your use of the term `unify' denotes here. There's no way, to my eyes, that this is self-evidently a good thing for TKD as a martial art whose origins and technical content are all about self-defense in hand-to-hand combat.