I'm no linguist, but I have done a goodly amount of research into terminology. Pretty sure about jutsu.
Grappling and unbalancing is indeed a new ball game for someone who's only trained in strikes. Should have been a good eye opener for her though; you learn pretty quick that there is more to defend against than just strikes.
I can see where you're coming from Daniel and things may be different over there but I would say over here people are also quite ignorant of martial arts in general, but most people know tkd as "the one with all the fancy kicks and their hands down when they fight". I was surprised even my father described it as this when I first started and he knows very little about martial arts. People also use the internet a lot now when looking to start in a martial art and to say the general feeling on the net regarding tkd is negative is probably an understatement. I know a few people who have googled "is tkd good for real life self defence?" when looking for a martial art to start and the general cosensus was "no". Our club has had to really distance itself from this perception in recent years.
I liken it to guitar. I have been a guitar teacher for years and have played guitar my whole life and spent many years playing in bands, but I wouldnt have a clue when the guitar was invented, who invented it, why it was invented, what country it was invented in etc. And I can honestly say I have never had a student of mine ask me any of these questions. For me, martial arts are the same. I am there to train and get as good as I can, but have little or no interest in the origins of my art. I used to think it was because I am a relative beginner, but since then Ive met too many high dan holders who also have no interest in these matters. In fact, I had a good talk with my instructor (7th dan) recently and was surprised I know heaps more about the history/origins/politics in tkd than he did, and all that knowledge has come from what I read here. Basically, other than the fact tkd is korean, he knew nothing at all about it. I had to explain to one of our 5th dans what the difference between ITF and WTF is. Some would say they are ignorant, but as long as they know the material, are good instructors and good martial artists I dont think it really matters whether or not they know who the kukkiwon president is or what year tkd was invented or what the kwans are etc
I agree. Clubs in my area now write SELF DEFENCE and then write tkd in small print underneath if they want to move away from the connatations associated with tkd. One tkd club in my area even sent out flyers where nowhere on the entire flyer was the word 'taekwondo' used but if you go to their premises they have tkd emblazoned on the front of the building but its in an industrial estate so you only see that once you have joined or have come along for a free lesson where they will see first hand that its not the sport stuff. I agree though, if its tkd then they should call it that.
As I said before, I think that it is appropriate regardless of your choice of forms; empty hand way is nicely generic and covers strikes, grapples, locks, etc.Thank you, and I agree. We played around with names for a while many years ago. Initially there was concern with the 'Do' but in the end we felt the same as you. I think in the past that there were profound differences between a 'Do' and a non-Do art but really not so much anymore.
And Kong Soo Do just wasn't really much in use. Oh, there were some KSD here and there, but it wasn't really 'out there' so-to-speak. We felt it would be a good niche to label what we teach, allow us to put in all the locks, throws, chokes, cavity pressing etc, respect the Okinawan/Japanese connection and not step on anyone's toes at the same time.
I mean what was the alternative? Old School TKD? Combat TKD? I dunno, KSD just seemed simpler and a better fit.
Although I did consider "Bait, Tackle and Kung Fu Emporium.
Nor would I, though I disagree that taekwondo has become as generic a term as Karate.
Though I suppose that the addition of the catch phrase, "Stike fast, strike hard, no mercy!" under your taekwondo sign would give people a clue that it isn't the usual fare.
By typical, I mean the environment that seems to pervade the majority of commericial schools, regardless of style or organization. I've been in enough TKD schools around the country that I have been able to pick out enough common threads to establish a typical school (typical is neither good nor bad). Seen a good many atypical schools too, though.
I'm pretty sure that Jhoon Rhee was using Chang hon forms early on. I have an old Jhoon Rhee book that details some of the forms and I recognize the names as Chang Hon. The system itself predates Jhoon Rhee taekwondo, and was developed by General Choi and his contemporaries in the ITF.
