'Korean karate': candor and denial

[Brad Dunne]

I've just uncovered some interesting info. It seems that an overlooked aspect of history has come to the front. They found cave drawings outside of Taewhat and they were of French origins. It showed figures, kicking a large animal and then kissing each other cheeks.

So now we know that TKD is actually Savate, but without pointy shoes and tight pants...........:drink2tha

 

[exile]

I've just uncovered some interesting info. It seems that an overlooked aspect of history has come to the front. They found cave drawings outside of Taewhat and they were of French origins. It showed figures, kicking a large animal and then kissing each other cheeks.

So now we know that TKD is actually Savate, but without pointy shoes and tight pants...........:drink2tha

Whoa—that should satisfy the most ardent devotee of 'ancient TKD'!!

Brad, better send that data off to the WTF site—they're gonna want to incorporate this material pronto! :lol:

 

[tkd1964]

There were three Combat interviews:

1970s: Without karate there would have been no Taekwon-do

1980s: Karate was simply a reference tool that helped

early 1990s: Karate had only a minor or no impact on Taekwon-do/Karate has nothing to do with Taekwon-do

(Ch'ang Hon Taekwon-fo Hae Sul, by Stuart Anslow, 2006, Diggory Press (Cornwall, UK), p.11).

You don't see this as a 'change of story'?

Or, as per the interview I gave you a link to with Gm. Kim:

In the early days he was teaching the same karate forms as the other kwans, such as Pyung Ahn, Bassai Tae, Kon Sang Kun, etc. Then in the late 1950’s he came up with a story about martial arts links to Korguryo dynasty, Silla Dynasty, 2000 years of tradition, etc.He created new forms and gave each form a name related to something in Korean history, such as a scholar’s name or a famous Korean patriot’s name. He called his system, “Taekwondo.” He was trying to get away from the connection to the Japanese - trying to make something patriotic. He wanted everyone to follow this new line and give up their previous training.​

Gm. Kim—who published the first book on the Palgwes when they were first created (heavily based on the Pinan kata set) and was a Kwan leader and the senior instructor in the Chung Moo Kwan, and later a Kwan leader in the Kwang-duk Kwan, in the late 1950s—was, as his BB interview makes explicit, approached on several occasions by Gen. Choi and urged to change affiliation to the Oh Do Kwan. He was an insider on the scene during the formative Kwan era, and knew exactly who was teaching what, what their background in the MAs was, their connections to the Japanese karate scene, and so on. He is telling you that Gen. Choi started off with the same curriculum as everyone else, derived, like everyone else (except Hwang Kee) from either Shotokan or Shukokan karate, and then, later on in the post-Korean War era, began to elaborate this legend of TKD's 'ancient' origins.

In view of Gen. Choi's own words and the testimony I've cited from one of those who was 'present at the creation', so to speak, are you really going to try to maintain that he was telling the same story over the four decades following the Korean War?

I also want to forestall red-herring objections along the lines I've already suggested, that in bringing these contradictions into the discussion I'm dishonoring the memory of a great man, or some such line. The underlying issue that drove my OP here has to do with the distinctly different technical approaches, on the part of many TSDers on the one hand and the 'official' Korean TKD directorate line on the other, to what were at one time the hyungs trained in common by the two groups. I was perplexed by the candor with which many TSD people seem to accept the O/J antecents of their art, in spite of the fact that Hwang Kee alone among the original five Kwan founders didn't study in Japan, compared with the denial of this connection that became a leitmotif of 'official' TKD in the post-Kwan era, with Gen. Choi arguably the first and most prominent example. The issue is important not as an obscure bit of ancient sectarian history, but because the different outlooks inform the technical approach to the hyungs practiced by TSD and TKD respectively. The discussion so far has suggested some interesting reasons why this split in attitude might have occurred, and leads me to suspect that dojangs which—in defiance of the dictates of TKD Central in Seoul—maintain their separate Kwan identity and links to their original curricula are also going to take a different approch to 'reading' hyungs, and deciphering their interpretations and applications, than those which identify completely with the canonical KKW curriculum. In the development of this discussion, I'm making no value judgments on Gen. Choi's revisionism; but to deny it strikes me as very wishful thinking.

as I have stated, I don't know about the Combat magazine but I would like to read it. As for GM Kim, the 2000 year history has nothing to do with TKD but with Korean history. The patterns are named after Korean patriots who were important to Koreas history. He did not want to be teaching his soldiers Karate(Tang Soo Do). He wanted something the Koreans could take pride in. Taekwon-Do has only been around since 1955.
Do they have these Combat mags in backissue? What you have printed would show an obvious change in his story and I would like to read them. To say that Karate had little/no influence is just rediculous.

 

[exile]

As for GM Kim, the 2000 year history has nothing to do with TKD but with Korean history.

Judging by what Gm. Kim has said, your interpretation here does not match what Gen. Choi actually claimed. We all know about the `2000 years of Korean history'; we have excellent evidence that there was indeed a Three Kingdoms era, and that Silla, Paekche and Koguryeo were involved in pretty much nonstop war with each other; and we know that figures from this 2000 year history were part of his naming scheme for the Ch'ang Hon forms. But that is not what is denoted by

Then in the late 1950’s he came up with a story about martial arts links to Korguryo dynasty, Silla Dynasty, 2000 years of tradition...​

Do they have these Combat mags in backissue? What you have printed would show an obvious change in his story and I would like to read them. To say that Karate had little/no influence is just rediculous.

Stuart Anslow is actually a member of this site—check with him about the availability of these issues. There has got to be a place where they are available, at least on microfilm.

 

[Kacey]

as I have stated, I don't know about the Combat magazine but I would like to read it. As for GM Kim, the 2000 year history has nothing to do with TKD but with Korean history. The patterns are named after Korean patriots who were important to Koreas history. He did not want to be teaching his soldiers Karate(Tang Soo Do). He wanted something the Koreans could take pride in. Taekwon-Do has only been around since 1955.
Do they have these Combat mags in backissue? What you have printed would show an obvious change in his story and I would like to read them. To say that Karate had little/no influence is just rediculous.

Regardless of what Gen. Choi said in his later years, I know no masters or grand masters (and I know several personally - all of whom trained extensively with Gen. Choi) who practice Ch'ang H'on TKD who deny that TKD has a healthy portion of Shotokan Karate contained within it.

Gen. Choi was a Korean patriot; he was personally involved in the Korean Independence movement when Korea was fighting its way free of Japan. That's why so many of the tul histories are related to patriots who were instrumental in that effort.

 

[Steel Tiger]

Actually, the Chil Sung hyungs/forms are represented by the constellation known as the Big Dipper or Plough. The form name translates to mean "Seventh Star". And supposedly the reference is to the North Star which is contained in the constellation. Many, many years ago when travellers would be traveling at night, they would use the North Star to guide their direction. As such these Chil Sung forms are supposed to help guide the Moo Duk Kwan practitioner to become a better martial artist.

The seven stars referred to in Seven Stars Praying Mantis also refer to the Big Dipper. One of the characteristic stances of the style is supposed to plot the seven stars on specific points of the body.

I like the concept of guiding practitioners to improve themselves.

 

[tellner]

The Seven Stars is a classic motif in Chinese martial culture. Cave paintings or no, I don't think the Koreans can legitimately claim they started it :shrug:

 

[tkd1964]

Regardless of what Gen. Choi said in his later years, I know no masters or grand masters (and I know several personally - all of whom trained extensively with Gen. Choi) who practice Ch'ang H'on TKD who deny that TKD has a healthy portion of Shotokan Karate contained within it.

Gen. Choi was a Korean patriot; he was personally involved in the Korean Independence movement when Korea was fighting its way free of Japan. That's why so many of the tul histories are related to patriots who were instrumental in that effort.

Personally, I never have either, nor have I heard the general Deny it. That is why I would like to read the magazines for myself. It sounds as if Mr. Anslow took snippits and put them in his book but I would like to read the whole articles.

Mike

 

[exile]

Personally, I never have either, nor have I heard the general Deny it. That is why I would like to read the magazines for myself. It sounds as if Mr. Anslow took snippits and put them in his book but I would like to read the whole articles.

Mike

As I say, the articles must exist in some form. And since Mr. Anslow is a member of MartialTalk—his username is Stuart A, and you'll have no trouble finding him in the member's list—you can easily pursue the matter with him and ask him, straight out, if he 'took snippets and put them in his book'.

 

[Steel Tiger]

Just thought I would throw this out there for you guys.

While looking into the martial arts of Taiwan I came across a system created by the famous martial artist Hong Yixiang. It is called Tang Shou Tao. It means what you would think it would mean (Chinese Hand Way) and was created in the 1950s and early 1960s. It is not a style so much as it is a system of concepts and principles.

Found it interesting in light of this discussion and thought someone else might as well.

 

[exile]

Taiwanese MAs are a completely closed book to me, ST—but I've wondered from time to time if there were any development there that differed from the mainland arts. What are core ideas of this recent system that you mentioned?

Just thought I would throw this out there for you guys.

While looking into the martial arts of Taiwan I came across a system created by the famous martial artist Hong Yixiang. It is called Tang Shou Tao. It means what you would think it would mean (Chinese Hand Way) and was created in the 1950s and early 1960s. It is not a style so much as it is a system of concepts and principles.

Found it interesting in light of this discussion and thought someone else might as well.

 

[Steel Tiger]

Taiwanese MAs are a completely closed book to me, ST—but I've wondered from time to time if there were any development there that differed from the mainland arts. What are core ideas of this recent system that you mentioned?

Taiwan is a strange world where some very obscure CMA go to live forever. Have a look for Robert W Smith's book Chinese Boxing: Masters and Methods for a good overview of Taiwanese martial arts (in the 1960s anyway).

Tang Shou Tao is a system developed to help a student learn internal martial arts. It is based in the three major Chinese internal arts - xingyi, bagua, and taiji. Basically what Hong, and his teacher Chang Chun-Feng, are saying that to properly develop internal power you must start with something like Shaolin Kung fu then progress to xingyi, then bagua, then taiji. Hong was of the opinion that if you started with taiji it would be very difficult to develop and understand internal power.

I don't know if I agree with this as I feel that my own understanding and development aren't too bad and I didn't follow this pattern.

One other thing Hong Yixiang was adamant about was the development of the physical and basic martial skills. He felt that students should have a essential understanding of punching, kicking, blocking, and throwing before they began training in the internal arts.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Truthfully I know of no time when General Choi did not admit that he trained in Shotokan Karate. Heck at one seminar that I was at oh so long, long, long ago he talked about the severity of his early Karate training and how that helped to form him in some ways.

Shotokan had to have influenced early TKD of that their is little doubt. Yet ITF TKD has moved beyond it's Shotokan influence. Still though if you look closely you can see it clearly as it is part of the lineage. (Shotokan)

Applications of the bunkai of Shotokan Karate will in my opinion and I know exile shares this as well fit perfectly with the TKD that came from General Choi.

 

[exile]

Truthfully I know of no time when General Choi did not admit that he trained in Shotokan Karate. Heck at one seminar that I was at oh so long, long, long ago he talked about the severity of his early Karate training and how that helped to form him in some ways.

Shotokan had to have influenced early TKD of that their is little doubt. Yet ITF TKD has moved beyond it's Shotokan influence. Still though if you look closely you can see it clearly as it is part of the lineage. (Shotokan)

Applications of the bunkai of Shotokan Karate will in my opinion and I know exile shares this as well fit perfectly with the TKD that came from General Choi.

I wouldn't argue with any of the material I've bolded, for sure. I myself have no idea how anyone could plausibly deny the role of karate in providing the platform for TKD; yet take a look at the utterly bogus narrative at this site—the official site of USA Taekwondo, the national governing body—the National Member Association!—of WTF TKD in the US. Read it and weep. Apart from one miserable little reference to 'other martial arts' (which flagrently contradicts the premise of the first three sentences that this is a completely unique MA that is among the very oldest in the world), there is absolutely no connection with the documented MA training of the Kwan founders. I read this and I think of Orwell's 1984: in the Newspeak of the KKW/WTF, the O/J historical sources of TKD have simply become 'unpeople'.

Given this sort of thing, I'm never surprised to find people with major agendas engaged in massive revisionist rewriting of documented history. This sort of thing works, too—we say, the truth will out, but that's optimism and idealism with a vengeance. If enough of the documentary record is suppressed, and the official story promoted aggressively enough, a few generations is all it takes to wipe the truth from people's minds. In Japan, I recently read somewhere, almost no one under the age of thirty knows what happened at Nanking in the imperialist expansion leading up to, and continued in, WWII.

Taiwan is a strange world where some very obscure CMA go to live forever. Have a look for Robert W Smith's book Chinese Boxing: Masters and Methods for a good overview of Taiwanese martial arts (in the 1960s anyway).

Thanks for the pointer, ST. I agree: Taiwan is a very strange place. An old girlfriend of mine, someone I was with for a long time,from an English family that had been part of the expatriate British Raj military in India, got interested in Taiwan, became fluent enough in Taiwanese Mandarin that native speakers, talking to her over the phone, could not tell she wasn't Chinese, and got involved in the Taiwan Independence Movement, smuggling... all manner of thing into and out of the country. She had some... surreal stories to tell about her experiences there. I can well believe that there are pockets of Mainland culture still maintained there have that are long gone on the Mainland itself. Will take a look for Smith's book...

Tang Shou Tao is a system developed to help a student learn internal martial arts. It is based in the three major Chinese internal arts - xingyi, bagua, and taiji. Basically what Hong, and his teacher Chang Chun-Feng, are saying that to properly develop internal power you must start with something like Shaolin Kung fu then progress to xingyi, then bagua, then taiji. Hong was of the opinion that if you started with taiji it would be very difficult to develop and understand internal power.

I don't know if I agree with this as I feel that my own understanding and development aren't too bad and I didn't follow this pattern.

One other thing Hong Yixiang was adamant about was the development of the physical and basic martial skills. He felt that students should have a essential understanding of punching, kicking, blocking, and throwing before they began training in the internal arts.

Very interesting! So no contradiction perceived there.... you need the external platform, and then work inward...

Definitely has to go on my to-read list!

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Well Exile as we both know the WTF is a whole different beast than the Tae Kwon Do that came from the lineage of General Choi. (very different)

 

[exile]

Well Exile as we both know the WTF is a whole different beast than the Tae Kwon Do that came from the lineage of General Choi. (very different)

That's true—but there does seem to be a lot of agreement that Gen. Choi was in the vanguard of the 'de-Japanification' of TKD. He certainly purged the ITF forms he (with, some claim, a very large input from Nam Tae Hi) created of much resemblance to the common Shotokan set he, Byung Jik Ro and most of the other first-generation Kwan leaders took as their core curriculum in the early days of the Kwan era. Performance and narrative are often linked. Change the performance significantly, and you open the door for a very different storyline. So my feeling is, the jury is probably still out. And the testimony from Gm. Kim Pyung-soo, and the dubious status of the General's claims about his 'taekyon' training, give a lot of grounds for skepticism about the degree to which he felt obliged to stick to the (documentable) facts about the JMA background to the Kwan-era system that came to be called TKD.

I'm with tkd1964 here; I'd really like to get my hands on those Combat interviews...

 

[tkd1964]

I would have to say that the WTF has not given due credit to the Kwan founders and their roll in TKD. I was glad to see that Two Masters (names I don't remember) have published a history of the early years. History is an important part of TKD and the way the WTF minimized it hurts.

 

[exile]

I would have to say that the WTF has not given due credit to the Kwan founders and their roll in TKD. I was glad to see that Two Masters (names I don't remember) have published a history of the early years. History is an important part of TKD and the way the WTF minimized it hurts.

I've wondered for a long time why the WTF takes this aggressively antihistorical line about TKD, and I first assumed, like most people who worry about this, that the reason was connected with anti-Japanese sentiment generally, based on the horrible experience of the Occupation. But lately I've come to think that while hostility toward Japan is an enabler, the real motivation of the WTF is much more cynical: TKD is now a multibillion dollar business, a huge part of Korea's nation identity, part of the creation of Brand Korea, and is so specifically as an expression of Olympic competitive sport. The linkage to karate is something of an embarrasssment to this branding of TKD (and hence Korea) via the Olympic tournament sport, because karate still has strong martial combat overtones. Part of insisting on the uniqueness of TKD is, if this line of thinking holds any water, part of protecting the WTF sport franchise from negative comparison with Olympic TKD's street-smart, tough martial cousins.

No one is saying that TKD is karate, of course; history is important, though, in understanding what current forces are driving the development of the art in certain ways, as well as giving us big hints about the content of the technical toolkit that's still inherent in the TKD hyungs if we just look for them. The Korean TKD directorate does the practitioners a major disservice in trying to separate the current art from its documented past...

 

[tkd1964]

In his last interview in Combat magazine in the 1990s, Gen. Choi maintained explcitly that TKD owed nothing to karate. Check out the documentation in Stuart Anslow's book on the Ch'ang Hong patterns. And check out Gm. Kim Pyung-Soo's account of how Choi changed his story on the provenance of TKD, in his interview with Rob McLain in the January Black Belt magazine (or, equivalently, in the MartialTalk magazine version of that interview here), or his insistence on the role of a supposedly completely indigenous 'taekyon' in his own MA training, based on instruction from a supposedly famous calligrapher and instructor whose existence there is no record of, and which the Taekyon Research Association itself is dubious about (see Capener and Robert Young's comprehensive 1993 Journal of Asian Martial Arts article, 'The history and development of taekyon' for documentation).

That's what I mean.

I asked Mr. Anslow about the Magazines and he said he no longer has them. I've looked at the interviews that I have copies of plus his autobiography and in none of them does he deny his Karate links.
As you metion GM Kim Soo, go to his site and read the Korean Karate history. You can replace the word Taekwon-Do for Kwon Bup.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I've wondered for a long time why the WTF takes this aggressively antihistorical line about TKD, and I first assumed, like most people who worry about this, that the reason was connected with anti-Japanese sentiment generally, based on the horrible experience of the Occupation. But lately I've come to think that while hostility toward Japan is an enabler, the real motivation of the WTF is much more cynical: TKD is now a multibillion dollar business, a huge part of Korea's nation identity, part of the creation of Brand Korea, and is so specifically as an expression of Olympic competitive sport. The linkage to karate is something of an embarrasssment to this branding of TKD (and hence Korea) via the Olympic tournament sport, because karate still has strong martial combat overtones. Part of insisting on the uniqueness of TKD is, if this line of thinking holds any water, part of protecting the WTF sport franchise from negative comparison with Olympic TKD's street-smart, tough martial cousins.

No one is saying that TKD is karate, of course; history is important, though, in understanding what current forces are driving the development of the art in certain ways, as well as giving us big hints about the content of the technical toolkit that's still inherent in the TKD hyungs if we just look for them. The Korean TKD directorate does the practitioners a major disservice in trying to separate the current art from its documented past...

True another fact might be that they do not want to be in a position of making any one, two or three individuals to big in the grand scope of things so that the sport is directly government controlled. Meaning everyone has to go through them.