Kukkiwon usage of honorifics and grade

[mastercole]

and i dont believe a word of this

i believe Al Cole believes it

but i think it is a gigantic fairy tale

This actually belongs in the other thread.

I should believe it, what I wrote is from my 10 years of research into the subject. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) agrees with the findings of my research.

UNESCO's decision

[h=3]Decision 6.COM 13.44[/h]The Committee (&#8230 decides that [this element] satisfies the criteria for inscription on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, as follows:

• R.1: Taekkyeon is a traditional martial art that has been passed from generation to generation and promotes cooperation and solidarity among its practitioners;
• R.2: Inscription of Taekkyeon on the Representative List could improve the visibility of similar martial arts around the world as a part of intangible cultural heritage;
• R.3: A wide range of safeguarding measures includes raising awareness, research and financial support to the master and assistants to encourage transmission;
• R.4: The nomination process has benefited from the participation of key institutions and practitioners and they have provided their free, prior and informed consent;
• R.5: At the request of the groups and individuals concerned, Taekkyeon was designated in 1976 as Important Intangible Cultural Heritage by the Intangible Cultural Heritage Division of the Cultural Heritage Administration.

Inscribes Taekkyeon, a traditional Korean martial art on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.

Of course you are welcome to present proof that UNESCO and my research is incorrect. Good luck.

 

[puunui]

and i dont believe a word of this

i believe Al Cole believes it

but i think it is a gigantic fairy tale

Where, in your opinion, did the emphasis on kicks in korean martial arts come from? Thin air?

 

[puunui]

I should believe it, what I wrote is from my 10 years of research into the subject.

I believe it too. But then again, I have been to Korea numerous times and have seen kids fighting outside throwing kicks, not to mention in bars where guys are throwing head high kicks at each other in the bar restroom, making me urinate all over the floor as I get bumped into. I have also been walking up and down those hills more times than I care to remember. In fact, there is so much walking by the people that Seoul feels like Manhattan, where everybody walks, except there are hills in Seoul, and Manhattan is relatively flat, especially when compared to Korea. Even the poombalki stepping motions make sense, if you think about the motion of walking or climbing up hills.

 

[Twin Fist]

i dont believe it

this is based on 2 things

1)the koreans LOVE to make **** up when it comes to martial arts. National inferiority complex that comes from having been an enslaved people. Its proven. The made up history of TKD = case closed on this one

2) this whole thing goes back to ONE guy with NO proof at all in anyway to validate his claim to be the last in the line. And i dont buy it.

I dont think this is the fault of people like yourself. I think everyone was fooled by the lies of that one guy claiming to be the last one left....

so, i believe that modern taekkyon is a recreated art. I cant prove it is false. You cant prove it is true, since the guy is dead now.

so we are left to believe what we wish to believe, you are an .....avid fan of things korean. You have invested everything you are in korean stuff

I am more interested in the truth. And this story has more holes in it than swiss cheese.

but, to be fair, i dont believe all of matsumi hassaki's claims either, but he at least has scrolls as evidence. Those can be dated and what not.

 

[Twin Fist]

no, i believe there WAS a system of kick fighting in korean's past called Taekkyon. i do not believe that the modern thing called taekkyon is the same art.

i believe the old art died out when the japanese killed all the local fighters and masters. We KNOW that happened.

ONE guy claimed to have survived.

THAT i dont believe

Where, in your opinion, did the emphasis on kicks in korean martial arts come from? Thin air?

 

[puunui]

no, i believe there WAS a system of kick fighting in korean's past called Taekkyon. i do not believe that the modern thing called taekkyon is the same art.

i believe the old art died out when the japanese killed all the local fighters and masters. We KNOW that happened.

ONE guy claimed to have survived.

THAT i dont believe

There is more than one taekkyon teacher. My hapkido teacher, GM Ji learned some of his kicking techniques from a taekkyon teacher who was a friend of his father. He had no other martial arts training other than from GM CHOI Yong Sul and the taekkyon teacher. He did not study taekwondo or any art that can be traced to the five kwan. He didn't call it taekkyon though, he called it tae ki li yon. I have the paper where he wrote out the name in hangul somewhere.

 

[Twin Fist]

the modern taekkyon art all goes back to the ONE guy.

and i dont buy that story.

you can beleive whatever you want, i dont care, i just dont believe it.

 

[mastercole]

There is more than one taekkyon teacher. My hapkido teacher, GM Ji learned some of his kicking techniques from a taekkyon teacher who was a friend of his father. He had no other martial arts training other than from GM CHOI Yong Sul and the taekkyon teacher. He did not study taekwondo or any art that can be traced to the five kwan. He didn't call it taekkyon though, he called it tae ki li yon. I have the paper where he wrote out the name in hangul somewhere.

SONG Duk Ki was not the only one left, he was the only one alive who was still practicing. In he early 1950's he and other Taekkyon practitioners gave demonstrations, and a special one for the Korea President. That is how people started to know that Taekkyon had survived. We have records from other Taekkyon practitioners that name their teachers, and what SONG Duk Ki said matched that. And he could not have read it anywhere because SONG Duk Ki could not read or write. He also took people to the old Taekkyon training grounds to show where he trained to compete as a boy.

Regardless of the racist comments, all this was researched out for years, independently by UNESCO. Interesting note is that UNESCO rejected Kungfu's application for the same designation as UNESCO did not have enough information to meet their strict criteria.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I am sure they wouldn't have passed in our school either. Not a chance. And yes, our green belt class shows more precision, control and effort than what I saw in those vids.

I think that if, as Daniel Sullivan suggested, these are students who have had only one year of training and have had to learn all their patterns in that time... I can see how they could appear so discombobulated. But how is this a good idea? Shouldn't a student testing for Black Belt in TKD, regardless of organization, perform at a MUCH higher level than what is shown in those vids? And shouldn't they be given the proper time to do so?

I was reading through this thread with great interest when I saw the above post. Haven't read any further yet but wanted to both comment and applaud this post. This is truly a valid point. All jabs aside, when an organization.....ANY organization seems to prefer quantity over quality, I see it as a problem. I see proponents of the KKW often tout the large number of BB's within the organization, and that's all fine and well. But it looks like the quality has suffered tremendously. I say that from the amount of videos I've seen as well as first-hand experience with KKW BB's that have come to me for training. Don't mistake this as a jab at the KKW or to those practitioners/instructors that REALLY strive for high levels of skill. What I'm saying is that, it is the student that ends up suffering in the long run. It's like this;

• The KKW (or any organization) doesn't suffer, they get the money and another BB added to the roles.
• The instructor doesn't suffer, he/she makes some money and can claim they have 'x' number of BB's under them.

It is the student that suffers because they were rushed through without being given the proper time to fully understand what was being presented to them. All this crap about 1st Dan being a low level so the quality doesn't need to be all that high and we just hope they continue on to greater and higher levels is just that....pure crap. The Dan level is NOT the Kyu/Gup/Kup level. Those are the true student levels where they're learning to walk and chew gum at the same time. The Dan level is a NEW level. A much higher expectation is placed...or should be placed on that level. Doesn't mean a 1st Dan can walk on water. Doesn't mean they're a 'master'. But they should be sharp, focused, disciplined and with power and precision in what they do. They should be immediately known as a BB even if they're performing a technique/drill/form out of uniform with no belt to indicate what they're rank is. And the only way to achieve that level of proficiency is to have the time to learn and develop it. Rushing for stats only hurts the student.

Perhaps a bit of a rant on my part, but I feel pretty passionate about it.

 

[Twin Fist]

and..........i still dont care

i dont believe it, and i wont believe it

and and take your race card and shove it back in the deck. I said nothing that was racist

it is the truth, the koreans made up a lot of stories when it comes to the history of thier martial arts.

joo bang lee and in huk suh are two great examples.Joo Bang Lee even admitted it was all lies.

"tkd is 200 years old" pffft

whatever

SONG Duk Ki was not the only one left, he was the only one alive who was still practicing. In he early 1950's he and other Taekkyon practitioners gave demonstrations, and a special one for the Korea President. That is how people started to know that Taekkyon had survived. We have records from other Taekkyon practitioners that name their teachers, and what SONG Duk Ki said matched that. And he could not have read it anywhere because SONG Duk Ki could not read or write. He also took people to the old Taekkyon training grounds to show where he trained to compete as a boy.

Regardless of the racist comments, all this was researched out for years, independently by UNESCO. Interesting note is that UNESCO rejected Kungfu's application for the same designation as UNESCO did not have enough information to meet their strict criteria.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Hey, back on track guys. Kukkiwon honorifics and grading, not taekkyeon historical debate.

Master Cole said that he posted in the wrong thread. I'm sure that by now he has reposted in the appropriate thread. Please find it and take the taekkyeon debate there.

This is where we were before taekkyeon:

My feeling is just simply call every black belt holder master or grandmaster, then it looses the false meaning the general American public learned to associate with the term. That places everyone on the same level, removes delusion and we can see a person for what they actually do, not what they are called.

That fact is that when our Korean seniors came over here, they decided what they would do in terms of who is this or that. Example here in my own region there was total confusion in the 70's and 80's as to what was what. Some Korean master's followed together, some did not not, but all of them made up there own system of titles, etc. Do I blame them? NO. No one had yet figured it out! Do I think it is wrong if they still do it? No. I do think it is wrong for them to state it is correct because that is they way they have been doing it for so long.

But now we know, and what we know comes from the teachers of the Korean masters that came here to America, so I will not go by what this instructor says, or that instructor says, I will follow what the Kukkiwon says on the issue, because that comes from the most senior instructors of all. As I said, I like the Kukkiwon's view, and I think it takes away all the confusion that has been around for all these years.

Essentially, I agree with you. The part that I bolded is the only part I wanted to comment on. I wouldn't call it a false meaning. The term, 'master' is a part of the western lexicon, and anyone in the trades (a lot of people) know exactly what a master is and how it is different from a journeyman, which is much closer to what a first through third dan is.

Anyone who studies music is also familiar with the term, 'maestro,' and how it differs from being a graduate from college with a music degree, even from a prestidgious school like Julliard. Maestro, and its French equivallent maitre, and such have also been in conistent usage in western fencing.

The term 'master' is also used in other industries, including academia (schoolmaster, headmaster, masters degree, etc.)

And the meanings that I listed above are not false. The term 'master' was part of the English vocabulary long before Asian martial arts were imported to the west, and its primary usage has really never been as the equal if 'mister.' Only the privileged were called 'master' in that way mainly because either they owned the land (and thus employed the household staff; nobody called the butler 'master') or were the children of the master and thus, slated to become 'master' in their own right. In other words, if you had servants, you had people calling you and your kids master. If you were a farm hand, you didn't rate an honorific.

Outside of aristocracy and landed gentry, usage of 'master' has been one that denotes mastery of the craft, and the usage of that word in the trades goes back to the days of artisans. Like several hundred years. The guild system of Europe had a very well defined set of conditions that allowed one to be considered a 'master of the craft' and thus permitted by the guild to open up one's own shop and take on an apprentice. Or when one finally set up his own shop, they were called a master, depending upon where you were and the time period. Until you set up shop, however, you were a journeyman, regardless of how skilled you were.

So I do rather reject the idea that Americans 'don't know what a master is' (not something that you have said, but a notion that I have seen expressed quite a bit over the years) when in actuality, we do. You can blame those who brought the arts to the US for all of the confusion in regard to what constitutes 'master' in the martial arts, starting with whomever's silly idea it was to translate to master words that do not have that direct connotation. When I say 'those who brought the arts to the US,' I don't only mean Asians either; plenty of returning US servicemen brought the arts back to the US.

 

[Twin Fist]

Quoted for truth


a one year BB just makes the BB mean less.

I was reading through this thread with great interest when I saw the above post. Haven't read any further yet but wanted to both comment and applaud this post. This is truly a valid point. All jabs aside, when an organization.....ANY organization seems to prefer quantity over quality, I see it as a problem. I see proponents of the KKW often tout the large number of BB's within the organization, and that's all fine and well. But it looks like the quality has suffered tremendously. I say that from the amount of videos I've seen as well as first-hand experience with KKW BB's that have come to me for training. Don't mistake this as a jab at the KKW or to those practitioners/instructors that REALLY strive for high levels of skill. What I'm saying is that, it is the student that ends up suffering in the long run. It's like this;

• The KKW (or any organization) doesn't suffer, they get the money and another BB added to the roles.
• The instructor doesn't suffer, he/she makes some money and can claim they have 'x' number of BB's under them.

It is the student that suffers because they were rushed through without being given the proper time to fully understand what was being presented to them. All this crap about 1st Dan being a low level so the quality doesn't need to be all that high and we just hope they continue on to greater and higher levels is just that....pure crap. The Dan level is NOT the Kyu/Gup/Kup level. Those are the true student levels where they're learning to walk and chew gum at the same time. The Dan level is a NEW level. A much higher expectation is placed...or should be placed on that level. Doesn't mean a 1st Dan can walk on water. Doesn't mean they're a 'master'. But they should be sharp, focused, disciplined and with power and precision in what they do. They should be immediately known as a BB even if they're performing a technique/drill/form out of uniform with no belt to indicate what they're rank is. And the only way to achieve that level of proficiency is to have the time to learn and develop it. Rushing for stats only hurts the student.

Perhaps a bit of a rant on my part, but I feel pretty passionate about it.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I was reading through this thread with great interest when I saw the above post. Haven't read any further yet but wanted to both comment and applaud this post. This is truly a valid point.

I ranther liked it myself.

All jabs aside, when an organization.....ANY organization seems to prefer quantity over quality, I see it as a problem. I see proponents of the KKW often tout the large number of BB's within the organization, and that's all fine and well.

Where do you see this? I see school owners and grandmasters do this, but so do school owners and masters in every other good sized organzation that has a black belt. Why single out the Kukkiwon?

But it looks like the quality has suffered tremendously. I say that from the amount of videos I've seen as well as first-hand experience with KKW BB's that have come to me for training. Don't mistake this as a jab at the KKW or to those practitioners/instructors that REALLY strive for high levels of skill. What I'm saying is that, it is the student that ends up suffering in the long run. It's like this;

• The KKW (or any organization) doesn't suffer, they get the money and another BB added to the roles.
• The instructor doesn't suffer, he/she makes some money and can claim they have 'x' number of BB's under them.

The assertions that you make would have more impact if in Korea it ever had been longer than a year or so to first dan.

It is the student that suffers because they were rushed through without being given the proper time to fully understand what was being presented to them. All this crap about 1st Dan being a low level so the quality doesn't need to be all that high and we just hope they continue on to greater and higher levels is just that....pure crap. The Dan level is NOT the Kyu/Gup/Kup level. Those are the true student levels where they're learning to walk and chew gum at the same time. The Dan level is a NEW level. A much higher expectation is placed...or should be placed on that level.

No offense, but where are you getting this? If you think about it logically, your entire statement falls apart.

A first dan student is no less a student than he or she was prior to their test. They aren't a teacher, they aren't a school owner, and they aren't a coach. They're just a student. First dan is no more a NEW level than first geub. At my first geub test, I tested on all of the tenth through first geub material, one basic form plus eight Taegeuk pumse, broke two boards and had to spar. At my first dan test, I read an essay, tested on all of the tenth through first geub material, one basic form plus eight Taegeuk pumse, broke like ten or twelve boards between multiple breaks and single breaks with multiple boards, and had to spar. Then I leaned one new form. Doesn't sound all that 'new' to me. How am I no longer a student? How is first dan not a "true student level?"

Doesn't mean a 1st Dan can walk on water. Doesn't mean they're a 'master'. But they should be sharp, focused, disciplined and with power and precision in what they do. They should be immediately known as a BB even if they're performing a technique/drill/form out of uniform with no belt to indicate what they're rank is. And the only way to achieve that level of proficiency is to have the time to learn and develop it. Rushing for stats only hurts the student.

You are another who is hung up on the "black belt" and not on the time in training. These are one year students. Compare four year students to four year students and stop focusing on the rank if you really want a valid comparison.

Comparing first dan ranks between organizations like comparing the title of 'minister' between Christian denomenations. In a Catholic church, a minister usually attached to a specialized function and is not a part of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. In other denomenations, a minister has duties more akin to a Catholic deacon, or in some cases, to a Catholic priest. It doesn't make the minister in one denomination superior or inferior to the minister in another denomination; same name applied to positions in differing organizations with differing levels of responsibility.

Likewise, a first dan does not convey the same level of experience in every organization. Given that is has apparently always been one year in Korea, and a first dan has always been a fairly low rank in Korea, why do you say that its being a low rank is somehow crap?

Perhaps a bit of a rant on my part, but I feel pretty passionate about it.

Why are you so passionate about a black piece of cloth?

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Quoted for truth

Truth? I'm sure it is how he truly feels, but it is not, in my opinion, all that factual or accurate.

a one year BB just makes the BB mean less.

Actually, you should be saying the inverse: a four year program to first dan makes it mean more, though in this case the 'more' is time in grade. The one year is what has been the norm set by the parent organization since long before you began training and before your seniors began training.

Why do you care so much about what the black piece of cloth means. Especially given that nobody seems to be able to agree upon its meaning in first place.

 

[miguksaram]

Also, the term, master, in the sense that they are using it (same as mister or miss) is actually masculine, with mistress being the feminine term. Though I can see where they may wish to use master in a gender neutral way, given that mistress would raise more eyebrows than master.

That is actually western style thinking. In Korean they don't distinguish the word in a masculine or feminine way. So master is master be it a girl or boy. If they were referring to mistress, that is a whole different word, with different meaning.

Given that they are trying to convey mister/miss/mrs., why not simply use those designations?

Korean is an "understood" language meaning that when you are conversing the subject of the conversation is known between the speakers do they do not tend to reiterate mister/miss/mrs. It is just known.

 

[miguksaram]

still trying to make it personal aint ya?

*sigh*

Actually you sort of did when you used the term..."if my students looked like that..." As such you have now set your students out there as a standard of measurement of what you would consider good TKD. Which is fine. However, if you are to say such things, then be prepared for people to show proof. If you remember correctly there was an incident with a gentleman criticizing your students at one point because he felt they were lacking in skill. You got very upset with that. So why would you expect a different reaction from others when you criticize other students?

Also, what do we know about these students outside of what you see on this video? Perhaps they are special needs students that have physical disabilities. Perhaps they are students who are nervous as hell because they are in a foreign land testing for black belt.

 

[miguksaram]

and i dont believe a word of this

i believe Al Cole believes it

but i think it is a gigantic fairy tale

What in particular do you not believe?

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

That is actually western style thinking. In Korean they don't distinguish the word in a masculine or feminine way. So master is master be it a girl or boy. If they were referring to mistress, that is a whole different word, with different meaning.



Korean is an "understood" language meaning that when you are conversing the subject of the conversation is known between the speakers do they do not tend to reiterate mister/miss/mrs. It is just known.

Perhaps, but we're not talking about Korean here, but English. Given that the 'master' for 1st through 5th dan is a policy in place for English speaking countries, and is apparently not in place in Korea, it is English language nuances and connotations and western cultural norms that are at issue.

 

[Twin Fist]

Why do you care so much about what the black piece of cloth means. Especially given that nobody seems to be able to agree upon its meaning in first place.

the norm in my group is 4 years, so i guess our standards are higher than the standards in Korea.

Every 1 year BB makes your bb worth less daniel. Mine too. Every 5 year old bb makes your bb mean less, and mine too.

If you get into Harvard, that means something. It wouldnt mean as much if Forrest Gump got in too.....

If you meet a young lady, and you tell her "I am a BB in TKD" and she responds "so is my 5 year old" your achievement means less.Even if it is just in her eyes

one guy teaching cheese makes us all look cheesy by association, one ORG putting out cheese makes us all look cheesy

and spare me all the "it only means what you think it means anyway" psuedo wisdom. You know exactly what i mean. You may not agree, but i know you know what i am saying.

 

[Twin Fist]

Also, what do we know about these students outside of what you see on this video? Perhaps they are special needs students that have physical disabilities. Perhaps they are students who are nervous as hell because they are in a foreign land testing for black belt.

i know they are not ready for Black Belt Rank.