True Tae Kwon Do

[ralphmcpherson]

I don't disagree with you when it comes to people in the KKW circles. However, it does seem a bit much to me to talk about non-KKW people being out of compliance with KKW standards, considering it's not a standard they've ever signed up for.

Absolutely spot on. I was talking to my old instructor today (6th dan) about us not complying to the kukkiwon standards, and he said the exact same thing. He said - how can we not be complying with something that we never have said we are a part of anyway. We dont sell our club as teaching kukki tkd so how can we be non compliant?

 

[puunui]

I don't disagree with you when it comes to people in the KKW circles. However, it does seem a bit much to me to talk about non-KKW people being out of compliance with KKW standards, considering it's not a standard they've ever signed up for.

And you have General Choi to thank for that.

 

[puunui]

Absolutely spot on. I was talking to my old instructor today (6th dan) about us not complying to the kukkiwon standards, and he said the exact same thing. He said - how can we not be complying with something that we never have said we are a part of anyway. We dont sell our club as teaching kukki tkd so how can we be non compliant?

But you are within the Kukkiwon circle, dancingalone's comment doesn't apply to you. You practice Kukkiwon poomsae and your instructor has Kukkiwon certification and issues Kukkiwon certification to his students. It doesn't matter what you sell your club as.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

But you are within the Kukkiwon circle, dancingalone's comment doesn't apply to you. You practice Kukkiwon poomsae and your instructor has Kukkiwon certification and issues Kukkiwon certification to his students. It doesn't matter what you sell your club as.

I suppose you can say we practice the kukki poomsae if you call palgwe kukki forms even though little or no kukki clubs do them anymore. Our GM hasnt had anyone request a kukki cert for about 15 years (from my understanding) so technically yes, he CAN give them out but doesnt unless requested which never happens anyway. My instructor is a 7th dan and hasnt requested a kukki cert since 2nd dan, so as far as the kukki are concerned he is a 2nd dan even though he has trained for 36 years and holds a 7th dan in our club. He is the highest ranked in our club other than the GM. So I suppose you could say we are in the kukki circle but really its been years and years since we have actually had anything to do with them. I must stress too that I have nothing against the kukki, Im not one of those people who go around knocking them and bagging them out, Im just not a part of it.

 

[dancingalone]

And you have General Choi to thank for that.

To be fair, General Choi AND Jhoon Rhee.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I'm trying to understand your perspective, which I am still baffled about.

You seem to be saying that KKW TKD is the true one in your opinion (which is fine), but then in a previous post you mentioned the idea of it being out of place individually to hold private standards of what TKD is. Yet then you mentioned KKW, Chang Hon, and Songahm TKD as groups with their own organized curricula. The two ideas seem incongruous to me. What makes the ITF or the ATA 'in place' to you?

I initially included these, but you stated that there is no real technical similarities between these and KKW. So if the same body of techniques practiced in different ways does not qualify as enough technical simlarity, then KKW wins the tiara of Miss True Taekwondo, with ITF and ATA being runners up and Jhoon Rhee being Miss Congeniality.

In my opinion, all of this is academic anyway. Taekwondo has ceased to be unified, due to the proliferation of different organizations and independents, all of whom do things differently.

Thus my statement, "a yu descended from one of the five original kwans is true taekwondo" is my personal feeling on the subject, to which you responded,

That would be closer to my belief.

So essentially, we're on the same page essentially. My own opinion is that KKW is the primary or main taekwondo, while the others, while taekwondo, are essentially splinter groups.

Once again, this is not in a context of better or worse with regards to quality of the curriculum or of instruction, much of which comes down to personal preferrence and individual instructors respectively.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

I initially included these, but you stated that there is no real technical similarities between these and KKW. So if the same body of techniques practiced in different ways does not qualify as enough technical simlarity, then KKW wins the tiara of Miss True Taekwondo, with ITF and ATA being runners up and Jhoon Rhee being Miss Congeniality.

Not that it really matters, but IMO it's rather debatable that KKW TKD is THE TRUE TAEKWONDO. What makes it the true one? It's the descendant of several concurrent lines of martial arts whose leaders elected to join together. How is it any truer than any other option that came from the gene pool?

Mere size? I would hope not.

Innovation? Arguably others have made progress in their areas of interest as well.

The Olympics? Again, I hope not.

I see KKW TKD as one of the many facets of taekwondo. All are equally true, and this also goes down to the granular level for individual practitioners who may be 'compliant' in varying degree to their own defined systemic teachings.

In my opinion, all of this is academic anyway. Taekwondo has ceased to be unified, due to the proliferation of different organizations and independents, all of whom do things differently.

Yes. Which is why I tend to stay away from adjectives like 'true' when discussing taekwondo. I realize Terry worded the topic as such however.

Thus my statement, "a yu descended from one of the five original kwans is true taekwondo" is my personal feeling on the subject, to which you responded,

A side thought, but I believe the Tang Soo Do/Soo Bahk Do people came out of the Moo Duk Kwan can also fall under the TKD umbrella if they wish to.

So essentially, we're on the same page essentially. My own opinion is that KKW is the primary or main taekwondo, while the others, while taekwondo, are essentially splinter groups.

It's probably accurate to state that KKW TKD is the largest single group by membership in the world. Yet I am not convinced they hold anything close to a majority share when you count every single TKD school along with their students.

I would also argue that the words primary and main carry more connotation to them than just size, so these too would be words I personally stay away from with regard to taekwondo.

Once again, this is not in a context of better or worse with regards to quality of the curriculum or of instruction, much of which comes down to personal preferrence and individual instructors respectively.

Perhaps. Yet when we use words like true or primary, we lead others to believe we mean more contextually and that there is a value judgement to be made, no?

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Not that it really matters, but IMO it's rather debatable that KKW TKD is THE TRUE TAEKWONDO. What makes it the true one? It's the descendant of several concurrent lines of martial arts whose leaders elected to join together. How is it any truer than any other option that came from the gene pool?

Mere size? I would hope not.

Innovation? Arguably others have made progress in their areas of interest as well.

The Olympics? Again, I hope not.

Its 'true'-ness is in that it is the the original kwans united to become the kukkiwon. Thus, because the original kwans are viewed by all involved as the start of taekwondo, the Kukkiwon has the most legitimate heritage.

I see KKW TKD as one of the many facets of taekwondo. All are equally true, and this also goes down to the granular level for individual practitioners who may be 'compliant' in varying degree to their own defined systemic teachings.

This is akin to saying that the FIK represents on of the many facets of kendo, when in fact, they are the primary international organization from which others have split.

Before the Kukkiwon was the Kukkiwon, it was still essentially the same body of people from whom General Choi and others split.

Yes. Which is why I tend to stay away from adjectives like 'true' when discussing taekwondo. I realize Terry worded the topic as such however.

And that is the context in which this discussion is taking place.

A side thought, but I believe the Tang Soo Do/Soo Bahk Do people came out of the Moo Duk Kwan can also fall under the TKD umbrella if they wish to.

I do not know on that.

It's probably accurate to state that KKW TKD is the largest single group by membership in the world. Yet I am not convinced they hold anything close to a majority share when you count every single TKD school along with their students.

I agree with you there.

I would also argue that the words primary and main carry more connotation to them than just size, so these too would be words I personally stay away from with regard to taekwondo.

Primary and main do carry connotations other than size, but I am not disinclined to use them. See below.

Perhaps. Yet when we use words like true or primary, we lead others to believe we mean more contextually and that there is a value judgement to be made, no?

Primary and main are much more appropriate to the Kukkiwon. I avoid true because it has different connotations to different people.

True can mean authetic or actual (what he is doing is truly taekwondo, while what he is doing is something that he made up after hours of watching Youtube and his certificate is bogus).

True can mean one group is the 'one true' taekwondo and others are pretenders.

True can mean that there is a set of standards and characteristics, which an art needs to conform to in order to be 'true' taekwondo.

Primary and/or main means just that: primary or main. Kukki taekwondo is the primary taekwondo due to lineage international presence, and size. When people think of taekwondo, they primarily think of what is Kukki taekwondo. Which is what makes it primary. Being the largest single organization with IOC recognition and backing of the nation from which the art originates makes it main.

Main doesn't mean better. Plenty of people avoid mainstream and go for alternative or niche.

In a musical analogy, Kukkiwon is rock and roll. ITF is classic rock. The ATA is pop rock. Jhoon Rhee is alt rock. AIMAA is heavy metal. Independent schools and breakaway orgs like the ITA or NPTA are indie rock.

'Rock and Roll' includes all of these expressions, which makes it the main category. The others are subcategories. They're all rock and roll. But not all rock and roll is classic, alt, metal, indie or pop.

The rock and roll hall of fame contains artists of each of these styles and then some. But an alt rock hall of fame would only have alt rockers. A classic rock hall of fame would only have classic rockers. And so on.

Hope that clarifies, as my post is kind of rambling.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

Its 'true'-ness is in that it is the the original kwans united to become the kukkiwon. Thus, because the original kwans are viewed by all involved as the start of taekwondo, the Kukkiwon has the most legitimate heritage.

So, merely being the largest aggregate of kwans makes the KKW the most legitimate? I do not believe that. The extension of that argument means you must likewise assert that a Chung Do Kwan luminary like Jhoon Rhee who has never been part of the KKW has LESS legitimate heritage than a newly minted KKW chodan.

This is akin to saying that the FIK represents on of the many facets of kendo, when in fact, they are the primary international organization from which others have split.

Before the Kukkiwon was the Kukkiwon, it was still essentially the same body of people from whom General Choi and others split.

I also don't believe this personally. The Kukkiwon has been an evolving institution with conceivably even more change on the back end (Olympics, TaeGeuk poomsae, etc.). Even if the same pool of people leading the KKW now were also active during the kwan era, it does not follow that the two are the same. Far from it actually in my opinion.

Primary and/or main means just that: primary or main. Kukki taekwondo is the primary taekwondo due to lineage international presence, and size. When people think of taekwondo, they primarily think of what is Kukki taekwondo. Which is what makes it primary. Being the largest single organization with IOC recognition and backing of the nation from which the art originates makes it main.

I will also contest the italicized thought. I don't think that's true. People think of kicking when they hear taekwondo. They do not automatically jump into imagery of the Olympics (most probably have no idea TKD can be an Olympic sport) not do they think of the Kukkiwon (most people say 'who'? just like they would if asked about the ITF or any other alphabet org).

Main doesn't mean better. Plenty of people avoid mainstream and go for alternative or niche.

Splinter, alternative, niche can all have negative thoughts attached to them. Saying something is mainstream or primary has much more of a, forgive me, 'main street' connotation to it, and by extension undercutting the groups not mainstream nor primary.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

So, merely being the largest aggregate of kwans makes the KKW the most legitimate? I do not believe that. The extension of that argument means you must likewise assert that a Chung Do Kwan luminary like Jhoon Rhee who has never been part of the KKW has LESS legitimate heritage than a newly minted KKW chodan.

No. Legitimacy only applies if we're trying to pick a winner in the contest of true. Outside of that, I consider them equally valid.

And outside of academic discussion, the only winner is the school with the best instruction, regardless of organization or yu.

I also don't believe this personally. The Kukkiwon has been an evolving institution with conceivably even more change on the back end (Olympics, TaeGeuk poomsae, etc.). Even if the same pool of people leading the KKW now were also active during the kwan era, it does not follow that the two are the same. Far from it actually in my opinion.

Saying that they are the primary group does not imply a lack of evolution. Kendo evolved considerably between being called gekkiken and modern kendo.

I will also contest the italicized thought. I don't think that's true. People think of kicking when they hear taekwondo. They do not automatically jump into imagery of the Olympics (most probably have no idea TKD can be an Olympic sport) not do they think of the Kukkiwon (most people say 'who'? just like they would if asked about the ITF or any other alphabet org).

No, but they do jump to what they see the most of or most frequently. The Kukkiwon/WTF presents a much more unified front on a much broader level than any of the other organizations. To be fair, you are correct on people not knowing 'who' the Kukkiwon is. Most just it the WTF.

Splinter, alternative, niche can all have negative thoughts attached to them. Saying something is mainstream or primary has much more of a, forgive me, 'main street' connotation to it, and by extension undercutting the groups not mainstream nor primary.

I see what you're saying, but mainstream also has negative connotations. Mainstream=homogeneous=watered down. Probably depends on perspective. I don't view main street or mainstream as necesarilly good (or bad). In general, though I do tend to favor the niche, alternative, or micro, or independent, so when I hear main or mainstream, or primary, it has no meaning of superiority, nor does it undercut others simply by being called that. But again, that is a perception difference between us.

One thing that I have noticed is that in many TKD discussions, people are more likely to rail against primary or mainstream, or at least go out of their way to separate themselves from it.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

Daniel, we're starting to get a little circular so I will end it here with a reassertion of my beliefs.

There IS NO taekwondo that is more legitimate or truer than another. The student practicing wheelchair TKD with no kicks accompanied by music is in the same boat as someone practicing the most orthodox of Chang Hon or Kukki TKD. While what we each do might not be to each other's taste, nonetheless it should be left at the idea of personal preference rather than promoting the idea of a TKD holy path to any degree.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Daniel, we're starting to get a little circular so I will end it here with a reassertion of my beliefs.

There IS NO taekwondo that is more legitimate or truer than another. The student practicing wheelchair TKD with no kicks accompanied by music is in the same boat as someone practicing the most orthodox of Chang Hon or Kukki TKD. While what we each do might not be to each other's taste, nonetheless it should be left at the idea of personal preference rather than promoting the idea of a TKD holy path to any degree.

Though I'm still not sure that I'm making myself understood (an issue at my end most likely), I'll agree with that.

I'm still disappointed that you didn't like my rock and roll analogy though.

Daniel

 

[puunui]

So, merely being the largest aggregate of kwans makes the KKW the most legitimate? I do not believe that.

Actually the Kukkiwon was created and unification was achieved with ALL kwans, not the largest aggregate.

The extension of that argument means you must likewise assert that a Chung Do Kwan luminary like Jhoon Rhee who has never been part of the KKW has LESS legitimate heritage than a newly minted KKW chodan.

GM Rhee is an interesting gentleman. He could have taken a huge role in the unification efforts especially in the USA but instead chose to go his own way. I know several of the seniors have expressed disappointment with him in that regard.

I also don't believe this personally. The Kukkiwon has been an evolving institution with conceivably even more change on the back end (Olympics, TaeGeuk poomsae, etc.). Even if the same pool of people leading the KKW now were also active during the kwan era, it does not follow that the two are the same. Far from it actually in my opinion.

The Kukkiwon is "evolving", especially under the current President. But before that, not so much. Olympics are WTF, not Kukkiwon, and the Taeguek poomsae was in motion before the Kukkiwon was built. The Taeguek poomsae, all the new poomsae are actually a product of the KTA's efforts, not Kukkiwon, although we now refer to them as Kukkiwon poomsae.

I will also contest the italicized thought. I don't think that's true. People think of kicking when they hear taekwondo. They do not automatically jump into imagery of the Olympics (most probably have no idea TKD can be an Olympic sport) not do they think of the Kukkiwon (most people say 'who'? just like they would if asked about the ITF or any other alphabet org).

I think things are changing in these regards. I think more and more people associate Taekwondo with the Olympics, just like Judo is associated with the Olympics. I also think more and more Taekwondoin are becoming aware of the Kukkiwon. I do know that there are many out there that intensely hunger for Kukkiwon certification and will do almost anything to get it. I agree that the average person who is not involved in Taekwondo has a very high probability that they will not know what the Kukkiwon is.

 

[dancingalone]

Actually the Kukkiwon was created and unification was achieved with ALL kwans, not the largest aggregate.

GM Rhee is an interesting gentleman. He could have taken a huge role in the unification efforts especially in the USA but instead chose to go his own way. I know several of the seniors have expressed disappointment with him in that regard.

Yes, but does this change the basic argument about legitimacy? I have a feeling you personally would say yes. I would say no. More kwans do not equate to more legitimacy. Either you are legitimate or not in my book.

And I've said this before... I don't think Mr. Rhee is losing any sleep over any disappointment he might have caused others by not affiliating with another organization - and neither are his students, likely. What people care about is their daily training and practice, instead of some overarching Korean idea of TKD unity.

The Kukkiwon is "evolving", especially under the current President. But before that, not so much. Olympics are WTF, not Kukkiwon, and the Taeguek poomsae was in motion before the Kukkiwon was built. The Taeguek poomsae, all the new poomsae are actually a product of the KTA's efforts, not Kukkiwon, although we now refer to them as Kukkiwon poomsae.

That's good to know about the KTA aspect with the Taegeuks.

About the Olympics and WTF... well, we can't have it both ways. Either the KKW and the WTF are the same animal under the covers ultimately or the very idea of TKD unity is dead on arrival.

I think things are changing in these regards. I think more and more people associate Taekwondo with the Olympics, just like Judo is associated with the Olympics. I also think more and more Taekwondoin are becoming aware of the Kukkiwon. I do know that there are many out there that intensely hunger for Kukkiwon certification and will do almost anything to get it. I agree that the average person who is not involved in Taekwondo has a very high probability that they will not know what the Kukkiwon is.

Well I understand a lot of people place a premium on KKW certification. Nothing wrong with that. Where I object is when it is presented that KKW taekwondo should be the only acceptable path towards studying, teaching, or promoting taekwondo.

 

[puunui]

Yes, but does this change the basic argument about legitimacy? I have a feeling you personally would say yes. I would say no. More kwans do not equate to more legitimacy. Either you are legitimate or not in my book.

Personally, I don't think of that word "legitimate" when discussing Taekwondo, at least not in the way the discussion has been going. Legitimate comes up more for example if a Karate instructor with no Taekwondo experience or training suddenly started advertising that he taught Taekwondo. That would be a legitimacy issue for me.

And I've said this before... I don't think Mr. Rhee is losing any sleep over any disappointment he might have caused others by not affiliating with another organization - and neither are his students, likely. What people care about is their daily training and practice, instead of some overarching Korean idea of TKD unity.

I don't know about his students so much but a part of me would like it if GM Rhee did care about unification, because it is on the minds of many Korean people. The country is divided and many families are separated because of that. I think Taekwondo unified in part because of that underlying Korean cultural desire for unification. The concept of unification has been around since the Three Kingdom period.

About the Olympics and WTF... well, we can't have it both ways. Either the KKW and the WTF are the same animal under the covers ultimately or the very idea of TKD unity is dead on arrival.

The WTF and Kukkiwon are part of the same unified whole, but they serve completely different functions.

Well I understand a lot of people place a premium on KKW certification. Nothing wrong with that. Where I object is when it is presented that KKW taekwondo should be the only acceptable path towards studying, teaching, or promoting taekwondo.

Should and only are words that are too black and white for me, at least within this context, and doesn't foster that spirit of cooperation that is necessary in any unification effort. I generally don't present my case for the Kukkiwon in those kinds of terms. I do encourage everyone to unify and obtain Kukkiwon certification and hopefully learn the Kukkiwon curriculum, because that is the pioneer's vision, but they have to want to and cannot be forced with such terms as should and only. There is plenty of room for individuality within Kukkiwon family; it is not a rigid system, although some are attempting to make it so, as we speak.