Talk:Taekwondo

From Academic Kids

Contents

N. Korean TKD, TKD origins

One subtle point to someone who asked the question: TKD is widely practiced in North Korea. General Choi made a tour of N.Korea, introduced, and popularized it there. That was the reason why he could not return to S.Korea. After visiting N.Korea, he was no longer welcome in S.Korea. N.Korea has amazing martial artists, universally practicing ITF TKD (they are quite opposed to S.Korean WTF TKD). In N.Korea, this is sponsored by the government (in a totalitarian regime, more or less everything that's done is done by the will of the government). I've known a couple of martial artists who have gone to train under the rather impressive N.Korean TKD instructors.

TKD also very directly derives from Karate and Kung Fu. General Choi, who coined the term TKD and brought together the ITF (before it split off into the WTF and ITF) was a black belt in Japanese Karate. Plenty of the other founding members were trained in kung fu. In fact, the name of one of the major school, Chung Do Kwan, directly comes from a mispronounciation of Shotokan.

If you trace back virtually all of the original TKD masters, they came from Karate and Kung Fu backgrounds. The influence of earlier Korean martial arts is much more weakly documented (although some of the techniques, for instance, the high kicks, demonstrate a very probable influence). Many of the earlier techniques were significantly influenced by China and possibly Japan (the fighting style of the Hwarang-Do was derived, largely, from Kung Fu).

That said, the Orient is a small enough community that you would expect influence from one culture onto the others.


Translation of 'Do'

I am not sure whether it is right to translate "Do" as "way of life". "Do" is more a "spiritual way". --zeno 04:41 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)

Do , 道 , simply means 'way', road or street. It can be interpreted as above. --Jondel 09:08, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)


Korean literature in Chinese

67.72.135.235, you seem ignorant of Korean literature written in Classical Chinese. If you believe that Samurang is not a fabrication by Haedong Kumdo but is a historical fact, show me primary sources such as Samguk Sagi, Samguk Yusa. --Nanshu 01:32, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)


TKD in history

I changed the history section but have reverted my change...I read one of the articles linked to at the bottom of the page and am convinced (for now) of the author's argument that Taekwondo has been retroactively "Koreanized"...but I think there needs to be more explanation: the history section as it is currently written dismisses too abruptly any possible link between Taekwondo and Subak. --Sewing 00:48, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I know what Taekwondo organizations say, and their attempts to associate Taekwondo with almost everything in historical sources that may have something to do with martial arts. It's not bad idea to add these claims, but we have to clarify the truth first. --Nanshu 22:42, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Major history section added; it is true that Japanese arts have had a major influence on Korean martial arts, largely by force under occupation, but, it is also true that the Chinese have had a large if not larger influence since they were the regional superpower for most of the last two millenia; think of it as America in a way. Nevertheless, what taekwondo is now, and what had been worked up by practitioners of kwonbeop is clearly quite uniquely Korean in flavor and derives from a longer history of unarmed practices which survived the occupation, along with the Japanese influences.

If your agenda is nationalist in origin, you should just say so. We're only interested in the truth here. --66.245.40.157 08:06, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Ah, someone who knows the truth? Then tell me what laws the Japanese government used to ban the practice of Korean martial arts? Who forced the ban? When was this law passed? Is it the military police manned by the man like the father of the previous leader of Uri party or the military itself which had more than 160,000 Koreans at various levels of command with the highest attaining the rank of general? Is it the police in Korea who was manned at local levels by Koreans? What techniques did Japanese incorporate as their own? Why isn't Taekwondo practiced inside North Korea or in China bordering Korea? Why don't Taekwondo fighters wear traditional Korean clothes while fighting? Don't dare say "I don't know because I can't read Japanese. So you find it." Who is promoting the nationalist agenda and making up stories? --Revth 03:01, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
yawn. Taekwondo is practiced all over the world, including mainland China, and Taiwan which won two gold and one silver in this year's olympics. What's for npov about it? --Wareware 01:59, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Ladies and gentlemen, all this posturing is besides the point. It is difficult to prove that when it comes to East Asian martial arts any art is sui generis. The fact is that what Tae Kwon Do is now is Korean, and that it had Japanese and Chinese influences, due to various forms of military and intellectual colonialism. This should not surprising to anyone who has ever studied the history of martial arts in East Asia. What remains is to describe the sources of this knowledge to the best of our ability, as Edededed has done below. --Zhongyi 03:36, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Oh...kay. The history in this article includes lots of unnecessary information about the Mongols, Three Kingdoms, etc., which should probably be put in a separate article about ancient Korean martial arts. Also, much of what is written in the history is taken directly from the Mooyedobotongji, which in turn quotes from many Chinese texts, and is thus talking about Chinese martial arts in China at the time (kwonbup = Korean pronunciation of quanfa = barehand martial arts in general, not a specific Korean martial art).

For example, Sorim IS Shaolin, and Zhang Songye = Zhang Songxi, who practiced Neijiaquan. This has little or nothing to do with Taekwondo at all.

China surely had a strong influence on Korea, as is clear from the strong use of Chinese sources in the Mooyedobotongji (although Japanese sources are listed in the bibliography as well), but modern taekwondo clearly is much more similar to Japanese karate than to Chinese martial arts, which have a totally different flavor.

On the other hand, more traditional arts with longer histories in Korea, like Taekkyon, have much more clear similarities with Chinese martial arts. (Similarities are easy to spot (using the eye).)

Taekwondo's history should be rewritten. While Chinese connections can be surmised, Japanese connections are much more specific and recent (Taekwondo leaders having studied abroad in Japan, achieving karate rank, for example). --Edededed 07:01, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

True, there is unneccesary info on the history part.. they explain more about olympic sparring --shawkat


Practical efficacy

I don't know how true this is: one of the reasons Taekwondo is so popular is because of its effectiveness as a form of self-defence. It's my understanding that tkd, like most striking martial arts, isn't a great form of self-defence. Grappling martial arts have a much better record in competitions such as ultimate fighting. I do tkd myself, and I think the reason for its popularity is similar to the other striking martial arts: possessing deadly techniques and physical fitness. Whether it's actually any good for street fighting is irrelevant.--Superninja 06:00, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)


Olympic scandals

The "subsection" under Organizations, "Scandels" [sic] is very sketchy and should at least be in its own node (and cleaned up). I summarised this in the Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics, so maybe we should just delete the stuff here? --24.226.53.162 02:21, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It's a major event in modern Tak Won Do history. As major racism plays a huge part in the history of the sport. Dae Sung Lee is a major Tak Won Do figure. The outcome for this case will have a major effect on the Olympics, and Tournments and on how Tak Won Do will be practiced in the future. We should not delete this stuff here.


korean Old Martial Arts / Taekwondo

TKD is a major form of self defense. That should be too obvious. As for the history, can you guys get the real history behind TKD? TKD was made from other martial arts that origin from the 3 kingdoms era, and there are hundreds of records to prove it in Seoul. It's like refering to Katanas without mentioning the Samurai. There are reasons why this martial arts was developed. It is very clear none of you do have any expertise, or definitive knowledge of the sport. Please do not act like you know. --Masssive ego

OK. You're saying, especially 'there are hundreds of recorde to prove it in Seoul'. It's very interesting. "As jiujitsu was derived from Yusul, sumo was a imitation of mongolian wrestling or Korean cireum. The Japanese arts were mainly derived from Korean martial arts, Chinese martial arts and Mongolian wrestling techniques.This annexation had far reaching effects in Korean martial arts since Japan tried to ban all forms of Korean martial arts while incorporating techniques from Korea and China into their own arts." Then, I want to ask about the followings. # "In addition many Koreans had an influence in the development of Karate," At least there should be written 'When' and 'How'. Karate derived from Ryukyu martial arts, and it came from Lost Chinese martial arts. No relation with Koreans. At least, Mr.Oyama practiced Karate at Shotokan. Oyama became famous in Japan by comics, but Kyokusin is just a group in many karate groups. Additionally, he is a naturalized Japanese.
How do you think about the text Problems in the Identity and Philosophy of T'aegwondo and Their Historical Causes (http://www.bstkd.com/CAPENER.1.HTM) Do you really believe old Taekyon is so similar to Taekwondo? If so, I want to see your references. --Poo-T Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
To put it simply, Taekwondo doesn't follow either Chinese or Japanese naming of martial arts so that's why it couldn't have existed from the 3 kingdoms era. For Taekwondo to have existed previous to Taisho period of Japan when "-do" naming became common and to have been influenced from China, it once had to be known Taekwonshu in Chinese which would make it Taekwonjutsu in Japanese. Another flaw of Taekwondo is the fact that its fighters don't wear a pair of shoes. You probably wouldn't know but like Chinese and most Europeans, Koreans used to wear shoes even in their homes. Not having a pair of shoes to wear or even bearing their feet in public place was considered to be faux pas in Korean culture. How can a martial art promote a cultural faux pas?
And this is not even the most important counter argument at all. Look at Kimchi and realize that it doesn't have Hanja or Chinese character to write it down. It actually does, but it is just a generic term for pickled vegetables in Chinese. You see, Kimchi is a real Korean culture and thus, unlike Taekwondo or Tang Soo Do that had been copied, there is no way to write it down accurately using Chinese characters. These are reasons Taekwondo's history is a fake made up after 1950s to claim its originality. Quite convincing, if you have no knowledge of Chinese and Japanese languages and take everything Koreans say at the full value and the "truth". --Revth 14:31, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Taekwondo has its roots both upon ancient korean martial arts and japanese martial arts like karate (because of the japanese ocupation), after WWII the koreans began to "koreanize" some karate influences (ex: if there was a 90º kick, koreans would do a 180º kick..) Taekwondo is not a 3000 years old martial art, its a 50 year old martial art, based upon diferent old korean martial arts and foreign influences.

[1] (http://www.tkdtutor.com/17Images/Misc/MuyoungChong.jpg) [2] (http://www.irantkd.org/pic/gallery/history.gif)

Revth's antagonistic and borderline xenophobic attitude notwithstanding, which is both distracting and ugly, he only demonstrates that there are Japanese influences on Taekwondo, which is self-evident, but what we lack is the historical documentation which inform the current practice and more work on the actual practice of the martial art itself as well as its unique emphasis on sport.

If I might make a recommendation at this point, I think the article should be structured roughly around the historic practices which fed into what became taekwondo, the development of the martial art and sport in the years after liberation, which includes the incorporation into the Olympics, and the current practice described in methods and techniques. The section on ancient Korean martial arts should be moved, as Edededed says, to a section on ancient Korean martial arts.

Still, we need more rigorous sources drawn from the Korean texts, for instance, the Mooyehdoboktongji and the Mooyehjibo, which are derived from a Chinese text, and historical records from the neighboring nations on Korea, not idle speculation on bare feet or kimchi or the lack of Chinese and Japanese words tacked on to Korean as so-called "proof" of the origins of Taekwondo. Given the centrality of martial arts practice in the feudal era, there must be pre-Occupation written and visual records. Of course there are political problems that need to be contended with that complicate the history and give rise to certain politicized versions of the history. By way of parallel example, the Shaolin Temple origin story, irrespective of "event truth", may have been created or used to foment anti-Qing sentiment from revolutionary paramilitary organizations in Southern China which developed martial arts practice.

Similarly, if there is a Korean nationalist mythology created around the origins of Taekwondo which coincided with the birth of the nation after liberation, that is a separate issue and it will come out during the historical research, but it is something secondary that readers of this article should keep in mind, because, again, practice should be the focus of the article. Any cursory investigation of the art's history reveals quickly that the founders of the art all trained in various styles of Japanese and even Chinese martial arts. Similarly, it is impossible to deny the influences that China, as the pre-Japanese imperial power, had on Korean military practice. Finally, although the origins have different pathways, there can also be no denying that the development and practice of the art over the decades (or perhaps, even longer) has been driven by Koreans, whether they have been colonial subjects or not. This kind of argumentation is, obviously, not very productive and I hope it will end here. These are secondary issues insofar as they do not relate to the actual practice and techniques of taekwondo, which should be at the core of the article here.

I find it interesting that Chinese and Japanese are arguing over the origins of Korean martial arts, but, I cite Santayana in my defense.

In brief, maximize practice, minimize history. --Zhongyi

I refer an Interview with Vice president of kukkiwon (http://www.donga.com/docs/magazine/new_donga/200204/nd2002040010.html). as 'Taekwondo was just created from just Karate, not related with Taekwondo'. But I agree with you that Korea did much work to develop Taekwondo to be better one. So, I think, the history could be shrinked. By the way, do you think it needed to describe 'The influence of Koreans to Karate' in the Taekwondo Wikipage? I don't think so. --Poo-T 12:00, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)


What do you call someone who practices Taekwondo?

What do you call someone who practices taekwondo? In other words, wrestling to wrestler is like taekwondo to what? --roozbeh 22:46, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

In portuguese we say "taekwondoka"; in English it's simply Taekwondo practitioner I guess. --Cyprus2k1 07:35, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
In the Philippines, they say "taekwondojin". (Jin is Japanese for person) --Jondel 07:46, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
One book I have in English uses the term "taekwondoist". It's an old book though, and usage may have changed since then. --Sonjaaa 10:25, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
There's always the term taekwondo practitioner, which seems to be broadly used.--Sonjaaa 10:27, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
I think this is the official term used by the WTF. See here (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&q=site%3Awww.wtf.org++%22taekwondo+practitioners%22&btnG=Search). --Sonjaaa 19:47, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)


Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art add yourself!

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art


Awesome Taekwondo Demo


Trolling?

Seems to me that there's a significant amount of subtle trolling in most sections of this page. Stuff like

"A focus on discipline, honor, good manners, self-confidence, and monthly payments."

"which techniques are taught vary from instructor to instructor, but you can best believe it will never be up to par"

and

"It is used in unarmed combat training in some armies (the French army, for instance, which is a horrible example for proving someone can fight, isn't it?)."

doesn't need to be there, surely? --Anonymous


Need for standardization

There are several problems with the text as it stands. I have fixed some of the most glaring problems, e.g., the failure to give a true martial arts benefactor even a minimal measure of due respect by capitalizing and properly spelling his name. There is no consistency in the way that the various forms of Korean martial arts are handled. Some are capitalized and some are not capitalized. The whole article needs to be gone over with attention to such issues so that it is consistent both within itself and is also consistent with Wikipedia standards. P0M 04:04, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)


response to --Superninja 06:00, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Superninja, I assume that if you practice tae kwon do, you do so in an American dojang. At many of these establishments, aerobics and rapid belt advancement (to appease youngsters) take precedence over combat technique; tae kwon do in its original form is far more serious than the typical American suburban form.

The assertion that grappling martial arts are more successful in street fighting is untrue. Grappling techniques are only used by the law-enforcement officials because of an emphasis on fairly non-violently disarming criminals; percussive martial arts, which emphasize simply defeating an opponent, are therefore not used. Though practitioners of grappling martial arts have a clear advantage once the fight hits the ground, a competent tae kwon do practitioner wouldn't allow that to happen. Furthermore, unlike grappling, which requires full contact with the opponent, tae kwon do practitioners can deliver a knock-out kick from several feet away. Though there are certain advantages to grappling martial arts, the claim that they're superior to percussive arts is untenable. --D. Franklin 06:50, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

While I agree with the intention behind what you say, I feel I should point out two things. The section a competent tae kwon do practitioner wouldn't allow that to happen edges towards being meaningless, as the definition of a competent practitioner becomes not being taken to the ground. It's easy to start excusing TKD practitioners being taken to the ground by then saying that they weren't competent. Situations can vary wildly, and it's impossible to state with any certainty that a person of style X would do a particular thing, or not let a particular thing to happen. You are right about the emphasis that law enforcement agencies have with control. Superninja's use of the UFC as an example is an interesting one. Grapplers did exceedingly well in the first few UFC tournaments because the other martial styles had forgotten their grappling elements, and they had no idea how to operate in that environment. These days, in UFC, everyone cross trains in both striking and grappling.
Secondly, and I know that you don't really mean this, so I'm mentioning it because I found it funny on first reading, unlike grappling, which requires full contact with the opponent, tae kwon do practitioners can deliver a knock-out kick from several feet away. reads like the TKD practitioner does not need to make contact in order to deliver a knock-out kick, as they can do it from several feet distant ;-) --SimonFr 09:30, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Response to "SimonFr 09:30, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC"
Yes, a competent TKD practitioner would not be taken to the ground unless he stepped on a roller-skate, or something. Since TKD emphasizes a fluid, mobile, somewhat unbalanced stance, the idea is to be able to position yourself ideally, making it impossible for an opponent to be able to grapple with you. While a truly competent fighter would have grappling knowledge, TKD techniques alone would suffice if used properly. As well, some grappling techniques that are found in TKD lean toward aikido more than true grappling. For example, a textbook maneuver in TKD is stepping aside from a rushing opponent, and pushing them past you, using their own momentum. Also, a COMPETENT practitioner rarely blocks directly: he redirects, accelerating the opponent's momentum and placing him off-balance. While these could be considered grappling techniques, practically they're not, since only minimal contact is used. I stand by my assertion. BTW, ha-ha to that second point; so much for that subtle, British wit!


Re-reading this, I perhaps wasn't clear. I'm not debating that TKD gives you the tools to do these things. I was attempting to point out a No_true_Scotsman fallacy. --SimonFr 14:28, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Rewrite?

It seems to me that much of this article could be rewritten, not for content but for grammar and readability. Perhaps getting rid of some of the invented words would be good too. --TheDaveRoss 07:28, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Also the article starts off with the two accepted spellings variations, "Taekwondo" and "Tae Kwon Do" but then procedes to use "taekwondo" and "tae kwon do" along with the other two throughout. It would be ideal if each accepted variant were listed at the beginning and then one form chosen for use elsewhere in the text.


This is not encyclopedic writing style

"If you want to join the Martial Arts to learn how to defend yourself and that of your loved ones, Taekwondo should be the very last art you look into. As it states above it is a great sport. Its great for kids, and for fun, but dont be fooled into thinking it even ranks *average* when it comes to combat viability."

Someone scrap it. The anony user is still on right now, I don't want to do it, lest he revert. --24.76.141.237 03:17, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Personal tools
Navigation

    Information

    • Home Page (http://academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php)
    • New Articles (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Special:Newpages)
    • Contact Us (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Contactus)


    Academic Kids Menu

    • Art and Cultures (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Art_and_Cultures)
      • Art (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Art)
      • Architecture (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Architecture)
      • Cultures (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Cultures)
      • Music (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Music)
      • Musical Instruments (http://academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/List_of_musical_instruments)
    • Biographies (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Biographies)
    • Clipart (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Clipart)
    • Geography (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Geography)
      • Countries of the World (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Countries)
      • Maps (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Maps)
      • Flags (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Flags)
      • Continents (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Continents)
    • History (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/History)
      • Ancient Civilizations (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Ancient_Civilizations)
      • Industrial Revolution (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Industrial_Revolution)
      • Middle Ages (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Middle_Ages)
      • Prehistory (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Prehistory)
      • Renaissance (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Renaissance)
      • Timelines (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Timelines)
      • United States (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/United_States)
      • Wars (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Wars)
      • World History (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/History_of_the_world)
    • Human Body (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Human_Body)
    • Mathematics (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Mathematics)
    • Reference (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Reference)
    • Science (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Science)
      • Animals (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Animals)
      • Aviation (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Aviation)
      • Dinosaurs (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Dinosaurs)
      • Earth (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Earth)
      • Inventions (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Inventions)
      • Physical Science (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Physical_Science)
      • Plants (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Plants)
      • Scientists (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Scientists)
    • Social Studies (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Social_Studies)
      • Anthropology (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Anthropology)
      • Economics (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Economics)
      • Government (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Government)
      • Religion (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Religion)
      • Holidays (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Holidays)
    • Space and Astronomy (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Space_and_Astronomy)
      • Solar System (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Solar_System)
      • Planets (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Planets)
    • Sports (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Sports)
    • Timelines (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Timelines)
    • Weather (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Weather)
    • US States (http://www.academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/US_States)
          Advertisement