Welcome Guest Login or Signup
LIVE CHAT | INSTANT MESSENGER | BOOKMARK
| LANGUAGE:
 
Google

BLOGS   WRITE NEW BLOG   EDIT BLOGS  
 
RSS
Genuine taekwondo; McDojo or Traditional style.
Posted On 07/10/2008 13:56:44 by CelticTiger
With all the talk I see about what's traditional taekwondo and what isn't, I'm going to ask what some may feel is a heretical question.  Does it really matter if its traditional or not?  Back when what we call, 'traditional' was the only thing in existence, there were genuinely good schools and lousy schools.  The lousy ones we don't hear about; they didn't last.  The good ones became the original kwans and survived.  An over simplification, but you get the drift.

Well what is the difference now?  Now, we don't live in the era in which the martial arts we know were established.  Taekwondo, and indeed most other Asian martial arts, are practiced in countries with completely different cultural environs than the martial art's country of origin.  As non Korean (or non Japanese, non Chinese, or whatever) practitioners began teaching and spreading the art, the cultural norms of their homeland made their ways into the martial arts. 

As a consequence, here in the good ol' US of A, most of taekwondo schools have more of an American flavor with Korean trappings.  Methods of discipline have changed with the times, the severety of the training has been adjusted to a civilian consumer market and children, and in order to be profitable and stay in business, the sport aspect of the martial arts has been emphasized, along with the byproducts of self confidence and discipline. 

None of this is necesarilly bad.  The average American has a hard time wrapping their head around Korean culture and the martial arts in general, but sports?  That they get.  Help their kid have confidence, fitness, and discipline?  That they get.  Defend themselves from a mugger they also get, but oddly, not quite as much.  Not unless they live in a high crime area or have been on the receiving end of an attacker.  Most people haven't, so they have a hard time relating to the self defense aspect, even though intellectually, they understand it.  In fact, the American people have been trained to be victims. 

So what does that mean for taekwondo?  In order for it to be taught correctly, some argue that you must get away from the commercial dojang and find only traditional teachers.  Otherwise, they argue, you're just learning a sport with no SD applications.

But if you look on everyone's website or in their literature, every taekwondo school claims to be teaching an 'ancient' art with its roots in the Silla dynasty.  About a third to half of all taekwondo schools style themselves in their literature as being 'traditional' as well.  So who's traditional and who isn't?  What's an aspiring white belt to do?

Remember my first paragraph about not all schools back in the era of tradition being good?  Well that still holds true today.  Not all schools are good and not all traditional schools are good, nor are all 'traditional' schools really even traditional.  A poor traditional teacher is still just a poor teacher, traditional or not.  Poor instruction, no matter how steeped in tradition, is still just poor instruction.  There are many very good schools that do not have that 'traditional' feel that offer excellent instruction.  Some are with the big orgs, such as WTF, ITF, or ATA, some are small, non affiliated schools.  Some have all the afterschool, karate camp programs and leadership, blackbelt clubs that a purist will disdain and will decorate their student's doboks with patches like a Christmas tree.  But the thing in common will be that they offer quality instruction. 

So here's my radical idea.  Rather than being concerned with how traditional a school is, how about focusing on how genuine the school is?  How genuine is the class?  Is the class teaching genuine taekwondo, or just some knockoff system that a self appointed twelfth dan master made up?  Do the students reflect quality teaching, with crisp forms and correct kicks or do they look sloppy and unable to throw a decent punch or kick? 

Genuine taekwondo.  Genuine martial arts.  Thats what I want.  I don't care about the packaging, and while I do have my preferences in that area, it really isn't important.  It is the instruction, the quality of the teaching, and the quality of the ciriculum that concerns me.

Isn't the training the end all/be all of a school?  If the training is good, then who cares about the packaging?  I don't care if the uniforms are neon pink or General Lee orange, so long as the training is genuine.

Daniel

Tags: Quality Training Dojang School



Bookmark:



Viewing 1 - 6 out of 6 Comments

From: major3rd
07/11/2008 23:08:09
In my opinion, those that are afraid to stay in the now live in the past.  In my thinking, it's a subtle form of insecurity.  It's the get a of jail free card for the schools that want to create a path and tell everyone that their path is the way.  It's so incredibly silly; what equation can convey the intensity of right now?  It's not to say that the masters of the past had nothing to offer - they definitely did.  However, it's up to each one of us to breathe life into this art.  We are the art - for better or worse.

Krishnamurti said it best; "truth is a pathless land".  I think you hit the nail on the head with this, Dan.  It's good having a guy like you in the crew.


From: Jeff23
07/11/2008 18:39:17

Another great point! I don't think I'll ever get tired of reading your posts Daniel. One thing that comes up in a college class that we called "Organizational Behavior" is the idea of tradition. Tradition is good if you understand it, but can be horrible if it is done because "that's the way it's always done."

Put monkeys in a cage and a bunch of bananas at the top of a staircase. If one of the monkeys touches the bananas, all of them get an electric shock. So none touch it. Add a new one and take one out. That new monkey will try to go to the bananas, but the old monkeys will stop him and beat him up. Continue the process until none of the original monkeys are in there. Now they have a tradition (beat a monkey up if he tries to touch a banana, no one touches the bananas) but none have any clue why. Suppose now that there won't be an electric shock if they eat the bananas. Think about what this says about blind tradition and the people in real life who follow.

So always know why you are doing something whether it be a simple drill or something as fundamental as why you kick a certain way or chamber a certain way. If it's tradition and works AND you know why, then great. If it's untraditional and works and you know why, then that's great too.



From: CelticTiger
07/11/2008 14:09:10

Old_Guy, Interesting question.  I'm not familiar enough with ITF to make a judgement.  I do know that taekwondo being a fairly recent art really doesn't have centuries of tradition, no matter how hard people try to connect it to the Silla dynasty, the Hwarang, or the Samurang.  But I think that because of that, there is an effort to over compensate to create tradition where none exists, such as the aforenentioned dynastic links. I do feel that fifty years is enough to establish tradition, but in truth, taekwondo is still in its formative stage in the big picture.  I think that there is still a great deal of effort to separate it from karate and that some feel that there must be some 'tradition' to undergird it and allow it to stand on its own.  This is unneccesary in my opinion; MMA does just fine without any tradition at all.  Personally, I feel that taekwondo can stand on its own without any manufactured history or artificial attempts to separate it from karate.

Deb, thank you for the kind words!

Sarge, very well said!  My thanks!



From: narcsarge
07/11/2008 09:40:00

I suspect that people are always looking for a way to make something "original" or "different" from other things in their market!  Martial Arts are no different.  Just look over the history of different styles.  Chinese Martial Arts doesn't recognize influences from other Nations.  Japense influence in TKD is almost a sin to mention!  So it is w/ Traditional or Genuine.  The movie Karate Kid had it right, effective training, passed from teacher to student.  That is what is important.  Isn't it what we demand from our school systems?  I mean, if what our child was being taught in publice schools was "traditional" but totally useless would we still accept it?  I think not.  If what our child was being taught is radical but effective, does that make it Taboo?


 


We use terms like traditional, genuine, original, etc. to seperate things from the mainstream.  I agree Daniel, a term will mean nothing if a student is not able to defend themselves when the time comes.  That may boil down to the student, rather then the training, but it may also point out issues wl techniques.  Hence the reason that you and I spend our time working on things from an effectiveness angle.  Are we changing Traditional Tae Kwon Do?  I don't know.  But I can tell, based on personal experience, that there are certain "traditional" schools that are not doing their students any service when it comes to effective techniques.


 


Bruce Lee had the right idea.  We should all pay attention and learn what works for us.  None of us are cookie cutter replicas of other students.  Martial Arts should be solidly based on useful, necessary, proven techniques.  Package it in any way you want, but when push comes to shove, comes to self defense, I want something that works....



From: KickChick
07/11/2008 09:07:55
Excellent entry and you bring up some very valid points !!


From: Old_Guy
07/10/2008 19:21:04
Excellent post.  I always wondered about the term traditional TKD.  With TKD having only been around about 50yrs I always assumed that traditional meant ITF which was the federation most akin to General Choi's teachings where as the WTF seemed to be an offshoot and more sport based.




*** TKDspace.com | Your Online Taekwondo Community ***
Powered by phpFoX Version 1.6.20