From: the_dojang-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com To: the_dojang-digest@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Subject: The_Dojang-Digest V8 #421 Reply-To: the_dojang@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Errors-To: the_dojang-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Precedence: The_Dojang-Digest Thur, 19 July 2001 Vol 08 : Num 421 In this issue: the_dojang: Nung-Suk Forms the_dojang: Masters and mistresses... the_dojang: Sticks and Songahm may break my bones.... the_dojang: Re: forms at uniform pace the_dojang: A question for Craig the_dojang: KSR 2001-09: _Early Korean Literature_, by David R. McCann the_dojang: Female titles the_dojang: . ========================================================================= The_Dojang, serving the Internet since June 1994. ~1111 members strong! Copyright 1994-2001: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource The premier internet discussion forum devoted to the Korean Martial Arts. Replying to this message will NOT unsubscribe you. To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe the_dojang-digest" (no quotes) in the body (top line, left justified) of a "plain text" e-mail addressed to majordomo@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com. To send e-mail to this list use the_dojang@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com See the Korean Martial Arts (KMA) FAQ and the online search engine for back issues of The_Dojang at http://www.MartialArtsResource.com Pil Seung! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SungPaeKi@aol.com Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 18:03:20 EDT Subject: the_dojang: Nung-Suk Forms >Another question, has anybody on this list transferred from one style to >another and had to learn another set of patterns? If so how did you find it? >Are there people on this list that cross train and know more than one set of >patterns. I began my Tae kwon do training with the ITF forms until I reached second degree. I then began to learn Hapkido through my current master, Mr. Burnett. He is also a 4th Dan in Tae kwon do. Mr. Burnett said that when he was coming up in Tae kwon do ranks that his Master, Lee, Kun-Man, would switch the forms that they were learning because of his masters in Korea. I guess he had learned a total of three different styles of forms, the WTF, ITF, and Nung Suk. I now know all the ITF, and Nung Suk forms to 2nd Degree, and practice them very often. I was just wondering if anyone else's school way back when would switch forms on a whim? Has anyone out there had ever heard of the Nung-Suk forms? To me they are the most complete. They all have equal movements for both sides of the body, they encompass almost all of the techniques required at each rank, and they are quite challenging. I was promoted to 2nd Dan with these forms in 1995 through AAKMA "American Association of Korean Martial Art." Certificate is a WTF Dan certificate, which was confusing to me at first, but was later explained to me that the Kukiwon runs all of the Tae kwon do rank that comes out of Korea. The only thing that I don't get is that my certificate says that I have met the qualifications set by the World Tae kwon do Federations when I do not practice WTF TKD. Is there anyone else on this list that belongs to AAKMA, or who does Nung-Suk forms? Any response would be appreciated. Joshua Cather 1st Dan Hapkido 2nd Dan Tae kwon Do Lincoln, NE ------------------------------ From: Clothahump Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:21:47 -0500 Subject: the_dojang: Masters and mistresses... > > From: Loucat101@aol.com > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 04:35:36 EDT > Subject: the_dojang: Titles > > If a Black Belt male is a master, does that make a Black Belt female a > mistress? I'm curious: I've never heard of a female master OR mistress... The correct term is master, as in master instructor. There's no gender involved. The ATA went through this when we inaugarated our first female master. ------------------------------ From: Clothahump Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:26:49 -0500 Subject: the_dojang: Sticks and Songahm may break my bones.... > From: "Craig Stovall" > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:44:43 -0500 > Subject: the_dojang: Songahm Weapons...Origins > > For any of the ATA folks that might want to address this. > > What is the origin of the single and double stick material that is taught in > the Songahm style? I believe this material is taught under the Protech > umbrella, yes? It is based on Escrima. ...snip... > Also, is this material only used for forms practice, or is actual > application (strikes, blocks, deflections, disarms, locks, throws, etc) also > shown? We start with the traditional 9 lines of cut, then go into blocking, then disarming and finally unarmed defense against the stick. After that, it's whatever floats our boat! ------------------------------ From: DrgnSlyr5@aol.com Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:36:19 EDT Subject: the_dojang: Re: forms at uniform pace In a message dated 7/19/2001 11:43:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, the_dojang-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com writes: << Dizzy writes: > One thing stressed very heavily at our Dojang is, when performing poomse > in class, to always start and end at the same time. We are told it should > sound like ONE person doing the form Rudy writes: << Hi Dizzy: After years of doing the very same thing, I have come to the conclusion that this practice may cause major problems for those who are significantly taller than their classmates. In order to keep up with them, they invariably shorten their stances and/or make other shortcuts in order to keep up with the pace of the team. Since it is my mandate to ensure each student progresses to his or her best ability, I now make sure students other than average size are allowed to practice hyung at a pace that is more comfortable and productive for them. >> I see the wisdom in practicing at one's own natural pace, but I also see benefit in unison training. At my 2nd Dan test, I was required (as were the others) to match pace in weapons forms with other candidates I had never trained with. In practice I had trained alone and with others at my school, varying speed of execution of the form. I feel matching pace is valuable because it allows development of the ability to not only concentrate on one's own actions, but also having to coordinate with the movements of others outside one's control. This is an essential skill for self-defense, IHMO. Obviously in SD, one does not know what is coming from the other as in forms, but it is the ability to also be aware of peripheral action that is important. DS ------------------------------ From: "Yarchak, Mary Kay" Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:21:01 -0400 Subject: the_dojang: A question for Craig Hi Craig, In your response to Jimmy, you wrote < As far as enlightenment...I am less than convinced that such a phenomenon exists.> Just curious as to why you doubt enlightenment? MK ------------------------------ From: Ray Terry Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:52:27 PDT Subject: the_dojang: KSR 2001-09: _Early Korean Literature_, by David R. McCann Forwarded message: _Early Korean Literature: Selections and Introductions_, By David R. McCann. New York: Columbia University Press, 2000. xiii + 185 pages, paper (ISBN 0-231-11947-X); cloth (0-231-11946-1). Reviewed by Robert J. Fouser Kagoshima University, Japan [This review first appeared in _Acta Koreana_, 4 (2001): 167-69. _Acta Koreana_ is published by Academia Koreana of Keimyung University.] _Early Korean Literature: Selections and Introductions_ is a stimulating but problematic addition to a slowly growing body of criticism of Korean literature in English. These two sides to the book are deeply intertwined and frequently jar readers, as if to test their alertness. For a work of literary criticism to be successful, however, it must work on three levels: content, organization, and writing. The content must be stimulating and soundly researched; the organization must be logical and comprehensive; and the writing must be persuasive and aesthetically pleasing. Few works of literary criticism achieve these things completely, but good and influential ones do. How well, then, does _Early Korean Literature_ reach this ambitious standard? Content: The most stimulating aspect of Early Korean Literature is the content. Running through the narrative is a strong emphasis on the social origins of specific literary works and the "literary culture" from which they emerged: "I have continued to find the concept of literary culture intriguing. It is a human ecosystem, with finite resources, patterns of use and distribution, tension between the haves and the have-nots; a monetary system, with discrete entities having certain values, where perhaps a little something in Korean might be exchanged for something else entirely in Chinese; but above all, a cultural system through which contending, competing, sometimes complementary forces interact" (pp. 99-100). The author uses this "literary culture" theory to discuss "negotiation" in the following works: _Ch'Oyong and Manghae Temple_, _Songs of Dragons Flying to Heaven_, and famous sijo by ChOng Mong-ju, Yi Sun-sin, Hwang Chin-i, and Yun SOn-do. The author describes negotiation in literature as follows: "Written works summarize and inscribe previous and ongoing negotiations about subjects or events that may or may not appear in them; they ascribe meanings to events and names; they claim the authority to produce and to be a written record." (p. xii) "Literary culture" thus emerges from the process of negotiation over the meaning of texts in society. This theory allows the author to focus on the political and social issues in the above works that links them to the historical and cultural context that informed their production. The result is a refreshing approach that leads to provocative observations such as the following regarding _Songs of the Dragons Flying to Heaven_: "The _Song_'s complex mix of Chinese *and* Korean history, oral *and* written sources, Korean songs, and stories transformed into Chinese-language stanzas and annotations, embellished with Korean and Chinese signs and portents, does not easily lend itself to the modern teleological narratives of growth toward Korean cultural independence. It might, in fact, serve as a textbook example of the contradictions, tensions, and embattled tendencies referred to in the headnote to this chapter" [emphasis in original] (p. 132). One area of concern regarding the theory is the lack of reference to major theorists who work in this area. From different perspectives, Terry Eagleton, Arnold Hauser, and Edward Said on the Western tradition and Karatani Kojin and Stephen Owen on the East Asian tradition, to name but a few, have written influential works on the relationship between social origins and cultural production and, in particular, between literary culture and literary production. A closer link to these and other critics working on the social-origins genre of theory would have strengthened the author's argument. Organization: Problems with the organization of the book start with the title. To those familiar with literature, a title with the word "early" indicates that the book focuses on the formative and early years of the given literary tradition. This is true in the West as it is in Asia. Thus, the term "early English literature," for example, would commonly refer to literature before Chaucer; "early Chinese literature" to pre-Tang literature or earlier periods, and "early Japanese literature" to pre-Kamakura literature. In the case of _Early Korean Literature_, the author uses the term "early" to refer to all of Korean literature from the formative years to the end of the nineteenth century. Though dividing literary history into distinct periods is often arbitrary, the author gives no reason for the classification of all pre-twentieth-century literature as "early." In the context of Korean literary history, the term "early" as used in this book is a misnomer that risks leaving readers with a distorted chronology of Korean literary history. The book is divided into three sections: "A Brief History of Korean Literature to the Nineteenth Century," "Part 1: An Anthology of Korean Literature," and "Part 2: Negotiations in Korean Literature." At eleven pages, the brief history of Korean literature is indeed brief, which makes it difficult to provide adequate historical context for the discussions that follow. The organization of Part 1 is odd because the first section covers early myths and Koryo songs, but not hyangga (though a few appear in the myths presented) or poetry in classical Chinese. The second section covers early Choson-period literature with classical Chinese poems and prose dumped together at the end of the section into a category labeled "hanmun." The organization of the works in the anthology jumps from being chronological to being genre-based. More glaring, however, is the omission of fiction written in Korean and dramatic works. This would have been less problematic if the author had mentioned clearly that the anthology was a selection that is closely related to the issues discussed in the book. No such explanation was given, so the reader is left wondering whether the anthology is simply a cut-and-paste job of translations that the author had on hand. Only when readers get to the beginning of Part 2 do they get an explanation from the author regarding the selection of works for discussion: The three essays that comprise the second section of this book are not, I should say at the outset, a chronological study, although they do take their texts in a sequence that runs from the thirteenth-century _Samguk yusa_ up to the seventeenth-century "Fisherman's Calendar" by Yun SOn-do (p. 99). Writing: The quality of writing in _Early Korean Literature_ varies, but it is never very good. At its worst, it is obtuse and difficult to follow, as in the following excerpt from the beginning of the book: Prior to the twentieth century, Korean literature included works written in the Korean language and also, because of Korea's close political and cultural association with China and the plain usefulness of the medium, in Chinese. Prior to the fifteenth-century promulgation of the Korean alphabet, Korean literary works were recorded either in Chinese translation or in various systems of Chinese characters used to represent the meanings, sounds, and grammatical markings of Korean (p. 1). The above explanation of the history of writings systems is unsatisfactory. To readers who are familiar with Korean literature, the use of Korean terms for the different writing systems would have been helpful. To readers who do not know Korean and who are not familiar with Korean literature, the description, particularly the description of pre-hangul Korean writing systems, lacks clarity and detail. The use of semi-colloquial phrases, such as "the plain usefulness of the medium," is also grating, particularly when dropped in the middle of woolly academic prose. Because _Early Korean Literature_ includes a number of translations, a fourth criterion must be added to the above three: the quality of the translations. Overall, the quality of the translations is high. They are faithful to the original and read well in English. At times, however, the translations are marred by the same formal-colloquial dissonance that appears in the author's original text, as in the following example from a dialogue between Master HO (HO Saeng) and the leader of a group of bandits in "The Story of Master HO": [Master HO] "Well, if you really mean that, then would it not be better for you to get married, build houses, do the farming, and stop being bandits? Your lives would be happy, you wouldn't be worried about going out and getting caught, and you would have food and clothing in plenty. Wouldn't that be wonderful?" (p. 89) Taken together, _Early Korean Literature_ presents a provocative theory of the role of "literary culture" in Korean literature from the late Koryo to the mid-Choson periods. It does what any good theory must do: explain phenomena. The problem for readers, however, particularly those who are not familiar with Korean literature, however, is that the theory is buried under so much disorganized and unclear writing. Readers can only hope that the author will let his theory breathe by working on a revised edition and by exploring the theory in subsequent research on other periods and genres of Korean literature. Citation: Fouser, Robert 2001 Review of _Early Korean Literature: Selections and Introductions_, by David R. McCann, (2000) _Korean Studies Review_ 2001, no. 09 Electronic file: http://www.iic.edu/thelist/review/ksr01-09.htm ------------------------------ From: "Miguel" Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 20:35:11 -0400 Subject: the_dojang: Female titles > From: Loucat101@aol.com > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 04:35:36 EDT > Subject: the_dojang: Titles > > If a Black Belt male is a master, does that make a Black Belt female a > mistress? I'm curious: I've never heard of a female master OR mistress... > Louise Louise, MA tiles, like military rank, have no gender; a female captain is not a captainess. A Master is a Master. A mistress is a civilian 'girlfriend'. Miguel Garcia's Tae Kwon Do www.garciatkd.com ------------------------------ From: Ray Terry Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:31:42 PDT Subject: the_dojang: . ------------------------------ End of The_Dojang-Digest V8 #421 ******************************** It's a great day for Taekwondo! Support the USTU by joining today. US Taekwondo Union, 1 Olympic Plaza, Ste 104C, Colorado Spgs, CO 80909 719-578-4632 FAX 719-578-4642 ustutkd1@aol.com http://www.ustu.org To unsubscribe from the_dojang-digest send the command: unsubscribe the_dojang-digest -or- unsubscribe the_dojang-digest your.old@address in the BODY (top line, left justified) of a "plain text" e-mail addressed to majordomo@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com. Old digest issues are available via ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com. Copyright 1994-2001: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource Standard disclaimers apply.