Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:54:03 -0700 From: the_dojang-request@martialartsresource.net Subject: The_Dojang digest, Vol 11 #391 - 13 msgs X-Mailer: Mailman v2.0.13.cisto1 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Errors-To: the_dojang-admin@martialartsresource.net X-BeenThere: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13.cisto1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net X-Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net X-Subscribed-Address: kma@martialartsresource.com List-Id: The Internet's premier discussion forum on Korean Martial Arts. List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: Send The_Dojang mailing list submissions to the_dojang@martialartsresource.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/the_dojang or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to the_dojang-request@martialartsresource.net You can reach the person managing the list at the_dojang-admin@martialartsresource.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of The_Dojang digest..." <<------------------ The_Dojang mailing list ------------------>> Serving the Internet since June 1994. Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource The Internet's premier discussion forum devoted to Korean Martial Arts. 1700 members. See the Korean Martial Arts (KMA) FAQ and the online search engine for back issues of The_Dojang at http://MartialArtsResource.com Pil Seung! Today's Topics: 1. FW: Re: Grandmaster Ma. (Dewitt, Garrett) 2. Re: Sharing Traditions (Donnelly, Eamonn) 3. -Nim (FRANK CLAY) 4. Re: Clarification on Nim (ABurrese@aol.com) 5. legal battles (FRANK CLAY) 6. honorifics (Charles Richards) 7. RE: Example from another art (Rick Clark) 8. Re: Sa bum and Kwan jang (Keith Shaw) 9. Sa Bom (Gladewater SooBahkDo) 10. Sa Bom?Kwan Jang (Gladewater SooBahkDo) 11. Kwanjang (Ray Terry) 12. Re: Re: Sharing Traditions (Ray Terry) 13. Living Dangerously in Korea: The Western Experience 1900-1950 (Ray Terry) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: "Dewitt, Garrett" To: "'the_dojang@martialartsresource.net'" Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 09:49:11 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] FW: Re: Grandmaster Ma. Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net > Mr. Simms wrote: > "There are a lot of very crumby instructors out in the > suburbs but I can tell you that Master Ma is not one > of them. He and his brother run two schools in the > Chicago area--- St Charles and Chicago proper, > respectively. His tradition proceeds from the Kuk Sool > Won style of Hapkido. He cares about his students, has > a solid curriculum, and gives guidance and instruction > commensurate with what he charges." "Can't ask for much more > than that." > Hello Mr. Simms. I have not ever met Grandmaster Ma, however in light of > all of the negative > comments,etc.... out there regarding the martial arts, I would like to > personally thank > you Mr. Simms for your thoughtful and very positive comments about this > man and > a fellow martial artist. > > Respectfully > Garrett > DEWITT MARTIAL ARTS > Brainerd, MN. --__--__-- Message: 2 From: "Donnelly, Eamonn" To: "'the_dojang@martialartsresource.net'" Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 16:14:01 +0100 Subject: [The_Dojang] Re: Sharing Traditions Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net "a.) Dojunim Kim may well never know if I share information, but has asked me not to " Not doubt there will be numerous takes on the dilemma posted by Bruce. I do not know the nature of the information or the reasons why you have been asked not to share this information, but Dojunim Kim has chosen to honour and trust you in good faith when he opened his house and resources to you. I can understand why he does not want you to share this information with others (who he does not know). How can he be sure that the information will not be distorted or misused by others as it is passed on. If an individual has been honoured in the way you have and specifically asked not to share or divulge something, I most humbly suggest that you would need a VERY good reason before consider betraying that trust - otherwise you dishonour yourself? Kindest Regards Eamonn Confidentiality Note: The information in this electronic mail ("e-mail") message may be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The information may be protected by privilege, work product immunity or other applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient the retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you receive this electronic mail ("e-mail") in error please notify us immediately by telephone on +44 (0) 24 7686 2000 or by e-mail at postmaster@cel-international.com. Thank you. Registered in England No. 3877626 Registered Office 256 Foleshill Road Coventry CV6 5AB --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "FRANK CLAY" To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 09:53:19 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] -Nim Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Klaas, <> I don't know that this is accurate. If I am your junior in age, but your senior in position (meaning general societal position, as well as, martial art} you would still refer to me as XYZ-nim. In a typical relationship where all things are equal, then I believe you would be correct. Frank --__--__-- Message: 4 Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:21:36 -0400 From: ABurrese@aol.com To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: [The_Dojang] Re: Clarification on Nim Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net GM West wrote: Loretta: Glad to hear from you again......spelling, pronounciation and grammar notwithstanding, your translation is OK, however, nim is only used, as I said before, when speaking directly to the person that the honorific pertains to.....it is very similar to "san" or "sama" in Japanese.........Perhaps Alain or some of the other Korean speakers could provide backup on this point. I have heard Dr. Kimm state that this particular "misuse" is most odd sounding to him...JRW ***************** I posted a post regarding this, and how you can use nim when speaking TO someone or ABOUT someone, but reading it again this morning, I was not as clear as I should have been. IF the person is younger or less in rank, you would not use nim. Therefore, GM Kim and GM West would not be calling lesser ranked and younger instructors sabomnim when speaking about them, just sabom. Kwanjangnim Kim Young-jong in Korea used to call Sabomnim Lee Jun-kyu, Sabom. But Sabomnim Lee and others called Kwanjangnim - Kwanjangnim. I use the nim talking to or about both of them since that is the polite and proper thing for me to do with my instructors. Yi-saeng told me I should use the nim ending when asking the student last Saturday, one to show respect to his teacher, regarless who it was, the teacher might be my senior, and it is also good to set a proper example of showing respect when speaking to kids. So, while it is proper to use the nim when talking about someone in certain situations, it is not proper in all situations. Many Americans do not use the language properly with usage or pronounciation. Heck, most Americans pronounce Tae Kwon Do wrong. (hint: if you are saying Tie Kwan Do, you are not saying it right.) This is the same with many Korean endings, each denoting different degrees of politeness. The Korean language I use to talk to older people is not the same as I use to talk to friends, and not the same as you use to talk to kids. I hope this clarifies nim a little bit. GM West is correct that many people are using it wrong, but it should be used to speak about others too, when they are your senior or older, or you want to show more respect. Yours in Training, Alain www.burrese.com --__--__-- Message: 5 From: "FRANK CLAY" To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:00:29 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] legal battles Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net <> They don't care. If you boil this down to what it means, they are concerned with the bottom line. They are worried about a loss of financial assets and want to be able to charge you to use the name. Its not reputation, its greed. So looking at it from this point of view, would you REALLY want to claim that as a lineage? Anyone noted that none of the other Kwans try to pull this stunt? This is just my opinion, and I realize that it may not be popular. Frank --__--__-- Message: 6 Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 08:36:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Charles Richards To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: [The_Dojang] honorifics Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net I read "But when you talk to John sabum and some of his students are present, refer to him as 'John Doe sabumnim' anyway." MC Reply And when I talk to John Sabum and my students are present I always use John Doe Sabumnim :-) Some of the list members that are contemporaries or mentors have asked me to be less formal when talking amoungst ourselves. I'm honored, but always use thier proper title around my students as it teaches them respect (lead by example). So I talk about Granmaster West's seminar, Grandmaster Hodder is comming to our seminar, Master McHenry is my instructor. FWIW, I agree with GM West's analogy with San and Sama, do any of the Korean speakers know if the affectionate titles like Chan and elder uncle can be translated to Korean? My son would be Niko Chan (not san) to me. Mr. Clarke would be "elder uncle" to my son as a term of endering respect... Yours in Jung Do Charles Sabum --__--__-- Message: 7 From: "Rick Clark" To: Subject: RE: [The_Dojang] Example from another art Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:13:07 -0500 Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Hi John, I guess the point I am trying to make is that at some point in time there are splits from various groups from those within the group for whatever reason. Those individuals have an attachment to a name of the art in more ways than one. To use my example of Judo, in the US back in the early 60's or perhaps even the early 50's there was the movement to break the control that the Kodokan held on promotions for US Judoka. I am sure from your experience in the martial arts and from just living in this world there are people that want to exert control over others and from that gain in power, prestige, money, and a host of other "benefits". So when the upstart Americans wanted to have the ability to promote and receive promotions that were not tied to politics and all of the other stuff the Japanese instructors had over them there was a lot of political fighting. Ranks were not going to be recognized as legitimate and all of the other mess that comes out of such a decision. The long and short of it is that in America we now control our own promotions in Judo. They would have had the option to change the name of the art they were practicing to something other than Judo and one group in Australia did back in the early 1900's they called it Judo-do. Well, you don't hear much from that group today, so in my example it was better for the Americans to retain the name of Judo and gain the power to promote and organize independent from the Kodokan - while still maintaining the name of Judo as their art. Later, Rick Clark www.ao-denkou-kai.org >-----Original Message----- >From: John Hancock [mailto:midnight503@hotmail.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 9:41 PM >To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net >Subject: [The_Dojang] Example from another art > >Mr. Clark, I think I get what you are referring to....but this could >cause some confusion.  Judo...is an art.  Tang Soo Do...is an art.  But >these are generalized terms today.  There are many schools of Judo...and >today there are many schools of Tang Soo Do.  However...today...there is >only one school of Soo Bahk Do (don't argue with me about Soo Bahk >International...they don't, and I don't believe can, legally ad the 'Do' >to their title).  The Moo Duk Kwan is a 'specific school' founded by a >'specific' individual.  The unique condition that Tang Soo Do has delt >with is that orginally there many schools of Tang Soo Do, but that >changed when the Kwan Consolidation happenned and Tae Kwon Do came >about.  Thus...when Hwang Kee refused to participate...the MDK became the >only surviving school using Tang Soo Do as its art name.  However, when >Hwang Kee decided to create his new art, Soo Bahk Do, and the MDK >officially adopted the name change...that left only those school which >had left the MDK post the TKD movement doing Tang Soo Do (ergo...why we >are seeing NEW Kwan today that do TSD).  The situation is unique to the >MDK and the art of TSD.  I can't think of any other school that has gone >through these kind of name changes.  It isn't any wonder that today, as >we try to teach the legitimate and accurate history of the school and the >arts' evolutions...we are faced with obsticles of incredulousness and >obstination while dealing with the quagmire of facts, myths and >misnomers. > >JH > > > >----------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! >_______________________________________________ >The_Dojang mailing list, 1700 members >The_Dojang@martialartsresource.net >Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource >Standard disclaimers apply >http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/the_dojang --__--__-- Message: 8 From: "Keith Shaw" To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:44:09 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] Re: Sa bum and Kwan jang Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Here is what we use at our dojang...lowest to highest level of respect Kyo Sa Nim - Instructor Sah Bu Nim - Head Instructor Kwan Chang Nim - Master Chong Kwan Chang Nim - Grand Master Grandmaster JC Shin has been a frequent guest at our dojang as he lives in the area. The first time he came, I asked Master Kim of our school the proper way to address a Grandmaster. So, we continue to respect him in this way   Keith Shaw National Karate Institute - Kun Gek Do 1st Dan -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup --__--__-- Message: 9 From: "Gladewater SooBahkDo" To: Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:26:50 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] Sa Bom Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Although the term Sa Bom Nim is used fequently. You are correct that the Nim portion is not intended to be used unless talking directly to a person. The term Nim is a honor term like sir. You would not say the word sir when talking about them only when talking to them. Nim should also be added when addressing a senior and not when addressing a junior. The word Sa Bom means Model Rule literality and although we use it as a title for Mater Instructor. Its meaning suggest someone with the title Sa Bom should be a Role Model of Model example. This is my understanding based on a required writing by all Sa Bom Candidates in our Organization. JC --__--__-- Message: 10 From: "Gladewater SooBahkDo" To: Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:37:51 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] Sa Bom?Kwan Jang Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Sa Bom is the correct term for a master Instructor Kyo Sa for a Dan instructor under master level and Jo Kyo for assistant instructor. The term Kwan Jang does refer to school leader. Kwan meaning school or institute. Moo Duk Kwan (Military virtue School) is lead by H C Hwang Kwan Jang and individual do-jangs are ran by the owner and chief instructor, which could be a Kyo Sa or a Sa Bom depending on their rank. Although Master instructor is a lose translation of Sa Bom JC --__--__-- Message: 11 From: Ray Terry To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net (The_Dojang) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:33:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [The_Dojang] Kwanjang Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net People in the martial arts think of Kwanjang as a martial arts title or term or dan level, but it is not. It is just a generic term for (as I recall) owner or director. Ray Terry rterry@idiom.com --__--__-- Message: 12 From: Ray Terry Subject: Re: [The_Dojang] Re: Sharing Traditions To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net > a.) Dojunim Kim may well never know if I share > information, but has asked me not to and that this > opportunity to record his curriculum is only the > second time in his life that he has allowed it. > > b.) On the other hand, Hapkido is degenerating into a > hodge-podge of misc techniques because people are > unable to share among themselves the original training > material and are making do with whatever they can > find. > > Maybe this would be a good time to examine your > question in considerably more depth relative to what > we owe our teachers compared with what we owe the art > (and each other). Thoughts? Comments? Did he ask you to keep the info confidential and you agreed? If so, IMO, you must keep your word and your promise. Doing otherwise would reflect very poorly on you and upon Hapkido... Ray Terry rterry@idiom.com --__--__-- Message: 13 From: Ray Terry To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net (The_Dojang) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 13:12:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [The_Dojang] Living Dangerously in Korea: The Western Experience 1900-1950 Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Forwarding... Living Dangerously in Korea: The Western Experience 1900-1950, by Donald N. Clark, 2003. Norwalk: CT: EastBridge. 453 pages. ISBN 1-891936-11-5 reviewed by Don Baker University of British Columbia dbaker@interchange.ubc.ca In his title, Don Clark advertises this book as an account of the Western missionary experience in Korea over the first half of the twentieth century. He is too modest. This book is much more than that. Because he writes about how the missionaries responded to the various situations they found themselves witnessing, and sometimes caught up in, he has actually provided a history of Korea from 1900-1950, albeit one filtered through the eyes of Western residents. The son and grandson of missionaries, Clark avoids the sin committed by many who write about their own parents and grandparents. He does not make them the prime movers and shakers of the times in which they lived, nor does he even make them the axis around which their world revolved. Instead, he lets them, and their missionary colleagues, serve as the eyes and ears through which we can observe what life was like in Korea back then, and how both they and their Korean converts and friends were affected by the many tumultuous events of that half-century. He begins with the arrival of his grandfather, Charlie Clark, in Korea in 1902. That provides him an excuse to sketch the cultural and political environment on the peninsula on the eve of annexation. He also explores the cross-cultural barriers the missionaries faced in trying to convert Koreans not just to Christianity but to the particularly rigid form of Christianity they preached, which demanded that Koreans give up such time-honored customs as smoking, polygamy, social drinking, and most difficult, the ritual honoring of ancestors. In addition, he discusses the problems preaching in Korean posed for those English-speaking missionaries. As someone who vividly remembers the many mistakes I made when I first began speaking Korean in Korea, I particularly enjoyed the story about the sermon on ddam (sweat) when the missionary actually intended to warn his congregation against the sin of t'am (envy). Since Western missionaries, including Charlie Clark, remained in Korea after the annexation of 1910, Clark is able to provide a different view of Japanese rule than is usually found in Korean accounts. First of all, he points out that most of the missionaries (with the conspicuous exceptions of Hulbert and Allen) were at first ambivalent about the Japanese takeover, hoping that a colonial government more modern than the Confucian government it replaced would open up more space for missionary activity. However, they soon found out that the Japanese were not enthusiastic about the spread of Christianity in Korea and in fact raised barriers to it. Japanese demands that medical missionaries pass qualifying exams in Japanese and that the curriculum in missionary schools be redesigned to conform to the curriculum in secular schools run by the Japanese government (which meant that religion could not be taught in those schools) soured the missionaries on Japanese rule. However, Clark makes clear that, despite such disappointments during the first decade of colonial rule, the vast majority of the missionaries were not prepared to support uprisings against the Japanese, even after March 1, 1919 showed how unpopular Japanese rule had become. Instead, the missionaries welcomed the appointment of a more liberal governor-general near the end of 1919, since Admiral Saito rolled back some of the restrictions which had been placed on their schools a decade earlier. A more serious problem for the missionaries in the 1920s was the rise of resentment by some Korean Christians of the missionary domination of Korean Christianity. Koreans wanted control of Christian schools such as the Chosen Christian College (now Yonsei University) to be turned over to them faster than the missionaries wanted to relinquish control. Clark tells us that such prominent Korean Christians as Paek Nakchun and Yun Ch'iho resented what they considered "missionary paternalism" in this and other matters. However, such disputes paled in comparison with the issue that confronted both the missionaries and Korean Christians in the 1930s. When the Japanese demanded that Christian schools permit their students to participate in Shinto rituals, both the missionary community and the Korean Christian community were split over how to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's while remaining faithful to the laws of God. The issue was soon rendered moot for the missionaries by the rise of tension between the US and Japan which led to the expulsion of most of the missionaries in 1940. Korean Christians were left behind to resolve that moral dilemma for themselves. As Clark tells the tale, that expulsion of the missionaries and their five-year absence from Korea led to renewed strains between missionaries and Korean Christians in 1945. During the war years, Koreans took charge of their own churches and schools and were not ready to return control to the missionaries when those missionaries returned after the war was over. However, just as in the 1930s, an external threat to Christianity in Korea brought both missionaries and Korean Christians closer together again. That threat was, of course, the North Korean invasion of 1950. Clark ends his book with a moving account of what life was like for both Catholic and Protestant missionaries, as well as Korean Christians, caught up in that horrendous civil war. While guiding us through the turbulent waters of Korean history from the final years of the Joseon dynasty to the Korean war, Clark manages to take us on some interesting side trips as well. He devotes a chapter to pre-Communist Pyongyang, when it was known as the Jerusalem of the East, and another chapter to the White Russians who were stranded in Korea after the victory of the communist revolution in their homeland. He also has an entire chapter on life for Koreans and missionaries alike in Manchuria in the 1920s and 1930. However, the chapter that will probably attract the most interest is the one he titles "Western Women in the Land of the Morning Calm." Despite that title, he spends almost as much time in that chapter on Korean women as he does on missionary women. By doing so, he sheds light on an aspect of modern Korean history often overlooked in standard textbook surveys. Another chapter that will attract interest is "Soldiers of Freedom," an account of the birth of a South Korean army and government and the subsequent uprisings in both Cheju and Sunch'on. Clark's comments on Park Chung-hee's role in that latter rebellion is the clearest account I have seen in English of how Park managed to become involved with that incident, and how he managed to extricate himself. In summary, don't be misled by title of this book. It is a fascinating and informative read for anyone interested in modern Korean history and is not just for those interested in missionary history or the history of Korean Christianity. In fact, this book would make a good supplementary text for a class on the history of Korea in the twentieth century. Citation: Baker, Don 2004 _Living Dangerously in Korea: The Western Experience 1900-1950_ by Donald N. Clark (2003) _Korean Studies Review_ 2004, no. 14 Electronic file: http://koreaweb.ws/ks/ksr/ksr04-14.htm --__--__-- _______________________________________________ The_Dojang mailing list The_Dojang@martialartsresource.net http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/the_dojang http://the-dojang.net Old digest issues @ ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com/pub/the_dojang Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and http://MartialArtsResource.com Standard disclaimers apply. Remember September 11. End of The_Dojang Digest