Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:48:06 -0700 From: the_dojang-request@martialartsresource.net Subject: The_Dojang digest, Vol 11 #393 - 12 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. Re: Kwanjang (John Johnson) 2. Re: Sharing Traditions (Bruce Sims) 3. Re: Kudo-s (Bruce Sims) 4. Non-prof (FRANK CLAY) 5. A question for John Johnson (Christopher Spiller) 6. Re: Non-prof (Ray Terry) 7. Sharing Traditions (J R Hilland) 8. Non-Profit (Gladewater SooBahkDo) 9. Korean Tradition or Respect (kevin_janisse@comcast.net) 10. Re: Non-Profit (Ray Terry) 11. RE: New to it all (John Moore) 12. RE: Sa Bom?Kwan Jang -- Title use in general (Jason Thomas (Y!)) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: "John Johnson" To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: Re: [The_Dojang] Kwanjang Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 04:47:35 +0000 Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Ray, You're correct that building owners are also referred to as "Kwanjang". In that sense the term just means "building head" or "organizational chief" or whatever. I should have made it clearer that "kwangjangs" in a dojang have a little extra meaning because they are leading a school of thought/style (this may also just be a personal interpretation). In general, however, dojang "kwangjangs" are simply the business owner or cheif person at the school. John >From: Ray Terry >Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net >To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net >Subject: Re: [The_Dojang] Kwanjang >Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:31:25 -0700 (PDT) > > > In Korea the term "Kwanjang-nim" is used for the school head or director. > > "Kwan" loosely means school, as in a system of thought (go back to the > > old days when kwans ruled KMA and you'll understand the meaning). "Jang" > > just means head or director. > >I seem to recall that an owner of a building, e.g. an apartment building, >was referred to as a kwanjang.  Did I remember that correctly? > >Ray Terry >rterry@idiom.com >_______________________________________________ >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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! --__--__-- Message: 2 Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 23:56:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Sims To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: [The_Dojang] Re: Sharing Traditions Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Dear Eammon and Ray: Thanks for the thoughts. Regarding my personal situation it goes without having to be said that I will be honoring my word to DJN Kim. His purpose in sharing the information was a gesture of respect to me for my efforts to provide accurate information regarding Korean martial traditions. He has been considerate enough to let me know that if I wish to share my impressions or opinions about my experiences with him, I am certainly at liberty to give my take on things. Where I think he is asking a line be drawn is in particulars. For instance, it comes as no surprise to anyone, I am sure, that the late Mike Wollmerhauser studied with DJN Choi Yong Sul so you would not be surprised to hear there is a training record in the Hapkiyusul archives. Would/can I tell you the information on it? Nope. Another example would be the techniques that DJN teaches in his opening curriculum. Against the comparable Hapkido material it is nothing short of extraordinary. Thats my opinion. Will I describe the techniques for comparison to other curriculums or arts? Nope. But having said that now, lets return to Jeres' original premise. If each of us, in turn, are bound by such injunctions or relationships with our teachers how can we share for the betterment of a failing Hapkido art? CAN we share? What is to be the nature of that sharing? In other words, the flip-side of honoring ones' teacher, kwan or chong (all of which is to the good) may be to condemn ourselves to a world of proprietary informations, yes? Now, I DO admit that people who are essentially "freeagents" may be under no constraints and that seems to be a no-brainer. I have been sharing my material with people almost completely on-demand with no thought to gain and with a focus on maximum service ("bungsa") to the MA community and it feels good to give back like that. The counter to THAT point is, are the Hapkido arts well-served by just spooning up information to people on-demand? I have seen, over and over again, that people who are given things with little or no cost to themselves seldom appreciate what they have been given. Things are quite different for those who have had to sacrifice for their gains. Thoughts? Comments? Best Wishes, Bruce --__--__-- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 00:01:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Sims To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: [The_Dojang] Re: Kudo-s Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Dear Garrett: ".....personally thank you Mr. Simms for your thoughtful and very positive comments about this man and a fellow martial artist......" Many thanks for the pat-on-the-back. Folks here did a real service (IMHO) when there was a lot of things that needed to be said about people doing some pretty ugly in the name of the Hapkido arts. I think its even more important that people who are doing a sound job, day to day, to promote KMA traditions get the good press they deserve, yes? FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce --__--__-- Message: 4 From: "FRANK CLAY" To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 07:33:14 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] Non-prof Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net JC, There are a billion and one ways that non-profs can make money. If memory serves, even employees of a non-prof are compensated. To compensate those people, revenue must be generated. Generation of revenue is to acquire assets, and assets both intangible and tangible can be considered profit. This is purely from a business point of view. Now when a mark or other qualifying item is used, that has the potential to affect incoming assets. Which is a loss. If the the US SBD were not so concerned with making money, and were as altruistic as you say, then why seal a name that is not documented as in service by them, nor is in use in the name of their organization. It is a stretch to say that in using the name TSD MDK someone will confuse it with the name SBD MDK, or TKD MDK. To be perfectly honest JC that is actually presumptious. I have been a martial arts teacher for a short time, only about 14 years or so. In all that time, only two students have had enough knowledge to ask who I was certified by, and one was wanting Kukkiwon. Now bearing that fact in mind, how then is the public going to confuse two organizations when they 1) don't know enough about them and 2) frankly, could care less? Organizations are not necessary, they are typically money making machines. This is not always the case, for clarification. I hear the accreditation excuse... ok, WHO accredited them? Who accredited our teachers teacher? Was that even necessary? No, it was money. You can spin it anyway you would like. Bottom line is that most of us have been around long enough to know what is going on, and what we see. If the US SBD does not like being viewed that way, or you don't like being viewed in that light, then change the way you do business. It wont be easy. For a long time I was still associated with the KTMS fiasco, though I had had no contact with them for the preceeding two years, except some rather hostile communications to its "US Liason". And for the record, the only people who are affected by such things anyway, are law-abiding citizens. People who would violate that ruling could care less, and then you would have to prosecute them all. Failing to do so could be viewed as discrimination... it is a poorly conceived plan in the fisrt place. But back to the point, I wasn't mislead by the name, I was mislead by the history that was provided to me. To their credit, Masters Dan Segarra, John Hancock and Ray Terry got me straight and saved me a bunch of heart ache... but where was the altruistic US SBD? Where was the information at that could have protected me and others? It is proprietary and not released. No news articles, no blurbs in TKDT... nothing. So while they are claiming one thing, in my mind their actions indicate they are more interested in the bottom line. Just my opinion though. --__--__-- Message: 5 Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 06:48:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Spiller To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: [The_Dojang] A question for John Johnson Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Mr. Johnson, I noticed in your last posting that you have dan ranking in Ul Ji Kwan Hapkido. I was just wondering about the name of the kwan as the only other time I've seen that name is for the ITF 4th dan tul "Ul Ji", which is named after Ul Ji Moon Duk, a korean general in the 7th century. Thanks in advance! Taekwon, Chris __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail --__--__-- Message: 6 From: Ray Terry Subject: Re: [The_Dojang] Non-prof To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 07:10:48 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net > I hear the accreditation excuse... ok, WHO accredited them? Who accredited > our teachers teacher? Was that even necessary? No, it was money. This is an interesting point. After the end of WWII there was no one in Korea to promote the Korean Karate kwan heads. They obviously weren't going to ask for promotion from Japan, so what did they do? They all met and agreed to promote themselves. I believe the first such joint promotion was to give themselves all 4th Dans. No testing... no look at prior rank (if any), just "we're all kwan jangs, we're now all 4th Dans, all in agreement signify by raising your hand, approved, congrats on our promotion..." Ray Terry rterry@idiom.com --__--__-- Message: 7 From: "J R Hilland" To: Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:24:50 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] Sharing Traditions Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Hello Bruce: It is good to hear from you my old friend! Ray hit it on the head when he said: "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...". You know it is all about technique. I don't think that hapkido is degenerating into a hodge-podge of miscellaneous techniques. Actually, I think hapkido is doing just fine as a 'traditional' art. Yes, there are people that think hapkido is eclectic and nothing more than bringing a bunch of techniques without any underlying principles of motion, but they are not really doing hapkido. A lot of people are misguided about what hapkido is. I do not have all the answers, but I know what is hapkido and what it is not, so do you. It is ok that he asked you not to share his documents. But no one owns good technique, that is an individual thing. Time in rank, good technique and detailed application of the theories of motion are qualities of a good practitioner. This US sobakdo group is acting like they created the kwan they want exclusive rights to. But what did they create? An organization. Nothing more. They have not discussed technique, just lineage, which in the large picture is not that important. When a white belt shows up on your mats, do they care what organization you belong to? What art you teach? Who you studied with for 15 minutes 20 years ago? Usually not. It is all about technique. Just my opinion. Jere R. Hilland, Fargo, ND www.rrhapkido.com www.HapkidoSelfDefense.com --__--__-- Message: 8 From: "Gladewater SooBahkDo" To: Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:29:06 -0500 Subject: [The_Dojang] Non-Profit Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net I can't speak for the USTF or any other organization. I can only respond to what I have seen. As I said I have been at the national Board Meeting for the USSBDMDK and although financial stability is sometimes discussed it has not been the focal point. Protecting the arts values and history has been. I think we can just agree to disagree and see how the litigation unfolds concerning tradmarks, etc. As for you sincerely hoping HC Hwang Kwan Jang Nim gets this message. Why did you not voice it to him when you were in NJ visiting his Do-Jang instead of voicing it to a web page you know he will not see. As for me I teach a small Do-Jang of about 100 active students. I charge $40 per month-no contracts. This is not my job as it is for some full time instructors. I don't want students that are bound by a contract I want students that want to train. I have seen schools that charge much higher tuition --w/contracts. If some students gets mad they will try and in someway cater to that person to get them to stay, because that is the instructors means of income. Students become dollars signs instead of students. I think if you teach correctly with strength and value and the student does not like it (there is always dance class). I believe those studio's running students through like cattle are the real money machines and loss the value of martial arts training. This happens in every style including SBD MDK but money making is not the focus at my school, and is not the focus at the SBD MDK leadership. Promoting the art we love and protecting it is our focus. Thank you for the opportunity to speak frankly without taking offense. Its not my intention to offend. It is my intention to be heard Respectfully; JC --__--__-- Message: 9 From: kevin_janisse@comcast.net To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:37:26 +0000 Subject: [The_Dojang] Korean Tradition or Respect Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net I have found it entertaining to see all the different views on and uses concerning Korean "Honorifics" and would just like to add MHO to it all. Why do we use it when we are not Korean? If we are dealing with Korean Teachers then it would only make sense to understand the proper addressing of their position as to not mistakenly insult them. People like to learn new terminololgy. We pass on Tradition. Here is a fun one.....By the use of a foreign title we can take the superiority edge off for our American (not only) public. Believe it or not it can be easier for a new student call you by a foreign title (they do not yet understand) than sounding militaristic like "John - Sir". Why not use it? If we will not deal with Koreans (from Korea). If we are not concerned about following Korean tradition. I am interested in hearing the opinion of others concerning why we follow Korean custom and tradition in North America. Remember the titles preformentioned in the many posts are not Martial Art specific. Another point to ponder....If you have a friend who has a PHD, do you alway refer or call him Doctor? --__--__-- Message: 10 From: Ray Terry Subject: Re: [The_Dojang] Non-Profit To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 08:48:49 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net > ... As for you sincerely hoping HC Hwang Kwan Jang Nim > gets this message. Why did you not voice it to him when you were in NJ > visiting his Do-Jang instead of voicing it to a web page you know he will not > see. I don't know if he will see Master Hilland's excellent post or not, there are a couple thousand people reading this forum, from 9th gup to 9th Dan. But since he is likely not to read forums outside his own SBD forum, hopefully someone will forward it to him so that he will think about the damage that is being done. As for our brief meeting, that was several years ago, but I did bring it up. I proudly told him that I was MDK, TKD MDK. He didn't blink. I also told the masters the same thing when I visited the SBD MDK in Seoul. They were just happy that I stopped in to pay my respects. Ray Terry rterry@idiom.com --__--__-- Message: 11 From: "John Moore" To: Subject: RE: [The_Dojang] New to it all Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:04:30 +0100 Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Hi folks, I have just attended my second session with The Master and am feeling a little sore - legs/back etc.. Now being next door to 40 and heading towards 18 stone it is hardly likely that I was going to find it a piece of cake and this, due to the influence of friends, appeared to be a good idea to both keep fit and enjoy doing it at the same time. As the whole show is still a bit of a mystery to me I am loaded with questions and I hope this group will allow me the ability to ask away without looking a prune ;-) First off - how many folks join up at 40 years and manage to go the distance? Is it wise to attend twice a week or is once the limit? John Moore www.moorecomputersolutions.co.uk --__--__-- Message: 12 From: "Jason Thomas \(Y!\)" To: Subject: RE: [The_Dojang] Sa Bom?Kwan Jang -- Title use in general Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:37:33 -0500 Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net I find that these titles are often used differently but individual schools and associations. Some times the titles are used for functionary positions; sometimes the titles are tied to Dan Levels or both. We use a combination of both: 1st Dan = Jo Kyo 2nd Dan = Kyo Sa 3rd Dan = Bu Sa Bom 4th Dan+ = Sa Bom 5th Dan+ (who run = Kwan Jang Their own School) The best analogy I could make to this is the way that titles are used in corporations. For example "Vice President", "Director", and "Manager" are all common business titles. However you would find that being a "Vice President" in a bank would be very different than being a "Vice President" at Dell. You would find similar comparisons with "Director" and "Manager" titles. All of these titles vary in use and precedent in the business world, but have some what of a general hierarchy. Jason www.natkd.com -----Original Message----- From: Gladewater SooBahkDo [mailto:GladewaterSooBahkDo@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 12:38 PM To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: [The_Dojang] Sa Bom?Kwan Jang 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 --__--__-- _______________________________________________ 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