Has Hapkido become a generic term???

[shadow warrior]

The following is ONLY an opinion formed during 25 years+ of studying and teaching Hapkido. What do you think???

Has the style of Hapkido finally gone the way of Karate or Kung Fu, as a term used to describe such a diverse set of techniques, that there is very little agreement about what is or is not part of that system???

Hand striking techniques for starters. What types are included and what training methods are used to develop these strikes?? Should modified boxing be used to describe the punching style??

Kicking techniques. What types of kicking are included (if any)and what mechanics of execution are taught and considered to be part of the style's parameters. Is Hapkido just Tae Kwon Do with some joint locks argument? Is there an actual Hapkido kicking style mechanic??

Twisting techniques. How large are the circles employed in joint lock and what dynamics are apparent? Are offensive techniques part of the style? Should projections, misdirections and joint locking while kicking be included??

Forms or "Kata". Can these be considered part of the Hapkido way??

Throwing. What kinds of throwing, reaping and/or sweeping are a part of the style??

Ground work. Should these sets of techniques be considered an integrated part of the style?? What emphasis should be placed on this skill set???

How important is the sophisticated skill sets of free fighting in the style of Hapkido?? Is this skill the point of Hapkido??

Weapons? How important are they? Which ones are included? When should students be introduced to them??

How important a role should KI development play??

Finally, is Hapkido alive or dead? Should it remain unchanged for eternity (dead), or should it evolve (alive) as part of its mandate??

There is NO agreement within the Hapkido community itself as to what actually constitutes the proficency, range, type, development, manesfestation or application of Hapkido techniques. Every Kwan in Korea is different! Not to mention the numerous Kwan "invented" over the past quarter century, both inside and outside Korea. There are also countless organizations and federations of Hapkido located around the world. They too are at odds as to what should or should not be considered Hapkido technique.

My point is that Hapkido has become so splintered and disjointed under the weight of commercial, political and egocentric self serving pressures, that it has succummed to the fate of the other aforementioned styles. It has become a "generic" martial arts term of little or NO value in describing what the art actually includes.

When you have eight year old black belts and so called, 7th degree black belts in their twenties certified under well know organizations and virtually every second generation Hapkido Master and Grandmaster heading up their own federation (some selling degrees), it is a sad day for those of us who love the art. I myself, find the climate of commercialism, posturing, non co-operation and compromise almost unbearable. Ten or fifteen years ago Hapkido was well respected among other martal artists, now its just another style name. If not for some truely dedicated students and knowledgable teachers, this art generally could (will) soon decend into the swamp of commercially driven mediocrity and techniques of doctored photocopies so widespread in general martial arts today.

Hapkido is well on its way to becoming the next martial art "flavour of the week". This has already well underway in the US and now in Canada!

Just ranting!!!

[TigerAn1]

Anything can become commercialized to a certain degree. Commercialization by itself does not make an artform inept. Ineptitude is brought on when incompetent instructors proliferate. Whether or not that applies to HKD is in my opinion unclear. As the saying goes, buyer beware.

[Shihan]

Shadow Warrior,

As being a beginner with only 6 years of training in hapkido, I bow to your experienced opinion. While I believe that I 'm getting quality instruction from my Sabumnim, I do believe that there are some things of no or less value in the art. Because of my lack of experience, I tend to keep my mouth shut on things that I know little of. But I promised myself that when the day comes that I'm knowledgable enough to teach, there would be some things I would exclude from teaching.
(1) While I like forms/katas as a form of excerise and muscle memory, I wouldn't place a great emphasis on it.
(2) As a older adult (42) I tend to keep my kicks from the waist down. I think it takes too much energy to throw high head kicks
(3) I think learning how to box, learning footwork, working off the jab would help compliment the style more than hurt it. I think practicing free fighting helps this skill.
(4) while I understand that in these times we don't use weapons like swords, sais, bo staff, tonfas, I believe in mastering the movement of a weapon more than mastering the weapon itself. In my humble opinion, them in a street confrontation any thing you pick up can be used as a weapon because the movements were mastered, not the weapon itself.
(5) It's said that all fights end up on the the ground, so a person should learn to grapple. But what of self defense scenarios? I know I wouldn't want to be on the ground trying to grapple with someone and his friends are around. they'll be tap dancing on my head :cry:
(6) Throwing, I believe is a good skill to learn because more people don't know how to fall. A good throw can take the wind and fight out of a would-be attacker.
(7) I think joint locks demonstrates not only your mastery of technique, but your control over yourself and your opponent. Anyone can maim or kill, but to control your opponent takes great skill.
(8) As we evolve as human beings, so should hapkido. To be too steeped in tradition is to be left behind.
(9) KI - Zen in the martial arts. I read in another thread how you accept some students, and turn away others. I like to believe that the development of your KI has given you the insight that you needed to make such decisions.
(10) And I agree wholeheartedly that children under 18 should not be black belts. While they may be physical able, they lack the maturity needed to know when or when not to use hapkido. My master is in his late 40's and has over 30 years experience in the martial arts including hapkido, ju jitsu, kung fu, chin na. He is well documented and pictured with some of the most notable masters of our time. His compassion is only out weighted by his skill as a practitioner and instructor. I have much love and respect for him as my master and fellow human being. I belive I'm not training at a McDojang.

With all that said, I believe hapkido has become the flavor of the month. And like anything, it becomes played and not useful. and when the smokes clears, and it always does, the true players in this game called hapkido shall stand tall and victorious. All that have been said is in my humble beginner opinion.

Be well, train hard, live long
:)

[wild_pitch]

just so you know.. keith is travelling in asia right now.

just so you don't think he is ignoring this thread if he does not get back to you soon.

[iron_ox]

Hello all,

Hapkido is the name of the martial art founded by Dojunim Choi, Yong Sul - the only people that want to create a generic use for the term are those that do not have any connection to Choi or have low rank and are self inflated - say first dan to ninth dan...

I think that it is great that so many have gone on to create their own "martial arts" from the Choi material - and renamed what they do - but they, like the countless other non-lineaged imposters in the world are no more Hapkido than they are Shotokan.

It is the repsonsibility of Hapkidoin to stand up and be counted, and stop the further generic ripoff of the name. After 25 years, I have seen SO much bogus Hapkido, that I, for one, and ready to put my foot down for the sake and survival of the art.

[Thomas]

Great posts so far and a lot of good insights. I really think the issue is a big concern to Hapkidoin around the world. Take a look at these threads for similar lines of reasoning:
Hapkido MacDojang Quiz
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5506
Not Another System
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19646
Beware of Hapkido schools with TKD masters
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2678


I think one of the biggest problems is the real lack of a definition (and I would argue existence) of the "One Pure Hapkido Style"

It's one thing to argue lineages and background and names, but it's another to actually define what makes a Hapkido "kwan" a legitimate one. And, it's another thing to look at how people who studied with the original founder later took the art and changed it... should the change stop there and should the changed forms even be looked at as "Hapkido"?

Would anyone step up and make a list of the things that define a Hapkido style as pure Hapkido in this thread? Is is possible to do?

P.S. this post is not intended to start an argument, but rather to see how people define Hapkido :)

[iron_ox]

I think one of the biggest problems is the real lack of a definition (and I would argue existence) of the "One Pure Hapkido Style"

It's one thing to argue lineages and background and names, but it's another to actually define what makes a Hapkido "kwan" a legitimate one. And, it's another thing to look at how people who studied with the original founder later took the art and changed it... should the change stop there and should the changed forms even be looked at as "Hapkido"?

Would anyone step up and make a list of the things that define a Hapkido style as pure Hapkido in this thread? Is is possible to do?

This is really quite simple: Students of Choi, Yong Sul, who remain true to the material they are taught are teaching authentic Hapkido. The term Kwan is simply a way to identify "who's school" it has never been or has ever intended to be a "style difference".

Hapkido did not exist in Korea until Choi, and his students of rank all learned the same material (even if some have changed the order now).

Most people that changed the material, like the Suh/Seo family want their material to not be considered Hapkido - all power to them - its not Hapkido.

How would you like to see Hapkido defined? Simply, a definition of Hapkido is the art of Dojunim Choi, Yong Sul.

[Thomas]

This is really quite simple: Students of Choi, Yong Sul, who remain true to the material they are taught are teaching authentic Hapkido. The term Kwan is simply a way to identify "who's school" it has never been or has ever intended to be a "style difference".

Hapkido did not exist in Korea until Choi, and his students of rank all learned the same material (even if some have changed the order now).

Most people that changed the material, like the Suh/Seo family want their material to not be considered Hapkido - all power to them - its not Hapkido.

How would you like to see Hapkido defined? Simply, a definition of Hapkido is the art of Dojunim Choi, Yong Sul.

Here I would respectfully disagree

In my opinion, this is where it does NOT become easy.

Choi Yung-sul learned Daito-ryu Aikijujitsu and then added limited kicking techniques. That is what he taught. Perhaps the word “Hapkiyoosool” is a more accurate name of the teaching of Choi Yung-sul.

However, Ji Han-jae studied under GM Choi and added even more kicking elements and other stuff. His modified style became known under the name “Hapkido”… which according to some the name was given to GM Choi as a sign of respect. The line opf Ji Han-jae went on to establish some very prominent and influential Hapkido masters, including Bong-soo Han, Myeong Kwang-sik, Myung Jae-nam, Many people who followed the modified style of Ji Han-jae also claimed direct descent from GM Choi, mainly because of the age differences and weight of reputation that the founder had.

From this very beginning, there is a splitting of the art that was originally Daito-ryu Aikijujitsu into a mix of that art with some limited kicking (Hapkiyoosool) and into an art with more kicking, knife defence and such called “Hapkido”. From there, various students of GM Choi and of Ji Han-jae have gone on to further adapt and change the art… and all of these styles have been collectively lumped under the name “Hapkido”

Is there one “pure” style? In my opinion and based on my interpretation of the history, I would say “NO”

However, I think a “Hapkido” art should contain all of the basic concepts of Hapkido (less emphasis on differences between the techniques and more comparison of whether the concepts are the same). I think the individual Kwans of Hapkido follow the same concepts and ideas but may do other stuff as well… just like different schools of Karate do (Issin-ryu, Shotokan, Goju-ryu, etc.). All are “Karate” and follow the same basic ideas and concepts… but are different in some of their techniques and application.

I know other people may interpret this differently, but I think the facts stand for themselves and represent how many people view it. For me, the real joy is working with Hapkidoin of various backgrounds without worrying about how “pure” their style may be. Recently I went to a Hapkido seminar with GM Seo In-sun and GM Serge Baubil. I was so amazed at all the different Hapkido groups working together and sharing. Many of the techniques were different… but all of the underlying concepts were the same. I think there is less differences in Hapkido than many people think.

Moo Sool



Website
http://www.hapkiyoosool.com/hist.htm

Hapkido article here by Rob Derricks
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/magazine/styles/hapkido1.htm

Hapkido family tree
http://www.hapkido-info.net/html/hapkido_family_tree.html

Ji Han-jae biography
http://www.hapkido-info.net/html/history.html#Ji%20Han%20Jae

Choi Yung-sul biography with important references to Suh Bok-sup and Kim Moo-hyun
http://www.hapkido-info.net/html/history.html#Choi%20Yong%20Sul

[iron_ox]

Choi Yung-sul learned Daito-ryu Aikijujitsu and then added limited kicking techniques.
Sorry, he added nothing to what he was taught. As the man that spent the most time with Sokaku, Takeda, Choi was exposed to more information than anyone regarding what Sokaku knew.

That is what he taught. Perhaps the word “Hapkiyoosool” is a more accurate name of the teaching of Choi Yung-sul.

No, the most accurate name is Hapkido. That is the name that he called it - period. If Ji came up with the name is irrelevant, because even he says he gave it to Choi to use, and Choi did so.

However, Ji Han-jae studied under GM Choi and added even more kicking elements and other stuff. His modified style became known under the name “Hapkido”… which according to some (Ji himself)the name was given to GM Choi as a sign of respect. The line opf Ji Han-jae went on to establish some very prominent and influential Hapkido masters, including Bong-soo Han, Myeong Kwang-sik, Myung Jae-nam, Many people who followed the modified style of Ji Han-jae also claimed direct descent from GM Choi, mainly because of the age differences and weight of reputation that the founder had.
That is very true, but what they did with the information they learned is very different - Myung Jae-Nam for instance studied Aikido and founded Hankido - good job on his part, but this is not Hapkido.

From this very beginning, there is a splitting of the art that was originally Daito-ryu Aikijujitsu into a mix of that art with some limited kicking (Hapkiyoosool) and into an art with more kicking, knife defence and such called “Hapkido”. Sorry, but where did you get this? The art Choi taught had weapons and certainly had knife defense as the knife was his favorite weapon. To try and divide what Choi taught by calling it Hapkiyoosool is to try and lessen the information that he passed on. With all due repect to Ji, his story as to his contribution to Hapkido has grown and grown over the years. Yes, he was VERY prominent when he moved to Seoul, but he had a third dan from Choi and had studied for 3 years at that time - from 13 to 16 years of age. Ji didn't add weapons, just started teaching them to a wider audience that the rather provincial Taegu. For example, again with all due respect, Ji claims most recently to have added dan bong to the curriculum of Hapkido - why would Ji add an anti-sword weapon to an art he learned in 1950's Korea? Clearly, this is a much older weapon learned from a sword culture - the weapon was taught by Choi, to Ji - and this is verified by Choi's longest training students. The so-called Hapkiyoosool guyys in the US are infact from the Myung Jae-Nam line and have no direct connection to Choi. Choi for his part used the name Hapkido on his certificates until his death.

From there, various students of GM Choi and of Ji Han-jae have gone on to further adapt and change the art… and all of these styles have been collectively lumped under the name “Hapkido” And there is the problem, the only people that want to keep Hapkido "generic" are those without proper lineage - or rank - because it is easier to ride on the coattails of a great martial artist like Choi, Yong Sul than admit that what they teach is something they made up for commercail consumption.
Is there one “pure” style? In my opinion and based on my interpretation of the history, I would say “NO” With all due respect, the biggest problem here for many people is that the "history" that they have been shoveled is garbage - based on a silent code so that those withlow rank or no real connection to Choi will not have their repective commercial patches disturbed.
However, I think a “Hapkido” art should contain all of the basic concepts of Hapkido (less emphasis on differences between the techniques and more comparison of whether the concepts are the same). I think the individual Kwans of Hapkido follow the same concepts and ideas but may do other stuff as well… just like different schools of Karate do (Issin-ryu, Shotokan, Goju-ryu, etc.). All are “Karate” and follow the same basic ideas and concepts… but are different in some of their techniques and application. Kwan are not different styles - the above listed Karate styles are different, in philosophy and content. Kwan is just a way of saying "Joe's Hapkido" - it is not a divider of style - Hapkido is the name of the art of Choi, not a generic lump all for Kuk Sool Won, Hankido, Hwa rang do, etc. Again, those that want to lump them all together often do so to bolster bogus training and rank claims.

I know other people may interpret this differently, but I think the facts stand for themselves and represent how many people view it. For me, the real joy is working with Hapkidoin of various backgrounds without worrying about how “pure” their style may be. I love to train with whoever comes down the 'pike, but recently have found that if Hapkido is not protected from those that would water it down, it will become a collection of techniques that anyone can do and say they teach Hapkido...

Recently I went to a Hapkido seminar with GM Seo In-sun (Not to quibble, but he and his brothers spent 20+ years telling us all that they were not Hapkido, but Kuk Sool Won - now by some stroke of magic we are to believe that he is a high ranking Hapkidoin? He has a third dan in Hapkido, first dan from Choi - that's it.) and GM Serge Baubil. I was so amazed at all the different Hapkido groups working together and sharing. Many of the techniques were different… but all of the underlying concepts were the same. I think there is less differences in Hapkido than many people think.

Moo Sool





Hello Thomas,

Always good to read your well informed posts. But, like every martial art, we must protect the vestiges of the entire art - most notably the lineage - there are several high ranking masters that are from the Choi lineage and are very willing to share their knowledge. If we neglect the lineage, or allow people to create connections to Choi that do not exist, we will end up with a collection of all be it well meaning people teaching "martial arts" they created - none of which are Hapkido.

[iron_ox]

Website
http://www.hapkiyoosool.com/hist.htm



Hello Thomas,

This was a web site that you used as a reference for your post. This is a good example of how there can be gross inaccuracies to information that are accepted as gospel truth.

This page claims that Choi never taught a westerner - hardly true - GM Michael Wollmershauser was taught directly by the founder - infact, most of the Hapkiyoosool history page has information gathered by Grandmaster Wollmershauser from interviews he did with Choi, Yong Sul and Suh, Bok Sup.

It also claims that Choi studied in TaeKyon - hardly needed - it was a dead art in Korea in the 1950's - Yudo (judo) was far more prominent. There is no evidence that Choi ever studied any art other than what he was taught in Japan.

There is a list of names of martial artists supposedly taught by Choi - only one on that list, Ji, Han Jae is verified as having trained with Choi in Taegu. Recently, Lee, Joo Bang made such a claim, but this is still in question.

This page is a good general start to history, but is filled with so many incorrect items that it shows the neccessity to verify facts from 2 or 3 sources minimum.

Again, I'm not trying to be an elist schmuck, but I think that if someone makes a claim, then it should be checked...

[Thomas]

. But, like every martial art, we must protect the vestiges of the entire art - most notably the lineage - there are several high ranking masters that are from the Choi lineage and are very willing to share their knowledge. If we neglect the lineage, or allow people to create connections to Choi that do not exist, we will end up with a collection of all be it well meaning people teaching "martial arts" they created - none of which are Hapkido.

Nice responses to my previous post. I see we may disagree on some things, but hey... that's bound to happen. The chunk I quoted above though, I agree with completely and I think that there are some people out there that fight very hard to do this (and I have butted heads with some of them in discussion here on this board :D ) I think this is a real challenge and something that should encourage Hapkidoin to research their art and meet other people and see what makes Hapkido into Hapkido.

Thanks for always sharing and for taking the time to share your knowledge!

About:
Again, I'm not trying to be an elist schmuck, but I think that if someone makes a claim, then it should be checked...
I agree with this as well and it sure is nice when people can look at various sources and evaluate them before making a decision. I still have a lot to learn but I am trying !!! (and enjoying the ride!)

[iron_ox]

I agree with this as well and it sure is nice when people can look at various sources and evaluate them before making a decision. I still have a lot to learn but I am trying !!! (and enjoying the ride!)


Hello Thomas,

Couldn't agree more!!! Thanks as always for keeping me thinking - nice when we can disagree but still discuss issues. :)