Book Review - Kimm's Hapkido History

[Thomas]

Review
Dr. He-young Kimm, History of Korea and Hapkido, Hando Press: Baton Rouge, LA. (USA), 2008, 738 pages. With shipping in the US, price was just under 100US$ and is available through http://hanmudo.com/intropage.html


Part One: Korean History pp.27-182
1. Stone Age and Ko Joseon
2. Koguryo Kingdom
3. Paikche Kingdom
4. Silla Kingdom
5. Koryo Kingdom
6. Lee Kingdom
7. Unification of Japan and Korea
8. Establishment of Two Governments

This whole section covers Korean history with a focus on military happenings and key people such as generals and kings. Overall, this is not the strongest “history of Korea” I’ve read but it does contain a lot of interesting, and martial arts related, stories that help to create a better understanding of where Korean martial traditions come from. It lacks detail on pre-1945 martial arts but does explain some of the customs and traditions from those times.


Part Two: Japanese History pp.183-216
9. Jemon to early Yamato Nation
10. Soga Family
11. Fujiwara Family

Part Three: Rise of the Minamoto Family pp.217-254
12. Daito-Ryu Jujitsu
13. Takeda Sokaku and Choi Yong Sul’s Life in Japan

One of the essential threads to the Second section is trying to build and promote the notion of Japanese culture developing from (Korean) Paikche culture. The Third section takes that idea and tries to push forward an idea that jujitsu descends from there as well, making jujitsu a Korean art imported to Japan initially. Although the idea has merit and some research to back it up, Dr. Kimm’s writing doesn’t make a very convincing argument overall in my opinion.

Chapter 13 starts the more relevant “Hapkido” history and is a nice look at Takeda Sokaku and Choi Yong Sul, including a great deal of interesting information and anecdotes.



Part Four: History by Chronological Order of Hapkido pp.255-492
14. 1940s
15. 1950s
16. 1960s
17. 1970s
18. 1980s
19. 1990s
20. 2000s

Part Five: Hapkido Associations pp.493-556
21. Korea Kido Association
22. Korea Hapkido Federation
23. International Hapkido Federation
24. Hong Moo Hoe

Part Six: Three Kwans pp. 557-723
25. Soo Duk Kwan
26. Sung Moo Kwan
27. Shin Moo Kwan

These sections are the real heart of the book in my opinion. Dr. Kimm provides detailed information on most of the big movers and shakers of Hapkido and provides a lot of names, dates, and relations here. He spells out the good and the bad, listing accomplishments, developments and even scandals that went on. It seems that he glosses over a couple of areas using the “only as it relates to Hapkido” argument (he avoids a bit of the Kuk Sool Won and Hwa Rang Do controversies). Otherwise this is probably the most comprehensive source of information in one place on Hapkido.

Index 724-725
Bibliography 726-731
Interviewed Masters (photos) 732-736



Minuses and Plusses in General

Minuses
-The lack of in-text citations and/or footnotes makes following the sources in this book difficult. Granted, much of the material comes from oral histories but to be “scholarly” the sources need to be accounted for. The bibliography in the back is huge but there’s no way to account for which specific sources information came from.

-For a book so concerned with so many different Korean organizations and individuals, it would have been nice to have had the Korean Hangeul in the text by the names of the organizations and individuals. Some pictures have Korean captions and some of the bibliographic entries are in Korean.

-Along similar lines, the Romanization of Korean words and names are not done to any specific (or uniform) Romanization system and in some cases different English spellings are used for the same terms in different pages. This makes it difficult to reconstruct the correct Hangeul, something that should have been provided in the text initially.

-There are still quite a few typographical mistakes, spelling errors, and grammatical errors throughout the text. Most are fairly harmless and don’t distract too much. Some are more difficult, especially when the errors are in Korean terms.

-Some of the content gets repeated in various sections and some of the content is a bit haphazardly organized, making it difficult to follow sometimes.

Plusses
-The book is filled with beautiful photos (all captioned) that really supplement the material well.

-The scale is grand, with mentions of almost every major and minor player in Hapkido since the 1940s.

This really is the definitive “Hapkido History” book available and probably will be the most in-depth one ever published. It isn’t perfect but it really represents and excellent starting point for any research into the “who’s who” of Hapkido. The lack of citations really detracts but unless the book is being used for solid research, it shouldn’t be an issue.

As a book that is so big (and expensive) and so specific to “Hapkido”, I have some reservations about an open recommendation. On one hand, there are much better “technical” Hapkido books out there that may be more “practical” for the money. Also, the best part of the book deals with “Hapkido” history and I feel that there really isn’t enough “other” information to make it worthwhile for practitioners of other Korean martial arts in general to purchase this.


On the other hand, this book should be in the library of every Hapkido instructor who wants to know where the art comes from and who the people are who have made such huge contributions. This information needs to be passed on to the next generation of Hapkido artists and this is a great reference to do so. It’s well worth the money I spent on it and I am happy that Dr. Kimm took the time to research, arrange and release this book. Highly recommended to Hapkido instructors.

[JimH]

Is the book a true historical account or is it skewed with the Koreanization of Japanese arts ,with Kuk Sool Won/Hwarangdo historical leanings?

I am confused,perhaps someone with information can tell me how Dr Kimm became a Hapkido Master?

According to his 12 page Bio,written by him,he was exposed to many various forms of Korean arts,but he specialized in Yudo.

He mentions many friendships with many Korean Masters,but no direct training or rank in any art other than Yudo.

The following is from his biography,written by him:

Dr. Kimm visited the school and began to learn Hapkido from Won Kwang-wha in 1962.
This is who Dr Kimm gives/gave credit to for his Hapkido.

Does anyone know when Won Kwang wha died?
He died in 1962

Dr Kimm visited Won Kwang Wha once a month from 1962,so how many classes did he actually have?

Dr. Kimm was invited to become an instructor at Southeast Missouri College by Dr. Mark Skully. He arrived in Cape Girardeau, Missouri in November 1963.

Not long to become a Hapkido Master,1962-1963,even had Won Kwang Wha lived?

The first mention of any rank which could have been associated with Hapkido would have been through Kuk Sool Won ,rank he was given by In Hyuk Suh to help push Kuk Sool Won.

Quote from Dr Kimm Bio:
From 1974 to 1987, they worked very hard to spread Kuk Sool-Hapkido.

From the Bio:
Around the time of the film Billy Jack,1975,Dr Kimm was studying for his 8th degree in hapkido.

Under who?
In Hyuk Suh?

In 1985, Dr. Kimm published the book, Kuk Sool-Korean Martial Arts. The book was seven hundred and sixty pages and contained techniques from White Belt through 5th Degree Black Belt which Dr. Kimm learned from grandmaster Suh.

Dr. Kimm moved to Freemont, California in 1987 due to the illness of his father-in-law. Grandmaster Suh was living in the same city and hey saw each other frequently. In 1989, they discussed Dr. Kimm's future and Grandmaster Suh suggested that Dr. Kimm become the President of the American Kuk Sool Association. Dr. Kimm told him that since the World Kuk Sool Headquarters was located in the United States, the duties of the two Associations would overlap often. Dr. Kimm did not feel that it would be wise to create a new Association. Grandmaster Suh understood Dr. Kimm's concerns and suggested that Dr. Kimm create his own style of martial arts and call it Yuh Kwon Sul. He then said that Dr. Kimm had accumulated enough knowledge and experience in soo (self-defense) techniques and hyungs (forms). He also offered his assistance but he did not want to influence the formation of Dr. Kimm's new style. He thought that Dr. Kimm should know that the basic elements of creating new forms were softness like the flowing river, hardness like a mountain rock, knowledge of 360 degree angles, and low and high postures. Finally, before he gave Dr. Kimm his personal recommendation to create a new style of martial art, he told Dr. Kimm that some day, when people talk about the founders of Hankuk Musul (Korean Martial Arts), he wanted to hear the name of Dr. Kimm He-young along with Ji Han-jae and Suh In-hyuk.

Grandmaster Ji Han-jae also recommended that Dr. Kimm create his own style of martial arts in 1989. He said that this would be the only way for Dr. Kimm to improve his techniques any further. He also said that if Dr. Kimm belonged to any style or organization he would loose his freedom to create new techniques or experiment in other areas. Dr. Kimm was very appreciative of his advice and treated him as his teacher. He then told Dr. Kimm that they were now in equal positions as founders of martial arts styles and that they both must receive respect from their respective students. Grandmaster Ji said that they were now one equal footing and to remember that they are now friendly competitors as founders.

In addition to the instructors that influenced his life, four grandmasters who greatly influenced the formation of the Han Mu Do philosophy and techniques were Lee Kyung-suk, Suh Jung-hak, Lee Won-kuk, and Kwon Tae-hoon.

Note:
None of these grandmasters are Hapkido

NO WHERE in the BIO does it say that Ji Han Jae was ever Dr Kimm's instructor.

No Where does Ji Han Jae claim to have taught Dr Kimm

The only reference to Ji Han Jae in the bio:
Dr. Kimm was very appreciative of his advice and treated him as his teacher.

Dr Kimm was appreciative and treated him,Ji Han Jae, as his teacher,not because he was his teacher but because of the fatherly advice.

Was Dr Kimm promoted,to promote Kuk Sool Won and hapkido because of his YUDO Background and mixed Korean art training?

I am interested as Dr Kimm is known as a Great researcher and writer,but he does have a view that tends to lend itself to the Korean First line in regards to Martial arts of the world,similarly to Kuk Sool Won and Hwarangdo.
(sorry everything did not originate in Korea,but if he owes everything to In Hyuk Suh I can see why he slants that way)

So again is it the TRUE,DEFINITIVE History of Hapkido or is it skewed?

[KSW_123]

JimH, According to the book Won Kwang Wha died in 1975.

[Bruce W Sims]

"...So again is it the TRUE,DEFINITIVE History of Hapkido or is it skewed?..."

You raise some great questions, Jim.

I think the short answer is "yes". The history that I have read by Dr. Kimm seems to be as skewed in the direction of his agenda as that of any of the efforts of other folks. Where the actual benefits come in is that Dr. Kimm is known for doing his research and making the effort to remain as objective regarding the subject at hand. Let me say again that this does not mean that the information is not influenced by a particular direction that he would like the material to move. Though this sounds like a contradiction please allow me two observations.

1.) It is undoubtedly true that CHOI Yong Sul's students exploited their teacher to some degree, and perhaps, in return, Choi likewise exploited his students. I don't know for sure since I wasn't there. However, it is plain that the information that Dr. Kimm provides clearly leaves this overall impression. However, on the subject of remaining faithful to the original Choi tradition, Dr. Kimm is rather quiet regarding himself. For example, it is rather clear in discussing the manner in which material was added (or taken from) the Choi material, Kimm is clear on the efforts of other folk. Regarding his OWN efforts at MA alchemy, though, he is oddly retiscent.

2.) It is clear, from Kimm's writing that he pulls no puches concerning the in-fighting among various actors in the first generation of Hapkido practitioners. Once again, though, Kimm is rather conservative in disclosing his own role in that same in-fighting.

Dr. Kimm was recently established as the KIDOHAE representative for the US. and may well want to have his efforts towards the Hapkido community presented in their best light. It is also plain that leaders in the Hapkido community may have been less than noble in their efforts to promote the arts and Kimm has certainly revealed this in the glaring light of his scholarship. There remains that odd silence surrounding how he, himself, may have also played a role in using the Hapkido arts for his own self interest. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[JimH]

I had read that Won Kwang Wha started when he was older and became very ill and died in 1962,shortly after opening his school.

There was also a Hapkido Family tree in which it listed years of births and deaths of some of the early masters and in it ,it also noted Won Kwang Wha as having died in 1962.

From Dr Kimm's Bio,written by him:
Grandmaster Won's death at the early age of fifty was a very sad event. His early death was said to be caused by high blood pressure complicated by his drinking of alcohol.

Even if Won Kwang Wha died in 1975,Dr Kimm left Korea in 1963,so even if we say he trained for one year,that is 12 classes ,at one class per month for one year,not enough time to Master the art.

Again the lineage is important only from the point of who impacted Dr Kimm the most,as if it was In Hyuk Suh then the leanings toward Korean Nationalism would be more effident,which they apparently are in the book,as pointed out by Thomas.

I agree with Mr Sims,the leaders of the various groups in Hapkido (and in most Korean Arts) pushed for expansion of their own agenda and to this end Dr Kimm is also a player and participant.

Rather than be thought of as the definative book on Hapkido and its history, it is yet ANOTHER Version of this not so ancient arts various twists and turns.

[Bruce W Sims]

(clip)
Even if Won Kwang Wha died in 1975,Dr Kimm left Korea in 1963,so even if we say he trained for one year,that is 12 classes ,at one class per month for one year,not enough time to Master the art.

Again the lineage is important only from the point of who impacted Dr Kimm the most,as if it was In Hyuk Suh then the leanings toward Korean Nationalism would be more effident,which they apparently are in the book,as pointed out by Thomas.

I agree with Mr Sims,the leaders of the various groups in Hapkido (and in most Korean Arts) pushed for expansion of their own agenda and to this end Dr Kimm is also a player and participant.

Rather than be thought of as the definative book on Hapkido and its history, it is yet ANOTHER Version of this not so ancient arts various twists and turns.


Yes, and I think this is where we have to "place our money", so to speak. Certainly Dr. Kimm's book was touted for quite a while, in advance, as what could well be a difining history, and I have been both entertained ---- and shaken---- by much of what I have read. However, despite the many new bits of information, I am afraid that you are very right, Jim, that we need to view this of another in a chain of histories. My guess is that reading the new history by SEO In Sun or the one by Barry Harmon, we will likewise get new bits. I am sure there will also be that inevitable "skewing" in favor of a particular approach. Thoughts?

BTW: Just a side note: As indicated by the recent exchange about the death of a Hapkido practitioner and teacher, I think we need to remember that locations and dates, like the spellings of place names and people need to be validated by more than one source. I think this is especially true when we risk complications between cultures where language and dating can be very different. For instance, in the case of Dr. Kimm's information about Takeda and Ueyshiba I found more than a little variance where other sources (see: Stanley Pranin; John Stevens) tend to be more consistent. Just a thought.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[American HKD]

I've said this many times long before Dr. Kimm new book but the length of time in HKD under a particular master is much more strict here in the US then it was in Korea for the most part even today this is true.

In Korea people had shorter stints with Masters but it also seems they took what they learned and trained hard.

Dr. Kimm had a lot of training in Kuk Sool and HKD with Master Ji for sure.

What I don't get is Dr. Kimm involvement with the Kido Hae because he has his own association to promote. Conflict of interest IMO and who needs the Kido Hae here anyway they bring nothing to the table in the US.

Hapkido has many god people here but lack of unity but that's nothing new in HKD.

[Bruce W Sims]

I'm not sure if the matter of Dr. Kimm and the HANMUDO is germane to the issue of the KIDOHAE. Some time back I tried to get some clarification of the inter-realtionship among the USKMAF, the HANMUDO, the KIDOHAE, KSW and all of the players respective to each organization. I never got a satisfactory answer. The result is that I would not mind approaching the KIDOHAE through Dr. Kimm so as to have membership with some organization and contact with people who take a serious approach to the Hapkido arts. My personal problem is that I don't need to find myself having to jump through hoops established by yet one more person who views himself as a legend in his own mind. Certainly I respect Dr. Kimm as a scholar and contributor to the Hapkido community. But I say again that I don't need yet another master at whose feet I will be allowed to worship. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[dortiz]

"The result is that I would not mind approaching the KIDOHAE through Dr. Kimm so as to have membership with some organization and contact with people who take a serious approach to the Hapkido arts. My personal problem is that I don't need to find myself having to jump through hoops established by yet one more person who views himself as a legend in his own mind. Certainly I respect Dr. Kimm as a scholar and contributor to the Hapkido community. But I say again that I don't need yet another master at whose feet I will be allowed to worship. FWIW. "

I dont understand the point here. First you say joining to be part of an organization that takes HKD seriously. Are you not part of an organization that does that. I will also argue that I find most do. What is often said to be bickering I find is a loyalty to teacher and organization. Often a few people like to attack them and get a very defensive response. I am always in awe of that loyalty and dedication to ones group. I find most of the HKD groups are like this. In general most are serious and show great loyalty and devotion the art, teacher and organization.
You also said you then dont want to have to jump through hoops. Well if you want to be part of an organization that is serious how can you not expect hoops, standards and high expectations. Those are what make, keep and promise a level of what we are asking for.
I read the part about not needing a master to bow to but yet again wonder what the joining would offer in return. Most of the return value is teacher. Not the organization. All of my teachers have given me way more than I have ever offered to them so again it may be about expectations. Again though the organization that is serious can only be so by putting the right face in front of folks. You cant say ones good and not the other because they are one in the same.
I dont believe you really want to join a group and start that process by saying what you just wrote. So I guess the question is what your real point. My point is this is my organization and these are people I respect. To be honest there are a lot of groups that I am not part of. Sin Moo (DJN JI) Master Lims etc. Yet I truly respect them and the folks that are training hard and are loyal to the teachers and organization. It truly brings joy to me to read their points of view.
I can only leave with this advice. Bruce you clearly are invested in the arts and have something to offer. Either find a way to package that for a group you can start or find a way to offer it to a teacher and organization that will have them all welcome you with open arms.
Its nice to be part of something.

[Bruce W Sims]

I'm sorry you don't understand what I was expressing.

But, since you don't I guess there is nothing else to be said.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[dortiz]

I am glad to hear that. Please explain so folks wont take it wrong as I did. My opinion does not matter and you know that. You also know that I truly believe you are working hard at what you add to HKD. I am all to happy and prefer to be dead wrong on this.

Dave O.

[American HKD]

I understand Bruce he want's to be part of a group that he can be part of learn, share, and research, but as a respected equal etc...

He doesn't want to be part of the Neo-Confucius culture that would place his status below people who have been there and came up the ranks.

Bruce very American of you for someone who usually maintains one must follow the Korean culture in HKD. Personally I don't blame you one bit.

[Bruce W Sims]

I think the best way to address my comments is to consider them from three directions.

The first direction is that the organization to which I belong has changed. When I first joined the World Hapkido Federation in 1990-1991, it was very different from what the organization is today. Myung KJN was very heavily involved with the organization and its management. The tenor of the organization was that of approaching the Hapkido arts from an orthodox and investigatory position. Unfortunately, today it is not fully certain when, if at all, Myung KJN will be returning to teaching. The foundation for technical examination of the YON MU KWAN material has become the writings and videos that Myung has published to date which means that the material has pretty much lost much of its dynamism from research. I have used the last two years to approach people who have represented themselves as members of the WHF and found that they have either moved on to other organizations, stopped practicing martial arts or have moved on to other arts. Apparently they have gotten what they wanted from Myung KJN and the WHF, but feel no particular compunction to support the organization in return.

A second direction to consider my comments from is the matter of “jumping through hoops”. In this case I need to share right up front that a person joining an organization is expected to support the regulations and goals of that organization, yes? Where I think a line needs to be drawn is at that point that the regulations and goals are identified as being little more than a function of serving the leadership of the organization. I was drawn to the WHF because the spirit of research into what we do and why told me that the members wanted a dynamic organization. In this way, we didn’t do things just because “teacher says so” but because what we did made reasoned sense. In this way, the YON MU KWAN Hapkido was a living and growing thing and not just something whipped together for some particular effect.

If you take my first two points, you naturally come to my third direction: an organization which creates opportunities into which a person can contribute. It has been my experience that WAY too many organizations are viewed as entities from which people can TAKE. I truly believe that Myung KJN originally abandoned the use of the KWAN approach here in the States because he had come to believe that Americans were unable or unwilling to view KMA as a venue for what we call “volunteerism”. Having paid their money, effectively Americans felt justified to view membership as the right to simply demand a service relative to what THEY wanted and not to what was good for the art or the KWAN.

So, in light of the current thread these three issues would sound like this.

a.) I would need to know that the KIDOHAE or today is essentially the same organization that it was when people were concerned about maintaining the integrity of the Hapkido arts.
b.) That the KIDOHAE outside of Korea was no just some sap to the American practitioners and that members of the US KIDOHAE would be given the same respect and regard as the members of the Korean entity give each other.
c.) That the KIDOHAE overseen by Dr. Kimm would be a living/breathing organization standing on its own merits and not be simply a vehicle for Dr. Kimm and his HANMUDO approach to the Hapkido arts.

Does this explanation help, Dave? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bruce W Sims]

I understand Bruce he want's to be part of a group that he can be part of learn, share, and research, but as a respected equal etc...

He doesn't want to be part of the Neo-Confucius culture that would place his status below people who have been there and came up the ranks.

Bruce very American of you for someone who usually maintains one must follow the Korean culture in HKD. Personally I don't blame you one bit.

Not altogether, Stuart. My view is simple.

If an organization says they are _________________, then I fully expect them to be that thing. So, for instance, if an organization says they are Neo-Confucian in their ethos, then I damn-well expect them to be that.... and not just when its convenient or serves a special purpose. If an organization says they are "a federation", "....excepts everyone", ".....are traditional", ".... are directly related to....." etc etc etc etc then I damn-well expect them to actually BE those things. Don't tell me the organization is one thing and then turn-out to be something else later-on down the road. At my age I think I have earned the right NOT to have someone piss on my back and tell me its raining.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[American HKD]

Not altogether, Stuart. My view is simple.

If an organization says they are _________________, then I fully expect them to be that thing. So, for instance, if an organization says they are Neo-Confucian in their ethos, then I damn-well expect them to be that.... and not just when its convenient or serves a special purpose. If an organization says they are "a federation", "....excepts everyone", ".....are traditional", ".... are directly related to....." etc etc etc etc then I damn-well expect them to actually BE those things. Don't tell me the organization is one thing and then turn-out to be something else later-on down the road. At my age I think I have earned the right NOT to have someone piss on my back and tell me its raining.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

My view is that most organizations are not worth very much however the Kwan is much more important to the members.

It's not good to be a lone wolf but the Korean based association are not what americans think they are and don't seem to offer much for us at all.

[Bruce W Sims]

My view is that most organizations are not worth very much however the Kwan is much more important to the members.

It's not good to be a lone wolf but the Korean based association are not what americans think they are and don't seem to offer much for us at all.

I agree with what you are saying in principle, Stuart. In fairness to myself, though, its important to remember that I did not start out wanting to be a "lone wolf". For many years my view was to get people talking about and even working towards badly needed solutions for problems folks would admit to in private but would not dare admit to in public. For instance, your reflections on ground-fighting have been around for quite some time, but you would play Hell trying to get people to make fundamental modifications in traditional Hapkido material to account for these observations. The same goes for the use of traditional material over things that people have made up in recent years, or the use of foreign practices that are routinely represented as "Korean". I could go on and on, but we all know the litany, and I just don't have the time or the inclination to bicker with Hapkido practitioners or community members any more. Its a senseless waste of my time.

For the purposes of this thread, though, I will also say that I think that I have reached a place in my Hapkido/MA career where I feel justified in requiring that leaders and organizations to actually be and do what they say they are about. So when I speak about the candor (or its absence) in Dr. Kimm's book I believe I am wearing more more than just my "scholar's cap". FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[American HKD]

I agree with what you are saying in principle, Stuart. In fairness to myself, though, its important to remember that I did not start out wanting to be a "lone wolf". For many years my view was to get people talking about and even working towards badly needed solutions for problems folks would admit to in private but would not dare admit to in public. For instance, your reflections on ground-fighting have been around for quite some time, but you would play Hell trying to get people to make fundamental modifications in traditional Hapkido material to account for these observations. The same goes for the use of traditional material over things that people have made up in recent years, or the use of foreign practices that are routinely represented as "Korean". I could go on and on, but we all know the litany, and I just don't have the time or the inclination to bicker with Hapkido practitioners or community members any more. Its a senseless waste of my time.

For the purposes of this thread, though, I will also say that I think that I have reached a place in my Hapkido/MA career where I feel justified in requiring that leaders and organizations to actually be and do what they say they are about. So when I speak about the candor (or its absence) in Dr. Kimm's book I believe I am wearing more more than just my "scholar's cap". FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Bruce I think we're in agreement.

When I mentioned the lone wolf I was not thinking of you but myself. I'm not waiting for some higher authority to bestow approval of my research and adaptations in my HKD.

It was quite telling when Alain Burrese just wrote his Korean instrs are adding Bjj material in their HKD. I'm sure they didn't get some special permission.

I don't believe the Kido Hae or any other will issue some approval document for this or that people will just do what they do, that's evolution in progress.

A leader just does what needs to be done regardless of the peer response, and maybe years later he will be recognized if he did something worth doing.

I say you should just do what you want to do regardless of the so called tradition.

[Bruce W Sims]

Yes, I think we are much closer to agreement than disagreement but from a slightl difference in our view. I agree with all that you have said, but need to reinforce what I was saying about organizations.

My own experience has been that too often what an organization SAYS it is about and how it actually performs can be very different. Perhaps I am suspicious by nature but I am very wary when I think that I see clues or cues in the offing. For instance, we are talking about Dr. Kimm's book and I am more than willing to discuss it from a number of angles. All the same, I am hearing from a number of folks that there is something to the flavor or "tone" or presentation of the writing which seems to be self-serving to Dr. Kimm. In like manner, Dr. Kimm has been established as the American rep for the KIDOHAE. Well and good. But what about his background with various arts? What about his establishing a "new tradition" when the MU-DO approach and many other fine traditions already exist? Why did he not simply do what JI Han Jae did and start a new tradition of Hapkido as in the case of SIN MU?
These are not criticisms of Dr. Kimm per se but important questions one needs to ask about his motives and goals and how those are to play out in the many pies in which he sticks his fingers.

In my own case, being a member of the KIDOHAE might be a fine step forward, but not if everything I bring to the table gets sifted through, say, HANMUDO or USKMAF (see: JR West) simultaneously. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Thomas]

No Where does Ji Han Jae claim to have taught Dr Kimm

The only reference to Ji Han Jae in the bio:
Dr. Kimm was very appreciative of his advice and treated him as his teacher.

Dr Kimm was appreciative and treated him,Ji Han Jae, as his teacher,not because he was his teacher but because of the fatherly advice.

Was Dr Kimm promoted,to promote Kuk Sool Won and hapkido because of his YUDO Background and mixed Korean art training?

Dr. Kimm's training and ranking

According to his book Han Mu Do Self Defense For TAEKWONDO Instructors and Students (Andrew Jackson College Press: 1994), p.30, he has studied the following arts under the following teachers:
Yudo and Bi Sool - Song Kwang-sub and Yoon Yong-jo
Taekwondo - Kang Suh-jong (Kang Seo-Chong)
Hapkido - Won Kwang-wha and Ji Han-jae
Kuk Sool - Suh In Hyuk
Taik Kyun - Son Duk-ki
Kumdo - Cho Seung-yong
Ship Phal Gi - Kim Kwang-suk
Zen - Sung Soo Dae Sa

In the same book, on pages 486-488, he has copies of rank certificates and letters of appointment for:

1968 - Taekwon-Do Kuk Mu Kwan 5th dan from Presdient Kang Seo Chong (8th dan). The name listed on the certificate in Korean and English is Kim Hyung Suck (김형석), which is apparantly another name for Kimm He-young.

1988 - Korea Shin Moo Hapkido Association 9th dan from Grandmaster Han-Jae Ji

1994 - Letter of Appointment to "Grandmaster of Hanmudo" from the Korea Ki Do Association (Daehan Kido Hye) President In Sun Seo. The name in Korean is listed as "김형석" (Kim Hyung Suck) and the English name is listed as Kimm He-young.

-----

In his book Hapkido, there are two letters of recommendations on pp. 766-767 noting the following:

1990 - Master He-Young Kimm is addressed as 9th dan by "Chairman Ji Han-jae, 10th dan Korea Shin Moo Hapkido Association"

1991 - Master He-Young Kimm is addressed as an 8th dan in Kuk Sool by Chairman In Hyuk Suh, 10th dan World Kuksool Association.

check out this site (http://www.hapkidoforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=253) for a look at his bio (or his own site here (http://www.hanmudo.com/bio01.html))





I am interested as Dr Kimm is known as a Great researcher and writer,but he does have a view that tends to lend itself to the Korean First line in regards to Martial arts of the world,similarly to Kuk Sool Won and Hwarangdo.
(sorry everything did not originate in Korea,but if he owes everything to In Hyuk Suh I can see why he slants that way)

So again is it the TRUE,DEFINITIVE History of Hapkido or is it skewed?

Concerning the book, I think it's good. I've read a lot of really badly skewed history (on Hapkido) and I think this one really gives a pretty good overview of many people with -warts-and-all. There are some areas that are glossed over and some things not mentioned but for the most part, this is about the best overview/starting point I've seen for Hapkido history. I think you'd enjoy a copy a lot!

[JimH]

Dr Kimm has a 12 page Biography on his Hanmudo site and Never mentions Ji Han Jae,except in passing and as a friend and mentor.
Ji Han Jae ,along with In Hyuk Suh,wanted Dr Kimm to start his own organization.
In 1988 Ji Han Jae promoted Dr Kimm to 9th Degree,(he,Dr Kimm, had been promoted to 8th Dan by In Hyuk Suh).He,Dr Kimm ,was under In Hyuk Suh and the Kuk Sool Won organization from 1974-1987 when he decided to take In Hyuk Suh advice ,given to him ,Dr Kimm, in 1987,and start his own organization,which he started in 1989.

Again Dr Kimm had Minimal time with Won Kwang Wha and Zero time training with Ji Han Jae.
So we come back to where his hapkido training came from?

His rank prior to Ji Han Jae GIVING him a 9th Degree came from In Hyuk Suh and Kuk Sool Won,so is this his claim to Hapkido Lineage?

He was being refered to as a Hapkido Master in 1974 due to ranking from In Hyuk Suh,but his training up till then was YUDO and some variations of Korean arts.
Was he made a Master in Kuk Sool Won because of his Yudo?
Was Yudo close enough to Hapkido and Kuk Sool Won to Help In Hyuk Suh advance his Organization in the US?

Did Dr Kimm ever rank anyone in Sin Moo Hapkido prior to his 9th Dan from Ji Han Jae?

Dr Kimm ranked Master J R West when both were under Kuk Sool Won and later when Dr Kimm ran the HanMuDo Organization.

The History of Hapkido by Dr Kimm is a recent book and the History, I guess, has been changed to fit the need,his need to an extent.

My opinion.

[dortiz]

Jim, both started in Shin Moo kwan. G.M. West while in Vietnam and Dr. Kimm in Korea. That was long time, training and black belts promoted ago.

[Bruce W Sims]

Jim, both started in Shin Moo kwan. G.M. West while in Vietnam and Dr. Kimm in Korea. That was long time, training and black belts promoted ago.

I don't think anyone is questioning Dr. Kimm's vitae, Dave. I know that, for one, I am not, and I don't think Jim is either. Speaking for myself, what I think is coming under examination is the degree to which Dr. Kimm's many contributions to the Hapkido community may also carry overtones of self-service and self-promotion. For example, I don't hear anyone taking issue with the publication of Dr. Kimm's history. Personally I have waited quite a while for it. However, anyone who has been in the community for any length of time knows that to date, each and every history has been written so as to support or advocate for a particular historical position. Now lets add another factor which I think I hear Jim making.

Dr. Kimm has moved among a number of leaders and practitioners of Hapkido arts. At any given time he might have submitted to the authority of this or that person or art. In stead he elected to move-off in his own direction and begin a "new" tradition. Further, one could make an arguement that his progress through the ranks has been accelerated to serve some other purpose.

If you put my point together with Jim's point, the result I see is that Dr. Kimm, though highly regarded as a scholar and contributor, has done little more than what he reports other Hapkido leaders having done, which is to say that he has turned the Hapkido arts to serving himself and his own agenda. This is the VERY reason I wrote the two posts that I did about joining the KIDOHAE. For myself I am fearful that my membership might be turned to serving Dr. Kimm's agenda, rather than serving the best interests of the Hapkido arts. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[dortiz]

I cant say yes or no to that. Jim, who I also enjoy reading as his posts are quite excellent did start down that road. Your original post was far different from the second which had some very valid and well stated questions. I, nor you and Jim are perfect. We have all been blessed with being human. All I can go on is our fantastic track record of acting as such for the last umtieth years. Therefore forgiveness and respect is the most I look for.
Its fair to have questions and there are respectfull ways to present them and appropriate times and places.
I also think these folks as each generation have tried their best. Perfect, heck no. Good, yes. We have strong KMAS here now with great options to study. A host of different teachers with strengths and yes, some weakness but thats life.
I would be just as defensive for Ji, Myung or Pelligrini. Why because they have created something, they have promoted good students and further the art. Is one good for everyone, no. Thats OK. Maybe no one is good for anyone.
I dont see why its beat up on Dr Kimm because his book has some skewing. He wrote it. Just like all of our history it works that way. Your teachers books are also my favorite. In many ways the best resource out there. At the same time I am smart and respectfull enough to discount the cave story and to understand where it comes from. That does not ruin the resource and its value for me.
My ownership lies in being a better person/martial artist. Filtering, learning and teaching. This is all I can ask of an organization as well.
By the way, You, Jim and the others here all also add to many of our Martial Arts lives. That too is just as important.

Cheers,


Dave O.

[JimH]

My Point is as Mr Simms had said.
Thomas wrote that Dr Kimm has a Koreanized version of the history of Hapkido and all arts Korean,as the Koreans are the ones who have created these arts and had them stolen.

This is Koreanized History of the Martial arts in some organiztions.
In Hyuk Suh and the Lee Brothers were TRUE KOREAN NATIONALISTS,they did not want to accept any Japanese version of an art,so they recreated history.

My point is that Dr Kimm has spent his time,and owes much to In Hyuk Suh and Kuk Sool Won.

Kuk Sool Won and In Hyuk Suh ,as well as Hwarangdo and the Lee Brothers are all KOREANIZED arts with a self serving Koreanized History.

The Book as written by Dr Kimm was supposed to be the TRUE HISTORY of Hapkido,through Direct Research and conversations with people involved.

My Point is that in Hapkido Dr Kimm was given rank by Ji Han Jae,that is not disputed,Ji Han Jae has his organizations and his twists to Hapkido as taught to him,but he has not reinvented Korean History to sell his art.

Dr Kimm,I believe is a scholar and a Great recorder of Facts,but if he has begun his book citing rewritten History as made up by self serving members and organizations then the Book is flawed and Not a True History.

Again ,I bring up who ranked him and who he spent most of his time with, as ,to me,it points to In Hyuk Suh and Kuk Sool Won over anyone else.

If the book begins with a flawed concept at the opening and says this is true,when we know it is not,then how do we expect to believe what follows to be the truth.

That is my point and I used a paper trail to try and support my opinions as to who Dr Kimm owes the most to for his success and probably his new postition.
(In Hyuk Suh and the Kuk Sool Won Oragnization)

Dr Kimms ranks are not in dispute as they are verified
He has ranking in Hapkido and Kuk sool won from In Hyuk Suh up to 8th Degree.
He has the rank of 9th dan by Ji Han Jae in Hapkido.

He never worked to grow Sin Moo Hapkido or any other Hapkido oragnization outside of Kuk Sool Won and then His Hanmudo organization.

So,to me,he espouses the views of Kuk Sool Won and the Korean Nationalism as created by in Hyuk Suh and others.

To me this is then not a true historical account.

I hope I have clarified my point,as I thought in an early post I tried to point this same position out.

[Bruce W Sims]

I think there is also a degree of subtlety that needs to be regarded. IMHO the histories of LEE Joo Bang and SUH In Hyuk had rather "high-profile" constructions that were plainly self-serving. Kimm's book, where I find it skewed is far more nuanced. Its like looking at a image of Kimm on the cover of his BON KUK GOM BUP disk and realizing that he is holding a ssangsoodo which was not the chosen weapon of the Korean military. Most people would miss this, yet there it is "hiding in plain sight". In like manner, it did not dawn on me that the material in the book might be skewed to a particular effect until I read the part about RIM Jong Bae taking issue with CHANG Chin Il for mixing TKD and Judo into his CHOI-tradition material. Certainly such a recrimination would have been widely known in the community given the marketing Joe Sheya did but I have found no mention of it. Similar contentions are laid-out quite clearly for all to find, yet the matter of Kimm's relationships with others is noticeably understated. I have been motivated to reread the whole second half of the book with different eyes.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[dortiz]

I apologize for probably reading it wrong the first time and sincerely thank you for taking the time to re post. I think that reads as fair questions and concerns and is addressed in a very reasonable manor.

Cheers,

Dave O.

[JimH]

Dortiz,
No Problem,no apologies needed.

We are on here to have dialogue,talk about the art we all do and its variations have an exchange of ideas and hopefully our dialogue leads to a sort of friendship and understanding and allows people looking for info on the art to have a resource.

As I have said on here before,the written word is not an easy medium to communicate in as when we read we read it in tone that we think the writer intends.
So as I am not a Tom Clancy,my writing gets misinterpreted and I am Happy to TRY and clarify it.
Sometimes my clarifications need clarification,lol.

Speaking to each other verbally would be better but for now this form of communication is what we have.

All the best

[JimH]

Mr Simms,
As a former student of Chin Il Chang for about 10 months just before his return to Korea at the Death of Choi I am interested in the part which speaks of his integration of TKD and Judo into his Hapkido.

I never saw this integration as TKD was a seperate class from the Hapkido teachings and the throws were similar to ones I had done when I trained with Ik Jo Kang.

I am also suprised the that Choi had ,supposedly,according to Chin Il Chang,designated him as his successor and awarded him a 10th Dan to unite all Hapkido if he made such changes to his original learning.
As according to Chin Il Chang he was the Only live in student of Choi and you would assume he would have stayed truer to what was taught him as Lim and Rim seemed to have.

Does the book speak more on this or is there more written elsewhere on this integration of arts by Chin Il Chang?

[Bruce W Sims]

The problem is that the book tends to jump around quite a bit with some parts repeating themselves many times and other parts relating material only once.

I had the honor of being accepted to the YONG SUL KWAN in 2004 and so have a sensitivity to any mention of KIM Yun Sang. On one such occasion I turned a bit early and found a whole section on the matter of CHANG Chin Il and Kim Yun Sang and their respective promotions. (see: pgs 391 - 403). However this is not the only place such information is found. The particular bit I was citing in my previous post regarding observations made by RIM Jong Bae concerning CHANG Chin Il mixing Judo and TKD in his training can be found on pg 589.
In that paragraph the context is as follows in its entirety.

"...........
Choi Yong Sul appointed Chang Chin Il as his successor in 1985, but Rim did not agree with his teacher saying, "Chang Chin Il does not teach the same way in which I learned techniques from Choi Yong Sul. Chang Chin Il has a wrestling and Taekwondo background so he mixed Hapkido with these fighting arts." Rim wanted to teach in the same way that he learned from his teacher. On September 18, 1998, Rim Jong Bae announced to his students that he was forming an organization in order to preserve the purity of the art that was personally taught to him by Choi Yong Sul. This organization would be called "Rim's Hapkido Association". On March 23, 2002, Rim promoted Joe Sheya to 9th Dan Black Belt.
................" ( see: Kimm; "Rim, Jong Bae"; pg 589)

Does this help?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

'

[JimH]

Thank you for the post ,and your time in doing so Mr Simms.much appreciated.