"Old" does not have to mean "good", but "authenticity" bespeaks the test of time. The Chinese still use "Old Frame" (M. "LAO JIA") in Chen TCC despite those critics who hold that it serves no modern purpose. The same goes for any of the five boxing styles that comprise what is now identified as CHANG CHUAN (lit: "Long Fist"). I still practice the combat use of sword and stick in a society that rarely, if ever, uses either. The pivotal quality in your statement in the operational definition of the word "good". I will also go out on a branch and risk a "flame war" to state that "authenticity" must still mean something to someone. The word remains in any common dictionary, and the quality is still sought in practice. FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce
Authentic has another definition: obsolete. At one time what is now considered ancient, was cutting edge and the latest technology. That technology has become obsolete. Nazis and fanatics are looking for something authentic, which does not exist. Anybody peddling the "authentic" are either trying to manipulate an audience, not too smart, or just nuts. The word "authentic" is a marketing ploy. It sends the seller on a power trip. As in, "I have the one and only authentic version, and if I go, it goes." Ridiculous. Traditional is another story. You can practice traditional arts in modern day. You can't practice authentic anything. Just by trying, you're messing it up, adding your own interpretation. I'm not saying anything new, this is obvious stuff. Anybody who says they have the authentic goods, is a power tripping charlatan.
Gee and here is me thinking that there is a difference between a doctor whose training is "authentic" and one whose practice is contrived. I suppose we will have to advise law-makers here in the States that regulations about inpersonating law-enforcement officers, clery and lawyers are essentially mute since the concept of "authenticity" is a non-entity, yes? Are you quite sure that you are simply not understanding what constitutes "authenticity? Might you not be thoroughly familiar with what the concept involves? If a person requested to practice an "authentic" representation of what SUH In Hyuk has to teach would that then be "obsolete"? Is it possible that you are confusing "authentic" with "proprietary"? I also notice that you are using some pretty judgemental jargon such as "power trip" and "charlatan". Maybe its just me but it seems as though folks who have the most extreme criticism of things often don't provide their ages. Have you noticed that as well? Best Wishes, Bruce
The people you refer to are unlicensed. A professional does not claim to be practicing authentic medicine or law or anything else. Only power tripping, charlatans, looking for that warm and tingling feeling they get when, false power, derived from the word, "authentic", puts a twinkle in their audience's eyes. It's a manipulative, marketing ploy. Your stuff was never authentic. It changed the minute it rolled off the assembly line. It's truly comedic. Are you trying to assert your dominance here with size and age? That's weak. Have you ever notice that martial art "history" is an excuse for people who are drastically out of shape, to feel like they are still powerful, and on top of their game? Yes?
So, lets see all of the professionals who are dedicated to identifying authentic materials are all phonies is that what I'm hearing? The art professionals who validate authentic works of art as being the product of a particular artist are all charlatans, is that right? Or how about the Anthropologists and Sociologists who dedicate themselves to identifying practices and mores of indigenous peoples, am I to gather that they are simply involved in "marketing"? Hey, what about the scientists who determined that the ostuary supposedly belonging to "James the brother of Jesus, son of Joseph" was "in-authentic"? Do you suppose that they knew they were involved in some sort of grab for false power? My comment about age was a diplomatic way of conveying to you that you are beginning to embarrass yourself and that you might not have realized that you were even doing it. Mindless oppositional behavior for its own sake doesn't do much for the discussion, and honestly isn't of much interest to me. Regards.
Quick reply to this one Bruce, wrt black powder weapons, I have to be honest and say that use of modern propellants in balack powder weapons is not nice. From experience the weapon doesn't handle the same, and the resultant "mess" in the barrel comparde to the gun powder / black poder residues ..... suufice it to say if you are using blasck powder weapons use black powder, if you are using modern werapons use modern propellants. It just "feels" better, whether that is authenticity, or not, the weapons are designed to work with the technology of the day, and therefore probably the way I have experienced itwork better with what they are designed for. Therefore the authenticity of the drill and he musketry works, and the practioner in this case should be authentic (Not being authentic can lead to rather nasty experiences like blowing ones hands, dfingers or mouht off!!!!). Sorry to quote you in full Graeme, but I thought it worth doing so. I thing that this is a damned good post. I think we all practice what we do for the love of it, because the teachers we have teach it well, beacuse the other practitioners we come in contact with take our learning further, and the encouragement we get from our "community" of practitioners. With regard to the historical accuracy of what we do, I firmly believe that we need to know from where we have, so as to know to where we are going. Therefore there is a place for the authenticity aspect and the historical accuracy aspect. Why, because if we want to know why we are doing certain moves, or forms or cutrs, or wahtever, it is useful to know why those moves, cuts etc were "invented". It gives us an insight as to what we are trying to achieve in that move etc. Then we can try and do it better. It can also teach us the flaws in what we are doing. That doesn't mean we should stop what we are doing in KSW, it just means that there is a place for knowing what was there before. Therefore both have there place. If this makes sense. Quozl
Sorry for multi posting, but couldn't find this post when I was posting before. You are correct in your sumise Obewan, the documentation is pretty good, although it is still fragmented in the early years with different manuals identifying slightly different moves etc. However you point is well made. It is therefore quite difficult, if I read this correctly, to actually see original documents and "manuals" that detail the MAs in Korea. Therefore it is important for claims of authenticity of an art to have realiable provinance, and if this is mainly verbal, that provinance is difficult to prove. However, I presume that with much research and interview and dedication, this can be achieved. if oneh has the time, the inclination and the dedication to so do, and also has a love for the detail that this would entail. You also have the edge on me as I have yet to find the time, and have the pleasure of reading Barry Harmons books. I am interested in understanding the origins of the mechanisms of the arts, mainly as an accademic interest, but must admit to just wanting to master the current sylabus to the best of my ability.m (Authentic or not! lol)
just to and my 2 pennys in my 20+years in KSW i cant remember IHS saying KSW being authentic!!! i can remeber him saying KSW teaches traditional martial arts values
I think it's weird that you are even interested in my age. Take your own advice. You keep reaching for a meaning to the word authentic that works in your favor. It doesn't work in any of your examples. You're coming across as desperate. But, unfortunately for everyone, people like you are, scientifically, unable to see anything from anyone else's point of view. That's why you keep doing it. The problem is in your mind. Then again without people like you, no one would have to overcome anything. So, you do serve some sort of purpose. We should actually be thanking you. Thank you Bruce, for being you. Anthropology and Sociology are constantly evolving fields of study, they change their findings based on new research all the time. They admit when they are wrong, then they study why they were wrong. A scientist with personal bias and agenda tainting their findings, like yours against Kuk Sool practice, are kicked out of the research circle. Oh, that's right. You have been kicked out of MANY circles. I don't have a problem with poorly educated people. I don't even have a problem with a person who lives in a fantasy world, believing he's the keeper of Ancient, Hwarang Warrior protocol. There is science behind that anti-social behavior. And it is considered today, authentic. Authentic in present day, because there have been many discoveries that have built upon the findings of many researchers, over a couple of hundred of years. But combine poor education and fantasy-world, mental-issues, with the belief that you are a great martial artist, and teacher....is, at the very least, creepy. And you seem to be, scientifically, unable to process your own embarrassment. The mind is actually projecting it on to others. This, scientifically, prevents a person from learning anything. In the era that, it seems, your mind is stuck in, they didn't have access to much scientific research. One was simply put to death by someone that got fed up with the relentlessness of it all. It's not like that now, and that's authentic. We just have to put up with people, and realize that there is a scientific reason behind the way they are. We have advanced. Kuk Sool, in that regard, is an authentic art, with QUALITY masters. What I saw on the Yahoo video, is embarrassing. And after research gathered on this thread, it's a consensus. You know what consensus means? Do you know how important consensus is in the study of humans in Anthropological research? How important it is in the field of law, and medicine, sociology, and science? History is not a science. Your embarrassment doesn't deflect externally well, onto others. If you're an artist, you don't require a consensus. If you are an art critic, and you're any good, you do require consensus. And you, are not an artist and your critiques are prejudiced. But most of all, you refuse to answer Steve's intriguing, and yet so simple questions. A critique of yourself. And, finally, your use of the word authentic to market your swill, is bafoon- like. It's like an big ancient, extinct, Do-Do bird jumping and squawking. It's interesting from a anthropological, psychiatric, scientific pov, but so not enjoyable, and annoying as hell. Best Wishes, Trailblazer
OK OK. SO I got it wrong. Authernticity DOES exist but not, IMO, in the case of martial arts. If you dig up an ancient china plate and carbon date it to say 500 bc then you can say that it is an authentic relice of that era. That doesnt mean though that it would be a good idea to eat your dinner off it today! With MA though, when does it become "authentic"? Is it if you can prove the lineage back 50 years, 100 or 300 years? IS a MA MORE autherntic because you can trace its lineage? If you can trace it say, 500 years..where did those people learn it? MA has always been a changing art. One person learns from another and adds their own "take" on it. Someone else thinks about it and realises that although a technique works well on someone who is well built, but it may not be so good on a smaller or more flexible person and so the technique changes again. On several ocasions I have heard KSN himself say, when asked what the "correct" finish to a particular technique should be..."whatever"! Meaning IMO whatever is appropiate for the situation, depending how they fall etc. Bruce, what you call authentic, means to me keeping it the same as YOU were taught. I can well understand and respect a desire for this, particulalry when practising forms etc. ANd I truly respect you for wanting to keep YOUR practise as pure as possible. I think we all do the same thing in our way. But even here in this forum we hear about Masters "changing" a form when visiting for a second or third time. Do you not think that this happened hundreds of years ago? I am sure that it did. In which case, I ask again, "In relation to MA...what is authentic?" Perhaps the true answer to that question is nothing and everything.
maybe bruce just likes to debate, he debates quite a lot over a number of threads, in fact you could call him a mass debater:whistle:
First: You're lucky, Quozl, there's no penance necessary for "multi-posting." And you're right about the post by KSN GT. Double dittos. I think part of what you are saying here is exactly what Bruce was getting at, based on such manuals as the MYDBTJ. But considering how much Asian culture revered the oral tradition, it stymies me why Bruce has such adamant reluctance to allow any such info when discussing TKMA. Maybe we have to chalk it up to the fact that "professional" liars have made him somewhat skittish (once bitten, twice shy - syndrome). Oh, BTW, TB, you have me LMAO. (edit: good one, Matt)
OMG - been a while since i have been on there but that Vid make me laugh soooooooooo much. Sorry but i used to play sword games like that before i started Kuk sool. I need no instruction at all... but KSW sword forms take years of practice! My 2p.... going to go watch it again now.... so funny!
I think you should go back and watch it again. There are good cutting technique in those forms. Blade angle, speed in the cuts, follow through. To me it looks like a set of cutting forms designed to develope good cutting techniques. Just because it is different from what Kuk Sool has is no reason to make fun of it. more Later.
Thanks.... now I don't feel so bad about laughing at the "Look-I'm-an-airplane"-technique on the staff clip. But I suppose the real test of a pudding is in the tasting, yes? How about if we take the techniques demonstrated in the YMK clip and the form demonstrated in that KSW demo and see which one will actually cut a standard target? Let me save you some trouble. The sword-waving ditz in the demo will suddenly stop slapping his TO around like his hand is on fire and focus everything into a single, full-power cut. No rolling around on the floor or jumping in the air. He will assume a solid, stationary stance and perform a single cut with all of the focus, speed and power he can muster. Need a follow-up? You may want to rustle-up some old films of sugar cane harvest in Hawaii or Puerto Rico. Notice that years of experienced harvesting have produced measured and focused strokes. Nobody wildly lashes about or roles around on the ground or jumps through the air. Laugh? Tell me something. Do you folks actually think about what you write before you hit "enter"? Regards.
im not sure if im right i think the sword forms in ksw arent cutting forms but rather a controlled strike if you were to cut somthing with this sort of stroke you wouldent get very far if you were to follow through with a full stroke the out come would be different i think!!
Nobody lives in the past and can expect to survive. OTOH I also subscribe to a saying whose originator is lost to me at the moment. "A person who ignores his past will never understand the present and has no future." Putting that to one side, though, lets consider the matter of "oral traditions". Genealogy is a hobby of mine and often requires taking "oral traditions" from family members including aunts, cousins and siblings. I no longer take written notes as I learned early-on that stories vary even within the same family and even concerning the same event. Further, those events which may evoke embarrassment, anger, pain, shame or ???? are very often shaped-around to cast things in the most pleasant or acceptable light. Its just people being people. Where we run into problems is when supporters are expected to take an oral tradition in deference to documents. For example, not too many years ago I had an opportunity to examine the membership papers of the YONG SUL KWAN in Guemsan and was amazed to find quite a number of "highly ranked" personalities in the Hapkido community were not be found as students of CHOI Yong Sul. Hmmmmm.... what to believe, what to believe. Written documents or oral traditions? When it comes to Korean martial traditions there is admittedly scare resources. To me this makes it all the more important to use critical thinking regarding what we have. Oral traditions are a resource but only as far as they point in a direction. The rest is research. FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce
You have me there. I can't speak for KSW applications. What I can tell you is that the heritage of GEOM BEOP relies on "validation cutting" for each technique. Each technique intended as a cut or a thrust is expected to accomplish mastery over a target. This sort of "testing" is not required of KENDO/KUMDO practitioners as the biomechanics for hitting someone with a stick is very different from cutting through them. In like manner, GEOM BEOP practitioners do not "spar" as hitting people with sticks tends to develop the habit of encountering the other person's stick rather than seeking to cut him down or thrust through them. There is one other point that is worth commenting on. Korean soldiers are reported as having worn "paper armour" and this report has routinely been discounted as pure fantasy or a metphor for belief in the power of the Buddhist Sutras. Actually there is truth in this though we would probably call the material something more like heavy "paper mache'". A loose fitting shirt was sometimes worn over the material. I mention this to point out that a person striking out with a sword in the heat of battle is attempting to injure a moving, supple target which can strike back and whose body is sufficiently protected for all but dedicated strikes. The concept of casually inflicting serious damage to the Human body with a sword is nothing like what most modern MA have come to believe it to be. People who are interested in some rather intriguing research on this matter may wish to use the "search" function over on SWORD FORUM INTERNATIONAL. FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce
And some written documents/artifacts were completely forged to represent the exact OPPOSITE of the truth (Japanese "vandalizing" Mongolian steles as an example). So putting blind faith in "concrete" evidence may not always be the appropriate way to go. As stated previously, critical thinking needs to be employed, but the consensus may not always be the same for everyone.
As someone who has done western style fencing (but not kendo and the like) I can assure you that such "games" can teach bad habits if you concentrate only on the "sport" aspect. If focused on good training for "realistic" combat, then you reap what you sow. I'd like to discuss this further, as I have some unique insight into some of the details, but I need to take care of some business first and therefore will report back later.
