On Taekwondo's birthday (11th April) I posted a blogpost discussing the evolution of the very first movement in the very first Korean martial arts form/pattern; Hwarang Hyung. I teased that therewere more changes from the original version which the oldest documentation we have is from 1959, and that a few of these changes might surprise some. Well in this part we will jump ahead to movement 4 in Hwarang Hyung, what was in the 1965 version called the twin forearm block, or in Kukki Taekwondo terminology a momtong keumgang makki (double diamond block perhaps in english?). In the version of Hwarang that I learned this technique is done roughly the same as in Taebaek Poomsae but with the middle block portion of the technique turned outward, so the palm of your blocking hand is turned away from you, not pointed towards you like in Taebaek Poomsae. Was this the original way to do it? How is it done in modern ITF Chang Hon Ryu? I'll make use of the same sources as in Part 1, and I advice you to read that part first if you have not done so :-) Click here to read it
The modern Kukki TKD version of the technique:
A video says more than a thousand words. If you compare this with modern Shotokan Karate you will see that the Kukki Taekwondo version is a little more circular, and that it is really a case of Kukki Taekwondo doing two basic techniques at once, the face block or high section block (eulgul makki) and the middle section thumb side forearm outward block (momtong anpalmok bakkat makki). In Karate as well as older Korean descriptions is seems as if they start at the same point and then shoot more or less straight to their ending position which is identical to the ending position of Kukki Taekwondo version in the video above. My favorite practical application is the one Iain Abernethy often showcases where you move the opponents arm up to clear a way for an uppercut strike to the opponents chin or jaw. In fact the whole sequence in the Karate Hyung/Kata which served as a basis for the sequence in Hwarang and Taebaek could be said as a blueprint to get a strike to the opponents jaw no matter if the obstructive defending limb is high, middle or low. I am unsure when they solidified the Kukki Taekwondo method, but I can say that the first time I learned the move I did it pretty much as in Karate, but I originally learned Taekwondo using what I would label "Kwan-era mechanics". They were hammered out years later at Chosun University in Gwangju South Korea, but thats another story.
1980s Version of the movement (modern version):
To see how modern International Taekwon-Do Federation Chang Hon Ryu does the movement we can look to Choi Hong Hi's Encyclopedia volume X (or 10)
1965 Version (intermediate version?):
As usual in Choi Hong Hi's 1965 book (the first ever English language Taekwondo book) there is very little illustration and we have to rely on text:
"4. Execute twin forearm block while forming L.B. stance toward A." - Choi 1965 page 188
So here the text is open for interpretation. Personally when I learned this form, I turned and shifted my weight back into back stance without moving the front foot much, just adjusted the lenght so it was a proper back stance length. If only we had video of someone performing around 1965 to demonstrate how the form was done back then. Wait, we do have one from 1968 produced in Korea for the newly(ish) founded ITF, produced with the help and under the care of Choi Hong Hi himself. Below is a snippet which I have edited so it is played at 0.25 of the normal speed. It demonstrates the chamber of the block (here done more or less as in Karate), the hands moving more or less straight into the ending position as in Karate, but the arm for the middle block is turned outward (but that was also how the single technique was explained in the book from 65 when you looked at the basic technqiue). Note also how what is to become the front foot is merely adjusted here, there is no where near the same withdrawel of it back before moving forwards again as in the modern version. We already see that from the 1960s (the clip is from 1968) theres a lot that has changed when we arrive at the modern version in the 1980s. I do not have the 1972 book so I can not pinpoint where these major changes happened, but the evolution is pretty clear.
1959 Version (original version)
Now I have saved the best part (in my view) to the end :-) In 1959 Choi Hong Hi authored and published the first book ever on Taekwondo (like using the name taekwondo), but the book has never been translated into english, and relatively few have really looked into it as most are interested in the correct way of doing things today, not how it was done back then since that is outdated material. There was no change in technique 2 and 3 which were the same two middle section punches as it is today, which is why I skipped straight to movement 4. When reading books from this era they made a point of not including too many pictures and illustrations since that was both costly and time consuming, so the illustrations are there but not for each and every move. Well below is a picture with the text describing movement 4 in Korean. I will translate it but since I am not fluent I like to include the original text so others can check it and improve upon my translation and or correct any errors I might have done:
Quote from Choi Hong Hi's 1959 book on Taekwondo page 171 (original in the picture above):
"Turn your stance to point B and move into back stance and perform the same movement as Pyungahn i (2) dan 4th movement"
For a long time I thought that in Oh Do Kwan they pretty much retained the Japanese names for the forms. You see in Choi Hong Hi's 1965 english language book he is very consistent in calling the forms that came directly from Karate the Japanese names. Heian 1-5 is called Hei-An 1-5 and not Pyungahn or Pingan as you would see in Korean language books from different schools in the same era. The Karate Kata series Tekki in Japanese are called Tet-Ki and not Kima, Chulgi or Naebojin as you would see in other schools using Korean pronounciation. Han-Getsu in Choi's book is known in Shotokan as Hangetsu, while in Korea it is often translated into Ban Wol which is the name I learned the form under. Here he refers to the Karate form by the Korean name or pronounciation Pyungahn. I am left wondering if he intentionally made the names in his English book Japanese(ish) so that international students of Karate who wanted to change over to Taekwondo could easily recognize them?
I am sorry for that little tangent, lets go back to the technique itself. As you can see by the quote we will not get much wiser from that passage, it is time to check out what Choi says we should do in Pyungahn 2 movement 4.
Below is a picture with the appropriate original Korean text which I will loosely translate:
Quote from Choi Hong Hi's 1959 book page 149: "Movement 4 (Opposite of movement 1)"
Sorry for trolling you guys, but I laughed so hard when I read it because I have a bad sense of humour. But this also underlines the effect of having as few photographs as possible to save expenses and costs which I mentioned earlier in the post. Here instead of explaining and illustrating Hwarang movement 4 Choi directs us to Pyungahn 2 movement 4 which again directs us to Pyungahn movement 1 as movement 4 was ommitted because it was just reverse of movement 1. Below you will get a photo for movement 1 pyungahn 2 page 149:
I will try to translate it as good as I can, but I had a little trouble with this one so I am going to do it loosely, and I hope if I am mistaken someone will correct me. Allthough the illustration is quite clear if you zoom in.
The first line is giving me trouble. I believe he says you can also block with knifehand (Sudo) possibly thinking of the opening movement in pyungahn 4, but I am really not sure. Sudo is what he called knife hand, but my Korean is basic so take the whole first line with a grain of salt.
The next part from the number "2: The body faces point C (the front) and your gaze faces point A (left)" keeping in mind that this must be reversed for Hwarang Hyung move 4.
"3) Defend against a facial attack from point A with your left wrist and defend against the attack from point C with your right wrist, prepairing for the next attack."
As you can see from the illustration and the translated text we have a clos if not identical technique from Karate where the arms go more or less straight into the ending positions from the opposite hip. I do find it interesting that the hand which is in front is not turned with the palm facing you as in modern Kukki Taekwondo ending position, neither is it turned outward as in the 1965 onwards Chang Hon Ryu Taekwondo version, it is neutral, the pinky finger pointing away from the face. It is also higher than the ending position in modern Kukki Taekwondo, but given that Choi Hong Hi states that the purpose is to block or defend against a facial attack using your wrist it needs to be quite high.
Just for fun let us see Funakoshi founder of Shotokan Karate demonstrating the same movent from the same form in 1935:
Here we can clearly see the Karate influence. The ending position is pretty much identical to Choi Hong Hi's 1959 book and here the fornt arm is also "neutral". When people say that early Taekwondo was Karate we should not feel offended, because it really was just that in the beginning.
Ending remarks
Some people believe that the Chang Hon Ryu of forms were developed and stayed completly consistent from inception to modern day. This I think might be true in some cases, there are some changes in the forms I leared which follow the 1965 versions when compared to the modern encyclopedia but there are some who has no changes that I can see. There has been an evolution in how basic techniques were done, some are very minor and some are larger. If you stick to kick block punch applications they do not really matter at all. As long as they work for you they are good. The changes only matters when analysing the forms for more "indepth" (in lack of a better term) applications akin to those Iain Abernethy and many others have found within Karate Kata. Even looking at original intent of the Taekwondo forms this evolution is interesting, as we now have seen a fairly dramatic change in technique in both movement 1 and 4 (and spoiler move 5 as well when I get to it). Which version is better? None are, they are simply different like I said in part 1. The Dojang's master should stick to a standard, but which standard will depend on the Dojang's lineage and goals.
Here again I have the same feelings. When I first learned this movement (R. Chun MDK) early on I was always told that it was a combination high block and middle block. This always seemed a bit odd as it depended on a specific attack done in a very specific way. Later I just accepted it as a teaching methodology that allowed students to get the basic mechanics down. I have used it as the uppercut strike that you described, but I have to note that the palm facing inward final position strikes me as the actual middle block intention. You are blocking with both of the bones of forearm-like Ishin-ryu. The pronated/supinated positions seen in karate and tkd represent different techniques to me. (on to part three) richard conceicao
ReplyDeleteThanks that’s interesting :-) I haven’t had much info on isshin Ryu, it’s not a common style here in Norway. Always happy to read your insights :-)
Delete