Projecting modern training experience backwards in time is a real problem...

One of the major things holding a good understanding of our modern Taekwondo system back is a lack of understanding of its foundations. There are many reasons for this, some are born out of the national need of a newly liberated Korea to differentiate themselves from Japan, and tweak the history of a largely Japanese shaped practice into something Korean. This is something we can understand, appreciate and show empathy towards, if we look into newer Korean history and the Japanese Occupation. 

Another big problem is people projecting modern training experiences and assumptions based upon modern martial arts backwards through time and applying that to earlier less standardized systems. This goes both for people projecting modern experience within Taekwondo or Korean MA and modern experiences in related systems, i.e Karate and project that back into the 1940s. 

The first group gives rise to people saying stuff like: 

• "I was never taught any grappling in Taekwondo, so it does not exist"
• "All Kwan were the same"
• "There was no vital point knowledge in Korean MA"

The second group likewise give rise to myths and misconceptions.

• "Modern JKA Karate has no Bunkai, so there was no Bunkai in the 1930s and 40s"
• "Modern JKA Karate has no grappling, at least I never learned any, so Koreans did not learn any from Funakoshi".
• "I trained Karate and I learned how to use my hip when blocking in a different way than how modern Taekwondo does it, so Koreans must have changed it."

and the list goes on. 

The problem with this is the underlying assumptions

• Modern JKA Shotokan Karate = Funakoshi 1930s and 40s Karate. (it is not)
• Differences in technique or forms performance = Korean innovation (sometimes yes, sometimes no)

I want to be extremely specific in this post, but this is just one single little thing (there is a whole ocean of others out there), so let us take a look at a technique which is very similar between modern Karate and Taekwondo in its ending position, but the chambers are so distinct that in modern discussions we are often labelling the techniques chambers into: Taekwondo Chamber and Karate Chamber. I am talking about the Knife hand guarding block, where one hand is in front blocking with the knife hand and the other arms knife hand is placed in front of the solar plexus. In Poomsae we see it in the first movement of Taegeuk Sa Jang, in Changheon-Ryu we see it in Dan-Gun Hyeong/ Tul, and in Karate we see it in the end of Heian Shodan/Pinan Nidan and in the Kwan era we see it in the end of Pyeongahn Chodan. 

The Hyper-specific example technique

Knife Hand Guarding Block

Above you can see a young me doing a rendition of the technique, or rather the end position. So the end position is the same, how do we get there? 

Karate Chamber

Karate Chamber for the block

In the Karate Chamber we have one hand extended, and one hand which will perform the block near the opposite ear. There might be a detail or two slightly off seeing as I do not actually have a black belt in Karate, but this is more than close enough as an example. The extended arm will pull back so that the knife hand is placed in the area of the solar plexus, while the other will perform the block itself, being shot forward into its final position. 

Taekwondo Chamber

Taekwondo Chamber for the block

In the Taekwondo Chamber both hands are first moved back and behind as you can see in the illustration above, before both being moved forward into position for the block itself. 

The assumption

The assumptions I listed earlier states that modern JKA Shotokan Karate is the same and identical Karate as the Karate Funakoshi taught in the 1930s and 1940s. So now that we see two distinct ways of doing one technique it is tempting to conclude that Koreans who did not know anything about the system they learned just changed it so that it was no longer identical to the parent art (Shotokan). 

Being interested in practical applications to my forms you have no idea how much virtual ink I have seen spilled in belittling Korean MA who chamber this technique differently and that you have to adopt the Karate Chamber to start using it. (Full disclaimer: I teach both and use both). The thing is, which I have alluded to, is that we are seeing two different branches growing from one trunk that have in modern times standardized the arts in slightly different directions, both stemming from the same "trunk".

The messy reality

Funakoshi taught (or at least his Karate contained) BOTH VERSIONS! 

When I say this I inevitably get comments such as: Well actually I trained Karate for many years, and you are mistaken. Which I usually counter with: "wow you look so good for someone who has been alive long enough to study Karate in Japan in the 1930s and 40s"..... Luckily we do not actually need to take my word for this. There is ample evidence of this fact because we have footage from early on showcasing this. 

Recently I came across a great example in the ending of Bassai Dai Kata (Balsaek in Korean) which I have always felt had a remnant of the "Taekwondo" chamber at the very end, but which in modern JKA they re-chamber to conform to the modern standard. Those who have trained Shotokan Karate will instantly know exactly what technique I am referring to. 

Well I found a clip from one of Funakoshi´s students; Kiyoshu Togawa who started training in 1947, which is juuuuuuust after most Korean Kwan founders would have returned to Korea to start establishing schools, but close enough in time to do the form in a manner that reflects better what the Kwan founders would have learned than modern JKA Karate would. 

As you can see Master Togawa first does a knife hand block with "karate chamber", then steps to the side, does a "taekwondo chamber" on the last knife hand guarding block. This is the very end of Bassai Dai. Now if you were to look at a more recent video you would see the same preperation, but just as the last knife hand guarding block is done, they re-chamber so they use the Karate Chamber instead. 

I posted this very video on my facebook, and got for the most part positive feedback. But I also got comments and DMs such as:

"That chamber is used in that particular move of Funakoshi’s Bassai Dai only. It is a mistake to assume that Funakoshi taught both ways of chambers in his Karate. I practiced Karate before Taekwondo and i never did that chamber except in that particular move of Bassai Dai only."

The irony is that this and DMs like this are doing exactly what the post was warning against, projecting modern experience in a modern standardized system backwards in time to an earlier and less standardized system. But the commenter did have a point, the last move of Bassai Dai is very distinct, but knowing that there are a lot more examples out there of earlier footage I spent 1 minute searching and found one. Unfortunately (or naturally) the video is very grainy due to the footage age. It is taken from a VHS that had "Vintage Shotokan Training" in it. I blieve we are looking at late 1940s or something, it is very early footage. Some even claim 1920s, but I am a bit skeptical of that claim. 

As you can see below we are looking at a very different form, and a different practitioner, at a different time. This time we see the very end of what WE call Pyeongahn Chodan (I do not know if the footage is taken before or after the name change of Pinan to Heian or the switching of the teaching order of the first two forms, so for ease of reference I will be using the Korean names). 

The initial 270 degree turn into knife hand guarding block is a perfect match for what we today call "Taekwondo Chamber", yet we see this done in "Shotokan Karate", just not a modern standardized version. The other knife hand guarding blocks done here is done in a very Shuri-te Okinawan Karate manner, which is like the Taekwondo Chamber in that both hands move back and then forward, but less pronounced as in modern «Taekwondo Chamber». What we do notnsee here is the modern  "Karate Chamber" where one arm is extended forward prior to the block. 

So we have Bassai Dai example from a student who started training in 1947 doing a "Taekwondo Chamber", we have another student who does a different form doing the "Taekwondo Chamber". Is this conclusive evidence of both methods being taught? 

They say all good things comes in threes, so I picked another example of the block being done. This time in a clearly different setting, on the beach. The footage is likely from summer training and there is a group of students performing what we call Pyeongahn Yidan. As we know after the initial 6 counts, we do a kick to the rear and then perform 3 knife hand guarding blocks. So instead of one form example, we know have 3 different settings and 3 different forms, by 3 different people (well a whole group in this last example). 

The video pans, so if you fix your gaze to the man in the dark shorts at the very left in the start of the clip and focus on him it is easy to make out the chambers etc. Then you can watch the clip multiple times and see that theres a whole beach of people practicing the "Taekwondo Chamber" in early Shotokan. 

I am not stating that one chamber is better than the other, like I said, I teach and use both. So did Funakoshi. It is in more recent times when there was a greater emphasis on standardisation and uniformity that we ended up with different chambers in different related systems. For some reason in Korea they ended up standardizing one version, while in Japan the standardized the other.

We do not know if this footage reflect how all of Funakoshi’s students did it, nor do we know how widespread it was, or if both methods were taught equally or if one was preferred over the other. What we can extrapolate from all these examples is that both methods did exist in earlier renditions of what would later become codified into Shotokan Karate, but in modern standardisation only the «Karate chamber» is used in the Shotokan Style. 

In some Kwan (like in the Ji Do Kwan as evidenced by Sihak Henry Cho´s documentation of both methods in his 1968 book) both chambers were used. I was going to include photos but I am hesitant seeing as it is still under copyright. Anyone who has it or the reprint can turn to page 98 and see it from themselves however. First he demonstrates the «Karate chamber» Block in natural stance, then he demonstrates the «Taekwondo Chamber» version in back stance. 

It is just as easy to project modern Taekwondo practices backward into Kwan-era Taekwondo and end up with misconceptions too, as in projecting modern Karate practice backwards in time. It is therefore important that when we do research we actually do research and not just study modern systems and project backward in time. If we could do the latter life would indeed be a lot easier, but for me, I want to know how things actually were in the actual time period. So I need to look to a lot of different sources to piece things together. Sihak Henry Cho demonstrating both versions in his 1968 book tells us that early Taekwondo was aware of both methods too, so both versions made it on to Korea. 

In the end we could say that the labels «Karate chamber» and «Taekwondo chamber» are helpful distinctions between them, but it is a modern label applied to something originally existing in both Okinawa, Japan and Korea.