Danger Dave:
Will there be (or is there) an English version of this book?
I don't know. I certainly hope so. But there isn't too much interest in the US about the historical origin of TKD. I mean, really, who cares? The answer is - no one, except obsessive compulsive types like me who does not like even the tiniest of misrepresenations (I'm a pain on eBay, let me tell you).
Matt Wallis:
Also in medieval (European) fighting, though empty hand wrestling on the battlefield was certainly a last resort, close in fighting with swords and daggers often involved a lot of wrestling/grappling.
That may be. Duels, in particular, may have involved some form of standup grappling WITH swords or, more likely, daggers. You can throw in things like wrestling and grappling if you like, but they were WITH weapons rather than WITHOUT ("hand to hand"). Furthermore, duels were ritualized competitions of manhood - something like sports - very dangerous no doubt, quite deadly often, but not quite the same thing as military arts dealing with battlefield combat. Again, the modern sense of "martial art" as an intensely personal safety activity is exactly that a modern sense. The notion that this modern view of "martial arts" and many of its spawns like Tae Kwon Do has anything to do with ancient (2,000 years!) or even medieval fighting systems are indeed laughable.
Don Gwinn:
What I don't understand is, if the Koreans had no ideas of their own about fighting, why did they choose the changes they made to Shotokan?
I don't know. I often heard a couple of reasons being bandied about by the Korean instructors themselves, namely:
1. To give TKD more of a "Korean" flavor, which unfortunatley meant more high-flying, high-kicking theatrics. One can see a similar situation with Hapkido in which Daito-Ryu Aiki-Jujutsu locking techniques were adapted, but usually performed with way too much theatrics for my taste.
2. More kicking because Koreans are taller than Japanese.
I personally buy the first one.
After all, TKD may be based on Karate, but just last night I was corrected for doing something "karate style" and the rationale for the difference explained to me.
Now this is interesting! What exactly was the stated rationale? How did you do a technique the "Karate" way?
kungfool:
I'm normally a very mild-mannered guy (yeah, righ!). I cannot stand B-S, period in any case. I do my homework when I am obsessed with somethings (like MA and guns, though they are marginally related to my profession). Unforutnately, both the martial arts industry and gun industry are PLAGUED, yes PLAGUED, by fraud and ignorance. Sometimes, when I happen to overhear a Dojo (or Dojang) or a gunstore conversation, it's like the blind leading the (gullible) blind. Sometimes it's the fraudulent and/or deluded (Frank Dux, anyone?) leading the blind.
So, I supposed the tone of my posts regarding things like those can be a bit, eh, short-tempered. Nonetheless, I recognize that my body of knowledge is microscopic in a large scheme of things, and I try to accept new information or correction as it becomes apparently to me.
Keep checking around and be skeptical. Caveat Emptor!
Skorzeny