Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Taekwondo

Issue to be Mediated

My assent to mediation is contingent upon clarification of issue to be mediated. My understanding is that mediation is for specific edit disagreements and not general personal opinions. JLL has been arguing that "TKD is repackaged karate" rather than focusing on the specific edits to the article that he's been making.

An example of this is his changing the subsection title "Foreign influences" to "Japanese and Chinese influences". Arguing the origin of TKD and claiming "TKD is repackaged karate" doesn't necessarily justify this edit.

To make this mediation most effective, I would like to ask that JLL's list the issues more specifically to his edit proposals. I don't think this mediation should be over our personal positions on the topic apart from specific edit disagreements although I'd like to hear an admin or someone else voice their opinion on this matter.melonbarmonster (talk) 20:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

---

• pls be CONCISE if you choose to add a summary of the dispute

Summary by JJL

The disagreement concerns material in the first three paragraphs of Taekwondo#Modern_Taekwondo in the now-current version of the article [1]. There's wide agreement that Tae Kwon Do (others might say modern Tae Kwon Do) emerged in the late 1940s in Korea following its liberation from Japanese occupation. There's wide agreement that Tae Kwon Do (TKD) is currently a clearly distinct art from Karate. The question is this: To what extent was TKD influenced by Japanese Karate, and to what extent was it influenced by Korean martial arts?

Here's the position I have produced sources to support, as stated by Steven D. Capener (Capener, Steven D., "Problems in the Identity and Philosophy of T'aegwondo and Their Historical Causes," Korea Journal, Winter 1995 [2]):

This process of development can be broadly outlined as follows: Japanese karate called

kongsudo or tangsudo was introduced to Korea just after liberation from Japan by Koreans who had learned karate in Japan. Upon returning, these Koreans opened karate gymnasiums promoting what they were teaching as karate, much like the process followed by the early Judo instructors. Well after these schools became established, the need to "Koreanize" was felt. The process of Koreanization consisted of three main aspects. The first was the selection of a new, non-Japanese name. The second was the creation of a system of techniques and training which was distinctly different from that of karate, and the third was the attempt to establish t'aegwondo's existence and

development within the historical flow of Korean civilization.

While attempting to escape the stigma of Japanese karate through the creation of a new

system of techniques based on competition, Korean t'aegwondo had already put itself in a quandary by asserting that its origin was rooted in traditional Korean martial arts such as subakhui or t'aekkyon. So while the nature of t'aegwondo was developing towards that of a martial sport of unique Korean creation and away from its Japanese nature of a martial art of self-defense, t'aegwondo leaders were unable or unwilling to

acknowledge t'aegwondo Japanese origins.

That is, TKD began as unadulterated Japanese Karate (mostly Shotokan). The indigenous Korean martial arts had largely died off through lack of interest in the latter 19th century and suppression in the first half of the 20th century. What little remained of these arts was practiced as a game, much as polo originated in cavalry training. But some Koreans had learned Karate and other Japanese martial arts and taught them. The rising tide of Korean nationalism and the concomitant anti-Japanese sentiment motivated Koreans to denigrate the Japanese origins, leading to a martial arts mythology wherein the origin of TKD is 2000 years old and purely Korean. This is a false but widely known martial arts legend.

What I'd like is for the page to state the history accurately: In the mid-to-late 1940s, some Koreans taught Karate in Korea, unmodified and by that name. For reasons of pro-Korean nationalism, it was intentionally modified by adding elements of Korean culture (including an emphasis on kicking, which was known to be a large part of many Korean martial arts from the bygone days), but little if anything was added directly from the largely extinct Korean martial arts. An emphasis on competition was also introduced. It's now a distinct martial art. JJL (talk) 21:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Summary by Manacpowers

like Omnedon's said,

   "Some other editors, myself included, felt that his edits went too far and produced a Japanese POV." 

I agree with him.

"Taekwondo rooted from Korean tekkyon. but grade system influenced by karate." this is my conclusion. and JJL said, largely extinct Korean martial arts? Korean do not have their own martial arts? it's a 100% nonsense word. He is a totally ignorant person. See Muyejebo, Muyedobotongji, Shippalgi etc. Manacpowers (talk) 07:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Summary by Omnedon

The present dispute started in late 2007 over JJL's edits which were designed to reduce what he described as Korean POV in describing the history of Taekwondo. Some other editors, myself included, felt that his edits went too far and produced a Japanese POV.

I have located some additional sources that support the idea that the truth is somewhere in the middle – that some of the developers of Taekwondo did indeed study karate (which hasn’t been disputed), but also that some of them studied subak, taekkyeon, and Chinese and Okinawan martial arts. One such source is a book by Doug Cook from 2006 entitled "Traditional Tae Kwon Do" (ISBN 978-1594390665) that includes 38 pages on Korean and Taekwondo history. I can and will provide quotes and references, but will not do so here, as this is intended to be a summary.

Some of JJL's statements are stronger than the documentation supports – for example, the idea that Taekwondo began as "unadulterated karate", which is simplistic. Then again, no one involved in this discussion has suggested that Taekwondo developed without any non-Korean influence whatsoever; and in any case there has long been a section in the article that referred to "foreign influence".

As I have done all along, I would suggest a more moderate statement along these lines: Taekwondo grew from, and was influenced by, other earlier Korean, Japanese and Chinese martial arts, which were variously studied by the men that developed Taekwondo into a Korean martial art. More detail would be needed, but I believe this statement is supportable and accurate. Omnedon (talk) 04:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)