David Peterson's new book on Wong Shun Leung

[Vajramusti]

Just got my hard cover copy.Expensive but well formatted, printed and bound with lots of eassys and pictures.
Look like a keeper. I might coment on it after I read it.

 

[guy b.]

Where is the book available?

 

[Tames D]

Is this the book? Probably not, since it was published in 2006.

Look Beyond the Pointing Finger: The Combat Philosophy of Wong Shun Leung
Jan 1, 2006
by David Peterson
Paperback
$34.95used & new(14 offers)
Hardcover
$45.00used & new(2 offers)
11

 

[Vajramusti]

Is this the book? Probably not, since it was published in 2006.

Look Beyond the Pointing Finger: The Combat Philosophy of Wong Shun Leung
Jan 1, 2006
by David Peterson
Paperback
$34.95used & new(14 offers)
Hardcover
$45.00used & new(2 offers)
11

No-this a newer and larger book with tons of pics and many essays.

 

[Danny T]

WSL Ving Tsun Kuen Hok - An Overview In The View Of Essay

Mui Fa Publishing proudly present world-renowned WSL Ving Tsun Kuen Hok teacher and author Sifu David Peterson's new book.
In this comprehensive and knowledge packed new book, Sifu Peterson offers a unique and detailed insight into the entire WSL Ving Tsun Kuen Hok method, exploring the forms, concepts, techniques, and drills as taught by the late Sifu Wong Shun Leung.


About the Book

WSL Ving Tsun Kuen Hok is the legacy of the late Sifu Wong Shun Leung, one of the most famous and formidable students of Ving Tsun (Wing Chun) Gung Fu patriarch, Grandmaster Ip Man. In the 1950s and 1960s, Wong Shun Leung almost single-handedly brought the fighting system of Ip Man to prominence in Hong Kong through his challenge matches, or Beimo, earning himself the nickname, Gong Sau Wong, the "King of Talking Hands", such was his prowess as a fighter. However, Wong Shun Leung was far more than just a "scrapper" with an unbeaten record. He was also a Ving Tsun scientist, philosopher, outstanding teacher, and creator of an approach to combat that is now recognized as one of the most simple, direct, and efficient fighting methods ever devised, Ving Tsun Kuen Hok (Ving Tsun Combat Science).


In this volume, Sifu David Peterson, author and student of the late Wong Shun Leung, presents a detailed overview of the entire WSL Ving Tsun Kuen Hok method in the form of individual essays that explore the forms, concepts, techniques, and drills that comprise the legacy of his teacher, as well as an exclusive look at the life of Sifu Wong Shun Leung and his teacher, Grandmaster Ip Man. The book also discusses the very important connection between Wong Shun Leung and the late Bruce Lee, to whom he was mentor, teacher, and friend.

Fully illustrated, in both colour and black-and-white, with never-before-published photos, along with an extensive appendix containing extra references for the reader, WSL Ving Tsun Kuen Hok: An Overview in the Form of Essays is a book that all practitioners of Ving Tsun, regardless of lineage or experience, should have in their reference collection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting is the statement that WSL was the:
"...creator of an approach to combat that is now recognized as one of the most... efficient fighting methods ever devised, Ving Tsun Kuen Hok (Ving Tsun Combat Science)"

This seems to imply WSL devised and created his own method?

 

[geezer]

Just got my hard cover copy.Expensive but well formatted, printed and bound with lots of eassys and pictures.
Look like a keeper. I might coment on it after I read it.

Joy, I'm really looking forward to your review after you finish reading it. Please keep us posted! --Steve

 

[geezer]

WSL Ving Tsun Kuen Hok - An Overview In The View Of Essay

Interesting is the statement that WSL was the:
"...creator of an approach to combat that is now recognized as one of the most... efficient fighting methods ever devised, Ving Tsun Kuen Hok (Ving Tsun Combat Science)"

This seems to imply WSL devised and created his own method?

I guess we'll have to read the book to get Peterson's take on that. But it wouldn't surprise me. WSL was a major figure in WC/VT. He's bound to have left his mark on the system as he practiced it and taught it. I'd like to hear what the WSL-VT guys around here think.

 

[Phobius]

Definitely interested in this review as well. My interest in WSLVT may stem from some discussions here and sounds like interesting read.

 

[LFJ]

"Creator of an approach to combat" sounds as if he invented VT, which is clearly not true and not something he ever claimed.

What he did "create" is the term "Ving Tsun Kuen Hok (Ving Tsun Combat Science)" to differentiate his line from others who are doing something else.

Whoever wrote the About the Book seems to have been confused about that.

 

[Phobius]

"Creator of an approach to combat" sounds as if he invented VT, which is clearly not true and not something he ever claimed.

What he did "create" is the term "Ving Tsun Kuen Hok (Ving Tsun Combat Science)" to differentiate his line from others who are doing something else.

Whoever wrote the About the Book seems to have been confused about that.

If you create a term to differentiate what you do from everyone else. That would mean you did create something else. As for inventing it, those are your words. Not David Peterson's I believe. Just because you create something does not mean you invented it, just that you used something to build something coherent or something that can be grasped.

EDIT: Just so noone misses the fact. That text is on the back side of the book cover. Any text written there is approved by David Peterson and his publisher.

 

[guy b.]

If you create a term to differentiate what you do from everyone else. That would mean you did create something else.

Not necessarily. It might also mean that you felt that others had changed or not grasped something about the original method, which you sought to preserve.

It might also mean that you just changed the name for no reason beyond marketing. Not that I believe that to be the case with WSL

 

[Phobius]

Not necessarily. It might also mean that you felt that others had changed or not grasped something about the original method, which you sought to preserve.

True, but lets play with the meaning. If WSL did not "create"/"change" something. Would it exist? The answer in this case seems to be no. Without WSL, there would be nothing similar to WSLVT today. As such it is his creation. (This I mean without discussing where it came from, purely meaning of the words)

It might also mean that you just changed the name for no reason beyond marketing. Not that I believe that to be the case with WSL

Seems as if David Peterson believes that WSL created something. I can't say more for sure without reading his book, but I am so interested in this and what information he has to share that I actually ordered the book prior to seeing a review.

 

[guy b.]

As such it is his creation.

Again not necessarily. It may just have been something that he preserved, created by someone else.

Seems as if David Peterson believes that WSL created something.

Enjoy the book by David Peterson

 

[LFJ]

True, but lets play with the meaning. If WSL did not "create"/"change" something. Would it exist? The answer in this case seems to be no. Without WSL, there would be nothing similar to WSLVT today. As such it is his creation. (This I mean without discussing where it came from, purely meaning of the words)

Play with the meaning? How 'bout, let's not.

"WSLVT" only tells us the lineage the system has been passed down through, not anything about who created it.

There not being anything similar to WSLVT today without WSL would just mean it would have died with YM.

The fact that there is this system today means WSL learned it and passed it on. So there is now WSL-PHB-VT or WSL-DMP-VT, for example. It only tells us the line of transmission.

Plus, I'm not even totally certain he came up with the name himself. It has been said that after his massive seminar in Beijing shortly before his death, participants found his teachings to be very scientific and started calling it "Ving Tsun Kuen Hok (Ving Tsun Combat Science)". The name stuck and China officially recognized it as such.

If that's the case, then he didn't create anything, not even the name.

There is an awful lot of hero worship in DP's speech and writings, with all the insistence upon an "unbeaten record" of 60-100+ blood matches and whatnot. It wouldn't surprise me if he thinks WSL was genius enough to create what actually took generations to develop.

WSL always claimed to have taught nothing more than what he learned from YM though, and that the system didn't need any changes although the BJ form may be open-ended. But that's it.

 

[Phobius]

WSL always claimed to have taught nothing more than what he learned from YM though, and that the system didn't need any changes although the BJ form may be open-ended. But that's it.

Since YM in your case changed the system to something else with time. The entire argument is void.

You are free to argue with David Peterson about his understandings being wrong and wording being incorrect. I did not know WSL and can not say what YM taught him, for the same reason I can find no proof what WSL would mean if he said he did not do any change whatsoever to any theory or practise or otherwise existing drill in WSLVT from what YM taught him.

I am sad to hear that however, it would mean WSLVT is not an evolution. I am a skeptic when it comes to traditionalists.

But once more, these are the words of DP, not mine. We don't need to argue over the sake that someone else claims something about a topic I do not know anything else about in detail and have no way of proving because evidence of it is non-existent at this time. I just wanted to say that people can create a system if it existed before but was lost in time, not all creations needs to be new or inventions, it just needs to not exist at the time of creation.

And adding a happy smiling face because this is not with hard feelins, just a sucker for definitions and pointing out the obvious.

 

[guy b.]

And adding a happy smiling face because this is not with hard feelins, just a sucker for definitions and pointing out the obvious

But what you have said about the name doesn't necessarily mean that WSL changed the system. In fact he said himself that he didn't. Therefore you have not pointed out something that leads to an inevitable conclusion either way.

You seem to want to believe that David Peterson means WSL changed VT when he says "Creator of an approach to combat" and that is up to you. I don't know what David Peterson means, not having read the book.

 

[guy b.]

It wouldn't surprise me if he thinks WSL was genius enough to create what actually took generations to develop.

WSL always claimed to have taught nothing more than what he learned from YM though, and that the system didn't need any changes although the BJ form may be open-ended. But that's it.

This is what I have always been told. It seems unlikely that WSL could have single handedly developed VT. But I guess it is one interpretation of the facts, however unlikely. I don't know what David Peterson believes.

 

[Phobius]

But what you have said about the name doesn't necessarily mean that WSL changed the system. In fact he said himself that he didn't. Therefore you have not pointed out something that leads to an inevitable conclusion either way.

You seem to want to believe that David Peterson means WSL changed VT when he says "Creator of an approach to combat" and that is up to you. I don't know what David Peterson means, not having read the book.

I never said that, I said he is doing something different to everyone else apparently. As such he created whatever it is he does. The idea might be from YM, might not. Have not seen evidence to support either claims.

Since there is no evidence the only thing we have is that WSLVT exist, it is not same as the rest and WSL created WSLVT. All other statements are unknown to us.

EDIT: It is not required that WSL changed the system, all it takes is that YM changed the system. Then WSL created a system based on the old ways. This is what I mean. No matter how we twist it the outcome is the same, WSL created something.

UNLESS YM never changed the system and always taught WSLVT and later all other students created brand new systems on their own. In that case WSL branded a system that was never needed to be branded and as such he created a trademarked system.

 

[LFJ]

lol. You're making very little sense with your "as such" deductions.

I think you know my take on how things in other lineages under YM came about. I think it's more than obvious, but anyway.

If I say 1+1=2, like my teacher taught me, but a bunch of other classmates leave saying it equals 3 instead, or that 1+3=2, that doesn't suddenly mean I came up with 1+1=2 on my own.

There is evidence that YM simplified some things in the system when he came to HK, yes, but created it himself? No. It developed over generations. WSL felt at this point it no longer has any apparent changes needing to be made to it. We imperfect humans have to use the system to improve ourselves.

There is quite a bit of evidence, in my opinion, that changing it in fundamental ways makes it less effective. So I'd be careful trying to be an evolutionist with something I'm not yet perfect in.

 

[guy b.]

I said he is doing something different to everyone else apparently. As such he created whatever it is he does. The idea might be from YM, might not.

If the idea came from YM, then YM or someone else created it, not WSL. Not really sure where you are going with this.

It is not required that WSL changed the system, all it takes is that YM changed the system. Then WSL created a system based on the old ways. This is what I mean. No matter how we twist it the outcome is the same, WSL created something.

Unless YM or another person(s) created it, in which case WSL didn't