Structure of Wing Chun

[Nobody Important]

Wing Chun, collectively, is a fragmented, dysfunctional collection of various lineages when it comes to agreement on just about every aspect of the art. From topics of concept, principle, theory etc. One aspect though that I think most will agree on is that Wing Chun is different to many arts stemming from the same geographical area.

One thing I find of great interest though is the physical structure of the art. The techniques, theory, principles and strategies of Wing Chun are IMO not unique and parallels can be found in many southern TCMA's. Where Wing Chun uniquely stands out, IMO, is in its physical structure and how these concepts, theories, principles & strategies, though found in other systems, transform to become something uniquely Wing Chun.

Could the true origins of Wing Chun be founded not on the theories, concepts, principles & strategy (indeed all important) but rather on the unique framework / structure of the art? IMO it is the one aspect of the art that sets it apart from all others. Your thoughts?

 

[anerlich]

You would need to expand on what you mean by the "unique framework / structure" of the art for me to be able to respond. Don't see what you're getting at.

 

[Nobody Important]

You would need to expand on what you mean by the "unique framework / structure" of the art for me to be able to respond. Don't see what you're getting at.

Many southern CMA's that utilize "Narrow Horse & Short Bridge" use a hunched body posture, generally referred to as "Crane Front, Turtle Back" which generally relies on using the spine as the main motor & waist as augmentation for power generation, not all do this but the vast majority do. This could be a reliance on "Animal Flavor" methods of contraction & extension. Most Wing Chun (I say most because some branches deviate once beyond SNT, like some of the Chi Sim & Vietnamese branches) is more about focus on proper posture and mechanics of human movement & not animal imitation IMO. Much like Tai Chi structure is different than most northern CMA's. Unlike Tai Chi though, that draws from older northern methods where some correlation can be seen. Wing Chun really has no source material which it can be compared to, with the possible exception of Yongchun White Crane, but even with the similarities here as far as body structure, there will be much contention.

 

[anerlich]

Some histories have it that the WC developers discarded the older base of animal imitation and based WC on human biomechanics. "Proper posture" is contestable IMO - there are variations amongst lineages on the basic stance for one thing, and some to me look somewhat removed from "proper posture".

 

[Nobody Important]

Some histories have it that the WC developers discarded the older base of animal imitation and based WC on human biomechanics. "Proper posture" is contestable IMO - there are variations amongst lineages on the basic stance for one thing, and some to me look somewhat removed from "proper posture".

Thank you for the reply, it's appreciated. I can see where you are coming from, especially concerning the Goat Stance. There is a lot of contention concerning it's proper formation and volumes have been discussed concerning it. Best IMO, to ignore that subject for now, no matter how relevant to the topic and focus on human bio mechanics as compared to other CMA's.

I am familiar with the story of how the creators chose to focus on strictly "human" mechanics as compared to "animal imitation". I wonder why this wasn't implemented into other arts or do some believe it was & that's perhaps where we get "variations".

It's just that it seems to me, that the posture & mechanics of said posture are what sets Wing Chun apart & not necessarily the other stuff like techniques or strategy.

Generally when I see southern TCMA performed I can tell if it's Wing Chun or Wing Chun based because it has a distinct signature, different to that of arts like Mantis, 5 Ancestors, Pak Mei etc.

 

[KPM]

If we go with the theory that both Wing Chun and Weng Chun started out very closely related and derived from an early form of White Crane, we can then propose a divergent development/evolution. First realize that my own Weng Chun sifu does not believe in a White Crane origin for Weng Chun. He sticks to the idea that Weng Chun developed from a refinement/distillation of the 5 animals style of Siu Lum. But regardless......if we follow the above theory out......as Wing Chun legend suggests, its possible that one very early branch of this "proto-Wing/Weng Chun was combined with a snake element. I can see a "snake aspect" in a lot of Wing Chun (especially the mainland branches) that I don't see in Weng Chun. I think part of this may be the rather "narrow" structures in Wing Chun....elbows in, very straight lines, use of angles, etc. On the other hand, the people in the Weng Chun lineages always seem to have had a connection with Hung Kuen....to the point that Chu Chong Man in later generations actually added Hung Kuen forms to his Weng Chun. So this kept Weng Chun more aligned with the other southern TCMA's but still with very similar techniques and strategies to Wing Chun.

So yes, I tend to agree that it is the core biomechanics that set Wing Chun (or any martial art) apart, rather than specific techniques or strategies or tactics. It is possible that early proto-Wing Chun, once influenced by a "snake" art or something similar that affected this core biomechanic, then just continued to develop along these lines.

 

[Juany118]

Some histories have it that the WC developers discarded the older base of animal imitation and based WC on human biomechanics. "Proper posture" is contestable IMO - there are variations amongst lineages on the basic stance for one thing, and some to me look somewhat removed from "proper posture".

As much as they look different though, most of them have the same result when it comes to how your centerline/pivot point etc supports attack and defense. I have come to refer to it as "visual semantics". /Shrug

 

[Vajramusti]

Wing Chun, collectively, is a fragmented, dysfunctional collection of various lineages when it comes to agreement on just about every aspect of the art. From topics of concept, principle, theory etc. One aspect though that I think most will agree on is that Wing Chun is different to many arts stemming from the same geographical area.

One thing I find of great interest though is the physical structure of the art. The techniques, theory, principles and strategies of Wing Chun are IMO not unique and parallels can be found in many southern TCMA's. Where Wing Chun uniquely stands out, IMO, is in its physical structure and how these concepts, theories, principles & strategies, though found in other systems, transform to become something uniquely Wing Chun.

Could the true origins of Wing Chun be founded not on the theories, concepts, principles & strategy (indeed all important) but rather on the unique framework / structure of the art? IMO it is the one aspect of the art that sets it apart from all others. Your thoughts?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing chun is unique and is different from other arts- southern or northern. The existence of many versions of wing chun confuses many people. Good wing chun may well be dying-given the proliferation of so many versions. Ip Man was fairly wealthy in his youth- and taught a few people and kept sharpening his skills.
When the fled the mainland his finances were gone. So he started teaching for money in Hong Kong.
There two ways of learning 1. large classes usually taught by/with an assistant 2.expensive private lessons.
People drop his name readily- but very few people stayed long with private lessons.Only about 4 persons learned the knives from him. Three of them are dead.

 

[wckf92]

Only about 4 persons learned the knives from him. Three of them are dead.

Care to share who these people are? I'd be interested to know. Thanks.

 

[geezer]

One aspect though that I think most will agree on is that Wing Chun is different to many arts stemming from the same geographical area. ...Your thoughts?

My thoughts? You really want my thoughts on this statement???

I have been trying not to share my thoughts on this, but the frustration has been building and, quite frankly, if I don't let it out and speak my mind, I might just blow up!

First, and I don't care what linguists have to say about regional dialects, Wing Chun is not different to other arts. It is different from those other arts. Brexit or not, get your terms of comparison straight, you limey son of a gun. I don't care if you invented the English language, you don't have the right to butcher it. It's similar to and different from. Got that?

And while I'm on the subject, my fellow Yanks, you don't get a free pass either. I've had it with the way the younger crowd have been butchering our lovely colonial accents with "upspeak" (rising inflection at the end of a statement as though it were a question), "vocal fry" (that gravily voiced affectation adopted by so many young women these days) and especially that annoying Silicon Valley geek habit of responding to questions by starting their answers with the word so (have you listened to almost any guest "expert" on NPR lately?). I tell you it's got to stop NOW.

As for your observations on Wing Chun ...most interesting. Please carry on.

 

[Juany118]

My thoughts? You really want my thoughts on this statement???

I have been trying not to share my thoughts on this, but the frustration has been building and, quite frankly, if I don't let it out and speak my mind, I might just blow up!

First, and I don't care what linguists have to say about regional dialects, Wing Chun is not different to other arts. It is different from those other arts. Brexit or not, get your terms of comparison straight, you limey son of a gun. I don't care if you invented the English language, you don't have the right to butcher it. It's similar to and different from. Got that?

And while I'm on the subject, my fellow Yanks, you don't get a free pass either. I've had it with the way the younger crowd have been butchering our lovely colonial accents with "upspeak" (rising inflection at the end of a statement as though it were a question), "vocal fry" (that gravily voiced affectation adopted by so many young women these days) and especially that annoying Silicon Valley geek habit of responding to questions by starting their answers with the word so (have you listened to almost any guest "expert" on NPR lately?). I tell you it's got to stop NOW.

As for your observations on Wing Chun ...most interesting. Please carry on.

I wish there was a <3 emoji for the "like section"

 

[Nobody Important]

I've had it with the way the younger crowd has been butchering our lovely colonial accents

See what I did there, lol!

 

[geezer]

See what I did there, lol!

Yeah, you bolded my correct usage of the third person singular to agree with my subject, the crowd. As in "the crowd has a mind of it's own". It is a single entity. And if that ain't right, I don't wanna hear about it. 'Specially from nobody important. Now if Tez were to correct me, I'd shut up and behave. That lady scares me a little!

 

[Phobius]

I've had it with the way the younger crowd have been butchering our lovely colonial accents

I've had it with the way the younger crowd has been butchering our lovely colonial accents

See what I did there, lol!

Yeah, you bolded my correct usage of the third person singular to agree with my subject, the crowd. As in "the crowd has a mind of it's own". It is a single entity. And if that ain't right, I don't wanna hear about it. 'Specially from nobody important. Now if Tez were to correct me, I'd shut up and behave. That lady scares me a little!

I guess it is age, but you yourself stated it was not right. Given age does give you the right to disagree with yourself. Just telling yourself you don't want to hear it and calling yourself nobody important is rather offensive to yourself. I think we should be nicer on the forum.