The death of history in CMA

[Xue Sheng]

I don't want to crash any's party, but what's emerging here is very reminiscent of what has happened over the past decade and a half in Japanese and Korean MAs: the `practical bunkai' movement, which seeks to recover the effective fighting applications of the karate-based arts and the hard, street-oriented training methods that go along with those applications and methods of analysis, did not originate in Japan or Korea, but primarily in Great Britiain, Australia and, latterly, the U.S. I'm not sure how much traction that movement has in Japan or Korea even now. I've heard from people who've been that in Korea, TKD is almost entirely competitive in orientation, and that if you want street-smart TKD training, you're much better off looking in the UK, or in some of the more conservative kwan-lineage descendents in the States. In Asia, it's Competition City with these arts, with a few honorable exceptions such as Gennosuke Higaki....

There's a parallel here with the CMA situation described in the preceding posts, for sure.

Party crasher :miffer: :uhyeah:

This is true but it is my understanding that the people teaching in Japan at least know and are passing on the art (if only in form) and its history.

And are there teachers in Japan that know "practical bunkai" that are just not teaching it to anyone?

What is going on in CMA is that there are those that are highly skilled, highly knowledgeable and not teaching anyone for various reasons form they just plain don't want to through they can't get students that will train because it is too hard and/or not pretty. And the ones that are not so good that are younger and better at self promotion are doing the majority of the teaching and much of it is questionable and they, in some cases, know little or nothing about the real history of the arts they teach.

And they try and take advantage of everyone else’s lack of knowledge of Chinese history to promote what they do and, in my opinion; this is where a lot of the “CMA secrets” come from. They don’t know it so they don’t pass it on and say it is "a secret". Or they make something up that no one has seen and say it was a secret transmission. My Sifu has pointed out a couple of these in Yang Taiji recently but he told me and some of his other students, he is not likely to go out and write a book about it. And if he had no students he would have told no one.

TKD, it pains me to admit, I know little about the history of TKD and Korea outside of its interaction with China and Japan. But I do know TKD changed because what I trained many many years ago is somewhat different from what I see today but that was in the pre-Olympic days of TKD

 

[exile]

it is my understanding that the people teaching in Japan at least know and are passing on the art (if only in form) and its history....

What is going on in CMA is that there are those that are highly skilled, highly knowledgeable and not teaching anyone for various reasons form they just plain don't want to through they can't get students that will train because it is too hard and/or not pretty. And the ones that are not so good that are younger and better at self promotion are doing the majority of the teaching and much of it is questionable and they, in some cases, know little or nothing about the real history of the arts they teach.

I think China is in a kind of unique situation, because of the terrible damage that the Cultural Revolution did to Chinese traditional culture generally. There are in all likelihood still people who were permanently traumatized by the horrors of that period. In many of the Communist countries in Asia, martial arts were regarded with extreme hostility and suspicion (China was, I understand, a particularly bad case; Dakin Burdick in one of his articles on the emergence of modern TKD has some interesting, and appalling, observations about how this hostility played out in China). So the destruction of the ancient knowledge bases for the CMAs by massive governemental suppression adds a special edge to the problem of wushu replacing the traditional family arts....

 

[Xue Sheng]

I think China is in a kind of unique situation, because of the terrible damage that the Cultural Revolution did to Chinese traditional culture generally. There are in all likelihood still people who were permanently traumatized by the horrors of that period. In many of the Communist countries in Asia, martial arts were regarded with extreme hostility and suspicion (China was, I understand, a particularly bad case; Dakin Burdick in one of his articles on the emergence of modern TKD has some interesting, and appalling, observations about how this hostility played out in China). So the destruction of the ancient knowledge bases for the CMAs by massive governemental suppression adds a special edge to the problem of wushu replacing the traditional family arts....

They did kind of get a triple hit in the CMA area all within 70 years
1) Boxer rebellion
2) Japanese invasion
3) Cultural Revolution

 

[Steel Tiger]

I don't want to crash any's party, but what's emerging here is very reminiscent of what has happened over the past decade and a half in Japanese and Korean MAs: the `practical bunkai' movement, which seeks to recover the effective fighting applications of the karate-based arts and the hard, street-oriented training methods that go along with those applications and methods of analysis, did not originate in Japan or Korea, but primarily in Great Britiain, Australia and, latterly, the U.S. I'm not sure how much traction that movement has in Japan or Korea even now. I've heard from people who've been that in Korea, TKD is almost entirely competitive in orientation, and that if you want street-smart TKD training, you're much better off looking in the UK, or in some of the more conservative kwan-lineage descendents in the States. In Asia, it's Competition City with these arts, with a few honorable exceptions such as Gennosuke Higaki....

There's a parallel here with the CMA situation described in the preceding posts, for sure.

There is a genuine similarity between the CMAs and KMAs in this regard. Technical skills analysis is quite strong, especially in the US and Canada. There is also a great interest in the huge variation of styles. But there is also a big difference when it comes to retention of historical knowledge.

Technical analysis along the lines of the 'practical bunkai' movement has been bubbling along in the CMAs for some time. People like Adam Hsu and Yang Jwing Ming offer very good insights into the application of techniques (I have an excellent book by Dr Yang about qinna applications in Yang taiji, for example). The problem is, this transmission is not coming from China, and, as a result, some arts and styles will simply die out in their homeland, just like combative TKD in Korea it seems.

But more worrying to me is the death of martial art history in China. In this I see a big difference between China and Korea. The TKD powers are determined to manufacture an ancient lineage for their art and this keeps the thought of TKD,at least, history is people's minds. As a result, people are examining the history. It is usually to prove one perspective or another is correct, but it is still being examined. Like it or not, there is a single cohesive driving force keeping things fresh in people's minds.

China does not have that driving force, though it could have, and there are literally hundreds of individual histories. There is no need or desire in the holders of the knowledge to pass it on. As I said earlier, there is also the problem of some of these men not understanding that what they know, seemingly everday things, is of value and important.

China also has an invented history for the martial arts (Da Mo came from India, went to Shaolin, taught the monks, it spread from there) which is supported by the state and with which it seems happy. Its just part of that wierdness I have encountered with China - a desire for the ancient, but no real desire to know about it.

 

[pete]

if you are worried about the state of martial arts history in china, talk to professor kang ge wu (not only a professional historian, but a martial artist).

 

[grydth]

if you are worried about the state of martial arts history in china, talk to professor kang ge wu (not only a professional historian, but a martial artist).

You have sources way beyond anything I do..... what can you tell us about this scholar's opinions? Has he written and published anything on this or other MA subjects?

Grateful for anything you can provide.

 

[tshadowchaser]

I know most of these discussion has focused on what is happening in China today so I will only interject that some of the knowledgeable teachers may well have migrated to Europe or other places and be teaching in a small scale. Thoughts on this?

 

[Steel Tiger]

I know most of these discussion has focused on what is happening in China today so I will only interject that some of the knowledgeable teachers may well have migrated to Europe or other places and be teaching in a small scale. Thoughts on this?

This is what is going to save a lot of secondary or incidental knowledge in the CMAs along with the technical aspects of less well populated arts.

I don't know about you guys, but I am always fascinated by little stories of meetings between, or with, famous people, where someone acquired a piece of equipment, or why they decided to go to a particular place on a particular day. This is actual history, everyday, ordinary history, and it is valuable for knowing the people who were instrumental in developing our various arts. This is what is truly being loss at a rate approaching lightspeed.

 

[pete]

i still don't feel your pain. if you've got access to a teacher, who learned the history of the art from his teacher... well there you have it. if you choose to pass it on to students of your own, the cycle continues.

if you don't have such a teacher, many who do and care about their arts have written books: http://www.plumpub.com/sales/taichi_books.htm

read 'em.

history of martial arts has always been and always will be a rabbit hole, fact mixed with fiction, truth and legend, much like a fish story: you shoulda seen the one that got away.

 

[grydth]

i still don't feel your pain. if you've got access to a teacher, who learned the history of the art from his teacher... well there you have it. if you choose to pass it on to students of your own, the cycle continues.

if you don't have such a teacher, many who do and care about their arts have written books: http://www.plumpub.com/sales/taichi_books.htm

read 'em.

history of martial arts has always been and always will be a rabbit hole, fact mixed with fiction, truth and legend, much like a fish story: you shoulda seen the one that got away.

I'm not feeling pain, just disgust.

THIS is an appropriate response to a sincere request for information?

Keep your link; one with your attitude has nothing of value to teach.

 

[Kacey]

[playnice]Karen Cohn[/playnice]

 

[pete]

sorry for the directness, but i remain. i do not share neither the pain, loss or disgust being conveyed by many in this link. the arts that i study, and specifically the lineages and associated histories are discussed openly by my teachers and in some cases documented in books authored by them. I know the research that was involved in the publications, and respect the sincerity of these people for what they've done for their arts.

just because chicken-little said the sky was falling, didn't make it true. this thread is founded on INDIVIDUAL's PERSONAL EXPERIENCES AND OPINIONS... NOT FACT! once they are conveyed as FACT, that's where i will step in and provide MY OPINION, BASED ON MY EXPERIENCES.

if your opinions are limitted or constrained by your experiences, better to actually DO something about it... OR SUPPORT those that are. hence the link. take it or leave it. if you want further info on MY experiences and MY readings, PM me and i'll be happy to share. If not, have a nice day.

Just don't believe for a minute that your opinions are universally shared, and that those that disagree are mean and nasty. I am fortunate to have the quality of instruction provided by my teachers, and we should all be thankful for the depth of historical information available today in ENGLISH. I also recognize the level of committment and effort I've PUT INTO MY training in order to appreciate what I now have.

Jazz didn't die with Coltrane, Rock and Roll didn't die with Elvis.
Kenpo didn't die with Parker, Tai Chi won't die with the 4 diamonds...

Keepin' the Faith,
Pete.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

This thread was started with the topic being about the death of history in Chinese Martial Arts, yet it has only discussed three internal systems (Tai Chi, Xhing Yi and Bagua Chang).

There is no mention of other systems such as Hung Ga, Choy Li Fut, Hak Fu Mun, Foo Jow Pai or Baji Quan. Does this mean that there is no one here with experience in these systems, that there is no such problem with them or that they aren't considered by those who participate in this thread as Traditional?

 

[Steel Tiger]

There is no mention of other systems such as Hung Ga, Choy Li Fut, Hak Fu Mun, Foo Jow Pai or Baji Quan. Does this mean that there is no one here with experience in these systems, that there is no such problem with them or that they aren't considered by those who participate in this thread as Traditional?

Excellent questions!

I, too, would like to know what is happening with these other systems. I know that many southern arts have developed strongly outside China and I wonder if this has caused a drain which has left detrimentally effected the representation of those arts in China.

I hope we can get some more input from practitioners of those styles.

 

[grydth]

This thread was started with the topic being about the death of history in Chinese Martial Arts, yet it has only discussed three internal systems (Tai Chi, Xhing Yi and Bagua Chang).

There is no mention of other systems such as Hung Ga, Choy Li Fut, Hak Fu Mun, Foo Jow Pai or Baji Quan. Does this mean that there is no one here with experience in these systems, that there is no such problem with them or that they aren't considered by those who participate in this thread as Traditional?

I have no experience with these systems. Would be interested in anything you can provide, to include whether they are endangered.

 

[Xue Sheng]

This thread was started with the topic being about the death of history in Chinese Martial Arts, yet it has only discussed three internal systems (Tai Chi, Xhing Yi and Bagua Chang).

There is no mention of other systems such as Hung Ga, Choy Li Fut, Hak Fu Mun, Foo Jow Pai or Baji Quan. Does this mean that there is no one here with experience in these systems, that there is no such problem with them or that they aren't considered by those who participate in this thread as Traditional?

I would love to know more about these systems, but the only Southern System I ever trained was Wing Chun and that was not all that long. I have read a bit about it and I, so far can't find much verifiable history before Yip Man

I started this on Northern internal systems because that is what I train and know more about than any of the Southern Systems you mentioned. Also the original articles that I read that got me started were focusing mainly on INternal styles, mostly Bagua. I do have a book that I have read about Southern Systems but it is only one book and I am not sure how accurate it is.