View Full Version : Complete History Of Hung Gar!!
06-17-2000, 06:53 AM
We all know that Hung gar has a long colourfull history, full of legends and folk heros. Its one of the most famous and widely practicsed chinese style in and out of asia.
It has been subject to many movies, books, magazines etc.. However there are many missconceptions and very little facts about its long history. I have heard many different stories about the history of hung gar and its legendary masters, some very similar to each other some different.
I like to find out what u think or know about its history, including its masters and their stories, any facts etc - starting from the burning of siu lum (shaolin) temple to present day. I know this is not an easy task but any info will be greatly appreciated and we may all learn something new or different.
06-17-2000, 09:28 AM
Yes, very colorful history indeed...
Shaw Bros movies have done a lot to popularize the old masters and kung fu history, but many times they have totally distorted the truth. Good example is "Wong Fei Hung and Luk Ah Choy" (also released as Challenge of the Masters).
One thing that really shocked me is that after the temple was burned and the fighters were being hunted down, some of their training changed. The horse stance was shortened to only 14 inches wide, almost like a wing chun or yee jee ma stance. It wasn't until years later when they were on the red boats that they went back to the full stance.
06-18-2000, 02:52 AM
Thats kung fu movies for you. They are made to entertaine, so historical facts and stories are changed to please the audience.
I also heard about the shortened horse stance, but dont know for sure if this is a fact or just another story. Its a shame for a such well known style that there isnt much written evidence about its history or many facts. Most of Hung Gar history was passed down master to student verbaly or word of mouth by public. This being the case there are not many historical evidences about the history of hung gar. I have done alot of research(still going on) and heard many different stories.
I just like to hear your(anyone on this forum) info and maybe shed some light on the topic. Any info or comment would be great.
06-18-2000, 03:42 AM
The thing about the horse stance is from an article on the history of hung gar, Hong Kong Chinese Martial Arts Association (HKCMAA) Yearbook, 1974 edition (I think it was that year). I think the author of the article was a historian from Guangzhou.
Keep in mind the aims of training were a little different at that time. They didn't use the horse stance for meditational and qigong purposes like some people do. The article mentioned that it came back into favor because of Leung Kwan, and because of their time on the Red Boats.
There is evidence on the history of hung gar, it's just not as clear or as accurate as we would like it.
The name hung gar was only used while they were being hunted down. Years later when it all settled down, the style went back to being called southern shaolin (nam kuen, lin nam kuen sut, etc.). These are the names that LSW calls his style, but he does make one or two allusions to "hung kuen" and "hung ga" in his books. When was that, around 1912?
Only recently did they start to call it hung gar again. My guess is that this came about because of the advent of performance wushu. Maybe the kung fu community didnt want southern shaolin (hung gar) confused with the wushu form, nam kuen (nanquan).
06-18-2000, 06:41 PM
Nice info Paul, Thanks
I havent seen that artical in the HKCMAA year book. I would be intrested to hear what else it said about hung gar.
Like u say there are evidence on the history of hung gar, but not very clear. I think some has changed certain facts and tell stories slightly different to promote their lineage of Hung Gar and for other reasons . However i am not concrened with the politics side of the art. i just want to gather as much info as i can about hung gar, its history, masters, theory etc...I dont care how different the stories are,Right now i just want to know what they are.
07-03-2000, 07:24 PM
An interesting note about Wong Fei Hung and his portrayal by Jet Li in the Once Upon A Time In China films. They always show him as having a hard time with women in the films, when in fact the real Wong Fei Hung had four wives, if memory serves.
arrrrgggggggggghhhhhhh... grrrrrrrr <PLOP>
07-03-2000, 08:31 PM
Yes you are right about real life Wong Fei Hung had 4 wives.
About films, they are there to entertain the audience. Like i said befor They are made to entertaine, so historical facts and stories are changed to please the audience.
For example in one of the Once Up on a time in china series, cant remember which one, you see Wong Fei Hungs character played by Jet Li gets into a fight in a theater. The fight in the theater actually took place in real life; if I remember right it was Lok Sin Theater in Canton. At the time the fight broke out Wong Fei Hung was nowhere near it. It was Lam Sai Wing, top student of Wong fei Hung, who was trapped in the theater and had to fight his way out.
I am sure you all know this anyway.
[This message has been edited by blade (edited 07-04-2000).]
Je Lei Sifu
07-03-2000, 11:13 PM
Just a little fyi. Lam Sai Wing was not Wong Fei Hung's top student, but he is probably the most recognised.
Wong Fei Hung's top student was Leung Foon.
Unfortunately, Leung Foon Died at a young age and I not sure if he had any students at all.
Leung Foon use to visit the local ***** houses and supposed to have died from and STD.
Je Lei Sifu http://188.8.131.52/forum/roundtable/cool.gif
07-04-2000, 09:19 AM
Yes, Hung style has had it's share of good guys, and good guys who did bad things. I asked my sifu about Leung Foon, he recalled that he died young, but didnt remember the exact cause. There are a few other hung gar masters who got into trouble like that.
Another amazingly good master was Wong Fei Hung's son. Apparently, he was one of his best. After he was killed by gangsters, Wong Fei Hung refused to train any of his children in martial arts. WFH does have a grandson who teaches in HK, I think his name is Wong So, and I think he may have learned from his grandmother, Mok Gwai Lan.
With that famous theatre incident, there were also Tang Fung, and his younger brother as well (can't remember his name right now).
Je Lei Sifu
07-06-2000, 08:26 AM
Tang Fung younger brother name was Tang Yee (cantonese) Tang Er (mandarin)
Je Lei Sifu http://184.108.40.206/forum/roundtable/cool.gif
Peace to you.
11-29-2000, 07:11 AM
Man, this is really a sore spot with me. I am just sooo sick of people saying that Hung Ga uses low stances to maintain balance because of the red boats. If this were so, then how come wing chun doesn't use low stances? Why does Chen Style Taiji use low stances?Eagle Claw? Wah Lum? Bot Gwa? More boats? Not to mention that Hung-red, and Hung meaning great (Surname of the first emperor of the ming dynasty)There are many other styles that utilze low stances none of which came from boats.Oh, and btw, has anyone ever seen an opera boat? They are huge! Do you think that they never docked and these guys were practicing gung-fu while the boat is pitching and rolling in the high seas? (I am picturing Charlie Chaplin in a cheong salm)And How come all the opera doesn't use low stances, HUH? WELLL? Low stances develop POWER, lots of it, it trains the entire body to generate power, it is needed to perform some of Hung ga's takedowns,which when infighting, the practitioner suddenly drops down to perform the takedown.The sinking and floating movements utilize the dropping of the entire body. (whew! thanx, guys I just had to vent. I feel much better now (sigh) /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
11-29-2000, 10:31 AM
Actually I heard that Leung Foon used to fight alot in the streets and got killed that way. But Im not sure tho.
Je Lei Sifu
11-29-2000, 06:23 PM
The story I was told of Leung Foon's death, was that he enjoyed visiting the brothels and died of and STD.
How true it is, I don't know.
Je Lei Sifu /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
The Southern Fist Subdues The Fierce Mountain Tiger
11-29-2000, 09:45 PM
to wombat jet li sucked as wong fei hung for the simple fact is that he showed know hung gar techniques and that ****ed me i think donnie yen would have played a better wong fei hung if you seen iron monkey then yoiu know what i'm talking about. of as for the history of hung gar
try my site:
oh and to paul. your knowlegde of kung fu amazes me at times
Je Lei Sifu
11-30-2000, 05:33 AM
My personal opion to who would be the best to play WFH in the Once Apon A Time in China series, would have be Hu Jianqiang. He play in the Siu Lum Tze, Children from Siu Lum and Buht Nam Siu Lum movies along with Lei Lin Gi (Jet Li). Is Nan Quan is Awesome.
Je Lei Sifu /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
The Southern Fist Subdues The Fierce Mountain Tiger
11-30-2000, 04:37 PM
I'm glad that somebody finally agrees with me that Jet Li sucks as Wong Fei-Hung because he never used any Hung Gar at all in his OUATIC movies! His "No Shadow Kick" is a joke! By the way, have you heard of "New Legend of Shaolin"? Jet Li screws up in that one, too. He plays Hung Hei-Goon, the supposed founder of Hung Gar (although I'm not quite sure, having read about the monk Gee Sim and all), in that movie. Guess what? No Hung Gar usage at all!!! That's kind of stupid to portray the founder of a certain martial arts style and not use it at all in the movie about him. /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
11-30-2000, 09:36 PM
your right jet sucked in that to the only reason like the movie is because of the little kids they steal they the show right from under jets nose just like th donnie yen did in ouatic2. instead of hung gar i see tai chi and wu shu what the hell is that to all the jet fans ya man sucks. and he can't even fight yuen wo ping makes him look good in all his movies but what happen in lethal weapon 4 and in the horrible romeo must die he sucked and so did his skill.
Well, as far as I know, Jet Li has studied modern wushu at Dengfeng Wushu academy as one of those "shaolin" monks that tour around giving demonstratios and showing their faces on Eurosport every once in a while. No wonder he does not know much Hung Gar.
*The dragon reveals himself only to vanish*
Jet Li was never a touring monk! Where the hell do you people get this stuff?!
12-02-2000, 03:36 AM
I thought he studied in beijing under Wu Bin.
12-06-2000, 09:29 PM
Illusionfist is right. Jet Li was (and is) the most famous student of Wu Bin in the early seventies. Wu Bin being the founder of the Beijing Wushu Institute and current vice-chairman of the International Wushu Federation (IWUF).
I met him personally a couple of times at important championships, and he also visited a friend of mine two times. This friend is a wellknown grandmaster in wushu and is director of a branch of the Beijing Wushu Institute.
But lets talk history. The best text on Hung Gar still has been written by Ng Ho. 'When the Legends Die' in 'A Study of the Hong Kong Martial Arts Film'. This book was published in Hong Kong in 1980 as Programm of the Fourth Hong Kong Urban Council. Ng Ho being an associate professor in the Department of Cinema and Television Production
at Hong Kong Baptist University.
The text is both in English and Chinese. Some wellknown masters of Hung Gar stated to me that this text is of a high (scientific) standard. The bibliography names 11 books written in Chinese.
I got my copy from Kwan Tak Hing, the great Wong Fei Hong performer.
12-07-2000, 09:05 AM
That is very interesting. Many people (me included) would like to read such a book. I suppose it's long out of print and unavailable?
Is it long? How many pages?
Charris has some pics and text from this book on his site, just wondering.
12-07-2000, 12:18 PM
Subitai wrote: "That is very interesting. Many people (me included) would like to read such a book. I suppose it's long out of print and unavailable?
Is it long? How many pages?"
The book is out of print. The article, including a short biography on Wong Fei Hong runs over 26 pages (in English). It describes the history from Shaolin Temple to Hung Gar.
But you can read the part on our ancestors:
<A HREF="http://www.ehga.org/eng/masters.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.ehga.org/eng/masters.html</A>
The part on the link by South Paw is however not the original text. It's based, rewritten, edited, things added. Especially hte text on LAm SAi Wing. In the chapter by Ng Ho in the Hong Kong Kun g Fu Movie Book (don't know the exact title right now, will have to look it up) is NOT spoken about LAm SAi Wing at all. Also the composer has written that LSW is a member of hte ChingMO, however there's no source that proofs that (and the Lam family says it isn't true)
I will give a better description of the book/chapter soon and will think about "offering scans at my website".
12-09-2000, 10:35 PM
"The article, including a short biography on Wong Fei Hung", is what I stated. Not mentioning Lam Sai Wing, because he is of a later date.
In the piece on the father of Wong Fei Hung it runs: "He passes his skills to his son Huang Fei-Hong, who in turn taught several disciples including Lin Shirong (=Lam Sai Wing), Gui Jiaoqi and Liang Kuan".
The exact title I already gave at one of my former replies.
It was presented by the Urban Council (of Hong Kong). The date of the 4th Hong Kong International Film Festival was April 3 - 18, 1980, and held in the City Hall.
12-10-2000, 10:21 AM
one book does not constitute a historically held view to be absorbed and accepted. one voice in the wind being heard by many does not make it a foundation.
there are other writtings on hung gar kuen and in particular there are those of importance in the mainland, that are also accepted by martial historians, written in the early and mid part of the 1900's.
these books, in some areas agree with what has been written in ng ho's book, while other parts of the text are in conflict.
in particular the birth and death of fei hung.
in general a nice read, but not the definative text to be held within the confines of prooven evidence.
12-10-2000, 09:04 PM
It's not the definitive work on Hung Gar, Ng Ho not being a martial arts historian.
But it is one of the better texts in English available.
Bean Curd, you wrote that in particular the birth and death of fei hung are in conflict with other writings on Hung Gar Kuen. Can you be more specific on this?
12-11-2000, 07:29 AM
if i remember correctly ng ho's book gives fei hungs' birth and death as about 77 yrs passing away around the mid 20's.
most of the text that i have read, state that fei hung was born in 1850 with a question mark on his death, but then in the text it is usually stated, "he had a good life,and died peacefully"
"the age of his death was 80 yrs!!"
simple maths born 1850 died 1930's.
the reason for the question mark on fei hungs' death, from what i have been told and also found out, is that due to tradition a year is put on to the death, and also remember that in tradition also the birth is one year old before they are actually out of the womb.
i can go on but would take up too much writing, hope this is suffice
Hi Bean Curd (again),
There are lots of texts that indicate WFH died in 1924.
Only (as far as I know) the Frank Yee clan uses the 1930. And since they have written many texts in Inside KF, it's indeed mentioned in many texts.
If it's truth is another question.
I've been told the reason they use 1930 is that there is a picture in the WFH Museum which might have WFH on it. (note: might be; it's not sure it's him, but he looks like WFH). This picture should have been made 1930, indicating that WFH waas still alive at that time. However it seems the date of the picture isn't that sure either.
(Perhaps somebody of Frank Yee lineage can tell us more about this)
As far as I know all Chinese text say 1924 though, I've never heard (can't read Chinese myself) they say 1930 too.
(Can anyone who can read Chinese tell something about this?)
12-11-2000, 01:49 PM
Bean Curd wrote:"i can go on but would take up too much writing, hope this is suffice"
Well it ain't. You have to do better than this. Also Ng Ho interviewed Mok Kwei Lan. She could not help him with more specific biographic notes, but she surely knew her husbands date of birth and death: born 1847, died 1924.
These dates were also checked by LCF and he agreed with it.
12-12-2000, 08:59 AM
first off, lets make something perfectly clear from the outset, a simple statement although very true, no one knows the exact time of death of fei hung.
to that end, all words and opinion is purely that.
what i was bring to this conversation was the awarness that there are differing views and opinions on this matter, as well as many others.
to hear one side of a story, and not diverse, will cause key hole logic, and become a blinded statement, given to being believed yet not verified.
patrick, here alone you have a key hole view, especially when you say "as far as i know, only the yee clan gives this date", the operative words my friend is "as far as i know", well i can make you aware now that there is most defiently chinese written text out there, that gives the same date as that given by the yee clan (as you have put it, and i must say, a very disrepectful comment to use the word clan in this text).
you also say "you have been told", well i have seen and read so lets not talk symantics please, don't be told, go and see it and read it, maybe you need to learn how to read chinese, it will help, many of the great books are not translated into other languages, which is a very disappionting situation, and hopefully one day will be rectified.
south paw, oh please, what is this by saying "it ain't", you have used only one book and by your own admission stated ng ho is not and was not an authoritarian on chinese martial history.
so logic would alone dictate that to use such as source is not of a concrete basis.
as for mok gwai lan, i have been told and have also read that after wong fei hungs death, she came back to hong kong very close after his death, she returned to hong kong in the 1930's.
to that end she came back with 3 of there children and lived in glochester rd. wan chai.
it is also known that one of the legacies she brought back with here was the jimo cern dao, and perpetuated wong fei hungs life by ensuring she taught many students.
as for lcf, i will say nothing on this matter as much as i will say anything on yee chi wai.
the disrespect and total disregard for the art lately has been totally disgusting, and i will not bring personalities in to this, due to what has been happening lately.
i am more than sure you both understand this reasoning, both men are great artists and it serves no purpose to bring personalities into this
Hi Bean Curd,
For sure I didn't want to bring up a dirty discussion.
With "have heard" etc. I already indicated taht I 've only heard a little about Frank Yee's research. I hoped that somebody of his lineage could tell me more about their research. That's interesting and worth reading/hearing. I was absolutely not trying to start a "war".
As for the Chinese text with 1930. Could you send me some scans of these texts, and tell me where the 1930 is written. Then I can see myself; I do know some Chinese characters and with the help of a Chinese dictionary, I will manage to see/read myself.
As for Ng Ho's text. Ng Ho's text is partly based on the legendary stories (books like "Heroes of the South" and "Stoies of Southern Siulam")
So it's not pure facts. However he did try to research and check the facts. So I assume his info on Wong Fei Hung is pretty trustworthy, although one never can be 100% sure.
As for not getting personal. Why did you quote and "twist our words into being something bad"? Isn't that personal to? ;)
Discussions are great - this is a DISCUSSION GROUP; they just shouldn't be insulting though.
As for discussing the HISTORY, why shouldn't we ask and try to find out the truth? (Or phylosopicaly: get closer to the truth, since the truth is something relative)
If we all would agree, there would absolutely be NO use for a discussion group. Would be very boring: one person posting something and then 20 replies "I agree".
12-12-2000, 06:21 PM
HA! Just wanted to get on my soap box that it's great that everyone shares their version of the hung gar history that they are taught. Just check the "I'm right, you are wrong" attitude at the keyboard.
Site sources and let the readers decide.
<off soap box>
12-12-2000, 08:33 PM
patrick, first off, i don't get personal ;) i read a text, view it, pick up on the wording and go from there.
can't get personal, i don't know you.
i will say it again, i am not here to make anyone agree or disagree with me, not interested in that, however, to use ng ho's book as the basis of historical fact, one has to be careful.
from what you are saying patrick, you know ng ho's background also, this is not to put doubt on ng ho's character, but others may see what was tranpiring as a martial fact, from a reliable source and this is not the whole case.
ng ho's book has been picked up by some sites on hung gar, and it has been used as a verified text, which again it is not.
as for the text there is a small piece coming your way, it isn't long, so shouldn't take you much time if any to read, and again this is another view point, no more, no less.
hi hasayfu, i have read some of your posts, does the "i'm right your wrong attitude" include you?
12-12-2000, 08:42 PM
Bean Curd wrote: 'does the "i'm right your wrong attitude" include you?'
Of course, I'm right and you're wrong
Hey, I learn a lot on this forum (in between the bickering). I hope I add to it too.
Hi Bean Curd,
Illusion fist sent me two little scans. Thanks.
Now I can't say anymore "I have never heard ..." ;)
Secondly what is "personal"? You address me by my name, quote me. Isn't that getting personal.
It's really hard to say what's personal. Everybody has another definition.
I think we however both mean the same in the end; that some discussion went way over the edge lately.
As for Hasayfu. He's right though. If we don't have any discussions at all, nobody would come here. (Just like people love to watch soaps on TV)
That also brings us to the folllowing. There are people who believe soap is real etc. Same counts for all the stories/claims/legends that are told here in the discusion group, on websites, in books and magazines.
So we shouldn't take anything for granted, not just only the book of Ng Ho. If you have a look at my website, you can see my comments on the history of Hungga. Here I do warn the reader they should not take everything for granted/not see everything as a fact.
We can't know everything and know what's true. The "truth" was that the earth was flat for a long time. So here we can see that the truth is somthing relative only, since now the earth is round.
I don't believe South Paw was claiming Ng Ho's text was the ultimate source either. He just said it is the best book he has ever seen.
Here I agree with him. Ng Ho doesn't claim to have the truth, but he certainly does his best to give his sources.
I also think it's one of the better texts. (but do realise its limits)
It are however other people that can't make the difference between "legend" and "fact" who make Ng Ho's book to more than it is. There are several websites using my site and the site of the EHGA as a source, and combine the info to something factual. EVen at a site it's said that Lok Ah Choi did Northern Flower Style. The person who wrote that saw either my or the EHGA site and read Lok AC did Flower Style. He read somewhere else that Flower style is a wellknown a northern system. However he did not know there's a southern Fa Kuen system too, and it would be more logically LAC did this Southern system. However it's only guessing and we don't evn know for sure LAC really learned FLower system.
Actually we do not even know if Hung Hsi Kwan really did Hung Kuen (or the same Siu lam style as LOk Ah Choi.)
If you have a look at the Bubishi Fong Wing Chun and the book "Essentials of Chinese Wushu" is the creator of Fujian Crane Styles, and Hung Hsi Kwan was just a person who taught her some tiger techniques. So they have about he same legend as we, only just the opposite person.
So I think this shows how questionable the history of Hungga is, just like the "Wingchun history is fake". (see the posting on that)
That brings me to my last point of this posting. It's good we discuss about the history of Hungga; this way we can find out the truth. And we should, because I think it's sad that we can not even say when WFH was born exactly.
If the next generation will have the same about LSW and who his students were, we haven't made any progression in all that time. Then a beginner of Hungga will still first learn the "Hung Hsi Kwan story", than the story that's told in his own lineage and later will encounter other stories, that have grown much furhter apart in time then they are now. There might not be only be a discussion on who was the teacher of Chiu Kao etc., but also about who your teacher was, who was mine, etc.
So it's better to discuss now, than have much more trouble later. The discussions however can be in better, not-insulting way.
If you consider the fact that Hungga United is made mainly by two persons of different lineages, it's possible. (I'm is of the Chiu lineage, the other of the Lam lineage. And we have occasionally help form other lineages
We do have opposite stories, but seem to find a solution everytime or just accept we can not judge what's the truth and take both stories)
So I think others can do the same; discus to learn more and be friends anyway to make Hungga strong.
12-15-2000, 05:15 AM
There is also a theory about Luk Ah Choy being a manchu and doing the lama system. So theres another stick that just got thrown in the spokes.
12-15-2000, 09:10 AM
It must not all be AMEN & PEACE.
We Hung Gar brothers know about the emotions. Let's laugh, weep, groan, shout or sing when we read the postings on this forum. We all know that this will benefit us.
[This message was edited by South Paw on 12-16-00 at 01:19 AM.]
Here are two scans of Ng Ho's text proofing that Ng Ho doesn't claim to have the truth.
Next one. (I hope it works.)
12-15-2000, 02:51 PM
partick, no probs, like illusionfist stated, i only had two small pieces sent to you, which where relevent to the conversation, to bring awarness, that there is most definetly writtings of differing dates of birth and death of wong fei hung.
to finish off on some points on your last post.
regarding the "personnal", if we where sitting with each other having this discussion, i would address you directly, since this is not possable by this means, the only alternitive is to use, name, words and pointers, i don't see this as being personal, just directional in the way i wished the converstation to go.
discussions - i don't understand why you have made this a point, the reason i brought up the conversation in the first place was to discuss an alternitive too what was being discussed, and of late with ng ho's book, was and is beig seen as the be all and end all of hung kuen history, which i will state it is not.
sites - here in lays the issue, the responsability of controling and owning a site is to enhance the information that is being read, it is not enough to write information, with quotations that the following text is of varying opinion, this is obvious by the words you have used alone, with the confusion that has been caused by people reading your web site, and not understanding the way the information was being presented to them.
as for south paw, (and no this is not personal, this is observational ), in the first thread on this subject, to support ng ho's book and also south paws statement the following was written,
"the text is both in english and chinese. some well known masters of hung gar stated to me that this text is of a high (scientific) standard. the bibliography names 11 books written in chinese.
to finish off, the foundation of the importance of this book as a historical heavy weight, south paw states , "i got my copy from kwan tak hing"
i will not go further into this, however i don't see how you can state what you have, with the words used by south paw, to that end i am sure he can answer for him/her self most admirably, however this is not my intention, only to bring to your attention, why i brought up the interjection of the conversation at the time.
as i had stated on numerious occasions on this matter on this thread, my only intention was to bring to the fore, that the dates currently being used, are in accordane with the ng ho book, and ill informed people are believing this to be correct, when it is not.
to clarify the small sections that where sent to you, the person who wrote the text, was a student of lam tsai wing, and he never left guangdong province and lived in canton all his life.
on this matter enough has been said for know.
>> ng ho's book, was and is beig seen as the be all and end all of hung kuen history <<
Do people see it that way? Most people don't have the text of Ng Ho, only a few masters, who got a copy of the Ng Ho text from my sifu.
So how can they? Or is it just your opinion that NG Ho's text isn't that good? And is it your opinion that we overrate the text?
When the two scans I posted show up, everybody can read that Ng Ho warns/tells that most of it is legendary and cannot be checked.
So therefore I do not understand why you critisize the text of Ng Ho.
As for the book being one of the best. Hey, I also think Dragon Ball Z (martial arts cartoon/comic) is one of the best TV-programms. Doesn't mean that it is real though.
Perhaps you read all the info very different than I do, like everybody reads it their way.
>> this is obvious by the words you have used alone, with the confusion that has been caused by people reading your web site, and not understanding the way the information was being presented to them <<<
As for the texts on my website. Well everybody can read the "warning" notes. If they do not read them and use the info as facts on their own website, am I to blame?
Should we all take warnings on all our pages, just like a packages of cigarettes has?;) And since there are stil people smoke (and start smoking), there will always be people who take everything they hear/read as a fact.
Many people just want to read it as facts. That's their choice. You can however not say that the websites using NG HO are to blame.
How about the info on your website/you tell to your students (i.e. your LINEAGE).
Are it all facts and do you warn your student you might not be right?
See, it doesn't work that way.
Last about my website. I do try to take up different stories. You might have seen that.
So I will add a note to WFH's dates that other sources say 1850 - 1930.
Lastly for all others here. If you want scans of the text, email me at email@example.com , with "NG HO TEXT" in the subject line. Then I wil send you a link of Hungga Archives. This is the still to be opened download section of Hungga United, where you can download several original articles, starting probably next week.
[This message was edited by Patrick Chiu on 12-16-00 at 09:56 AM.]
12-15-2000, 07:41 PM
Bean Curd wrote: "to finish off, the foundation of the importance of this book as a historical heavy weight, south paw states, 'i got my copy from kwan tak hing'."
Kwan Tak Hing found this book of great importance
because he plays a major part in it. He gave it to me as a present.
There is a complete fistset shown of him and more important he started in all those Wong Fei Hung films playing the leadrole. A lot of these films were also shown at the film festival in Hong Kong.
Besides there are biographical notes on Kwan Tak Hing, as well as actors like Bruce Lee, Jacky Chan, Samo Hung, Shek Kien, Lau Kar Keung, Lau Kar Fai, Lau Kar Wing and many more.
The text - not the book - by Ng Ho is not a 'historical heavyweight'. But up to this time it's just a good text, and Ng Ho refers to the books he used for it. Most of the texts that appear in martial magazines do not mention references. Most of it is copied from other sources or/and some oral tradition.
Nothing wrong with the last source, depending on who the source is, and in relation to the topic.
I promised a few postings ago to give a more detailed description of the book and text:
The text by Ng Ho is NOT a book, but a chapter in a book.
The book is "A Study of the Hong Kong Martial Arts Film,
Urban Council, Hongkong 1980."
This book is divided into several sections (chapters):
- Descriptions of Kung Fu Movies
- Bibliography of actors and directors
- Wong Fei Hung Movies (and Kwan Tak Hing)
- A survey of the Tradition ... by Ng Ho.
This chapter by Ng Ho discusses (mainly based on literature research) the
story of Shaolin burning , Southern Shaolin and burning, Zhi San, as well as
a biography on Hong Xiguan, Fang Shiyu, Fang Yongchun, San De monk, Lu Acai,
Tieqiao San and some others.
As for the text and it coming online. Let's do it another way. If you - any reader -
email me before friday, dec. 22 th., than you will receive scans in the following days, starting saturday 23th. (Due to the size and many people having hotmail, I will divide it several sections)
[This message was edited by Charris PS on 12-16-00 at 01:16 PM.]
12-20-2000, 01:53 PM
Jet Li is way better than Donnie Yen. Yen's body is built which makes him stiff. Jet's body is very loose. I think Yen is good but he's stiff at times.
Who said Jet Li sucks at playing Wong Fei Hong? It's not him who chose to fly through the air and fight without technique. It's the director's choice. Did Jet fly at all in Fist Of Legend? Jet Li was awesome in that movie as well as the two Shaolin Temples. Regardless of soem of his movies, you can't deny his skill. I believe that he is the top kung fu actor right now.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.