Hidden History of Chinese Internal Arts by Sal Canzonieri

Hey! For anyone who remembers all the great research Sal (and others) used to share on here, I just found his youtube channel, and discovered that he did finally publish that book he was working on for so long.

https://www.youtube.com/@salcanzonieri/videos

https://www.amazon.com/Hidden-History-Chinese-Internal-Martial/dp/1490430717

Sorry if this is old news and I missed the thread, but this was the first I heard in years.

Just wanted to share this. (Heads up if you watch the youtube—In all those years of research Sal apparently never bothered to look at a guide on pinyin pronunciation—It can get a little painful) Sorry Sal… but thank you so much for all this great work.

I watched the first half of: “Taoist and Shaolin Roots of Chen & Yang Tai Chi Part 1 - General Overview & Silk Reeling discussion

What I agree with:

  • I agree that any claim Chen Village may have made that they are the creators of their own art and had no influence from Shaolin is bogus. I wasn't aware that they would be against stating that they had Shaolin influence. After all,... they seem to have no problems attributing Qi Jiguang's 32 Postures to be an influence on their family art.
  • I agree that there are a lot of postural similarities across Shaolin forms. I find that cool.
I had a very hard time understanding his Chinese pronunciation of the names of practitioners.

“Chen Fa’ke took the Yang form because Yang Luchan was really popular, and then he augmented it because Chen died out in the 1950”

Well… a few problems with this bold claim.

First of all… Chen Fa’ke arrived in Beijing in 1928. Yang Luchan was long dead by then. Chen dying out by 1950 is true for the Chen Village, but Chen Fake was in Beijing two decades prior to that.

So the timeline does not make sense for what is being claimed here. The premises are just silly because they are either before he was born… or after he died.

The other problem with the separate lineage from Chen Fa’ke father being different than Chen Fa’ke is the case with Chen Zhaopi.

Chen Zhaopi learned from Chen Fa’ke’s father. So that throws a monkey wrench into his claim because if Chen Zhaopi’s form is a derivative of what’s “original” (Chen Fa’ke father), then that pretty much debunks the notion of Chen Fa’ke’s basing this form off of Yang Style from the basis that “Xinjia” and “Laojia” are far more similar to each other than they are to Yang Style.

Furthermore, Chen Zhaopi invited Chen Fa’ke to Beijing because he claimed that Chen Fa’ke was much better than himself.

“Chen Fa’ke would never taught Silk Reeling” - well… he clearly taught it to his son, Chen Zhaokui.

The author seems to have the false idea that Silk Reeling in Chen Style NEEDS to be some standalone drill. Silk Reeling is taught in layers in the Taolu.

“While he was talking, he would go this all day” [author proceeds to make funny weird movements as if to mock Chen Fa’ke] - Uh… how would the author know what Chen Fa’ke was doing? We have no videos of Chen Fa’ke.

Other dubious claims:

  • Hu YaoZhen (Feng's Xinyiquan teacher) learned Chen TJQ from Chen Fa'ke. - What? Hu and Chen Fa'ke were friends... but since when did Hu learned Chen Style? O_O
  • Feng learned Yang Style from Wang YunKai - What? Wang YunKai is not associated with Yang Style....
  • Hu YaoZhen created Silk Reeling - Uh... what? The author just claims it and does not back it up beyond the part that Hu YaoZhen was a famous Qigong practitioner.
I find his biographical knowledge to be rather dubious, but outside of that, I do agree and believe in the Shaolin influence in Chen Style.