I love kung fu, the artistry, the sophistication of the movements, how healthy and centered I feel after doing a form but at the same time classical kung fu seems overly complicated.
The true intent of the form is hidden and if never revealed by the teacher becomes lost amongst all the intricacy of movement.
So how do we balance the Wen and Wu, the martial and civil to be excellent in both? To build our health, to improve our character but to also be capable at defending ourselves?
[QUOTE=Eric Olson;822405]I love kung fu, the artistry, the sophistication of the movements, how healthy and centered I feel after doing a form but at the same time classical kung fu seems overly complicated.
The true intent of the form is hidden and if never revealed by the teacher becomes lost amongst all the intricacy of movement.
So how do we balance the Wen and Wu, the martial and civil to be excellent in both? To build our health, to improve our character but to also be capable at defending ourselves?
Does one always come at the expense of the other?
Cheers
EO[/QUOTE]
fighting is simple once you are solid…you can spend years to get your wind and base skills like a good thai boxer…but the art of getting hit and hitting the **** out of someone is very simple and something we as animals are good at…it is quite natural, we fight gravity every day:)
i always saw dope kung fu as that **** you do after you have the base skills…like two guys are kickboxing champs…one pulls out a drunken technique and tottally messes up the other guys head.
yes it is very complex as we can see there is not many kung fu fighters like there are peeps that suck at form…you gotta be a fighter to have good form and vice versa, anything else is wimpy or brawler level and like mentioned fighting is simple…i used to brawl when i was thirteen hanging with twenty year olds…didn’t mean i was a kickboxer let alone jackie chan.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;822433]Look at the Bong thread for an example of overcomplication.
Can you imagine a thread like that with boxers discussing the left hook ?[/QUOTE]
The true intent of the form is hidden and if never revealed by the teacher becomes lost amongst all the intricacy of movement.[/QUOTE]
IMO, not every movement in a form is intended for fighting purposes. Some of them are just for cardio exercise. Some are for coordination and balance training. Some are just symbolic.
Strip out the movements that are actually intended for fighting, and I think kung fu becomes a lot more simple.
The problem is with form inventors cramming everything training-related except the kitchen sink into the form.
[QUOTE=MasterKiller;822442]IMO, not every movement in a form is intended for fighting purposes. Some of them are just for cardio exercise. Some are for coordination and balance training. Some of are just symbolic.
Strip out the movements that are actually intended for fighting, and I think kung fu becomes a lot more simple.[/QUOTE]
I guess my question is, do we lose something essential by stripping those things out? In other words, is the whole greater than the sum of the parts.
