now we’re getting somewhere
ego,
okay you like maths i like food, so i’ll go with the food scenario, as they say in chinese, “live to eat, not eat to live”.
your persception of the validity of north to south, i feel is askew, to some degree you are looking at them from an analytical perspective, nothing wrong with that, but it can blinker your perspective.
there was a eagle claw player many many years ago that used this perspective to explain the needs and usage of the various styles in gung fu.
“martial arts is like a smorgasboard, there is much food on the table, yet at different times in life, ones tastes change. to only look at what they like at that particular time is to miss the depth and value of each and every art.”
“some will love a type of food always, others will change their taste quite often, while others will grow to appreciate the exotic foods, it is here that the knowldege, depth and understanding of their chosen art and that of others will become more appreciated”
“there is a basic requirement of the body to live, these basic foods are essential to a good, strong, healthy body, to forget these foods will only be detremental to the player”
he does go on, but i am sure you understand where i am coming from and the points trying to be expressed.
the main point though, is just because one art looks from any perspective to be superior mearly because it has a university perspective, you undermine and give no respect to the junior schooling you first had.
it is true that some southern styles may appear basic, however from an external perspective of xing yi alone it looks very novice, yet the depth of the art is complicated, this goes for any art be it from the south or the north.
maybe you should put the math books down, and go have a really good yum cha, it may change your perspective
[This message was edited by bean curd on 05-19-01 at 07:09 PM.]