alpha dog
No. The birth of the great southern styles including wing chun is in the southern rebellions against the Qing march southwards.Wing chun is for rebels, against folks with only regimented battlefield preparation. Then ultimately it matures to defending
the “self”..
Catering to the many and catering to the coin accounts for the corruptions.
Alpha Dog
You are absolutely right, the only problem is that many people have a tough time understanding the meanings or intensions of Wing Chun’s original focus.
Many scenarios come to mind, such as students own agendas, trying to complement their training with other styles and the list continues.
AD - Joy’s correct. WCK was developed by/for rebels, not for soldiers, who have different requirements. As to the few/many paradigm, this is mentioned by many sifu. I don’t know if it’s truly the case (I like to think the art is pretty robust) but then not everybody chooses to study WCK so maybe that part takes care of itself.
Rgds,
RR
Alpha Dog…
Originally posted by Alpha Dog
Actually, I was commenting on Sabu’s post.
Understood. Thanks for clearing that up.
Matrix
Catering
“Ok, what have I gotta do to get you into this great little Wing Chun today?” – Sifu UsedCarSalesman
I agree, Yuanfen and Roy, that misunderstanding of or disrespect for “ground principles” of Wing Chun by those who teach it/learn it can do significant damage to the art over time.
Assuming we know today what those Wing Chun axioms are, though, don’t you think that anyone willing to commit the time and energy can learn it? After all, it was designed for creatures that walk on their hind legs, that have two arms, shoulder-to-shoulder about three heads wide… Or am I being hopelessly naive?
IMHO, that “he’s got that magic ability” is a Hollywood-era invention. True, some people are naturals, while others learn slower and CAN INDEED be held back by the baggage of false expectations they bring to the study. This holds true for everything.
The only difference between a genius and a regular guy is that the genius has good ideas more frequently.
Having said that, if everyone were geniuses no one would have invented beer.
alpha dog sez-my notes in brackets follow
Assuming we know today what those Wing Chun axioms are, though, don’t you think that anyone willing to commit the time and energy can learn it?
((Axioms are suggestive /denotative…they supplement but do not replace good teaching.Krishnamurthi and Lord Bruce got it wrong. One cannot be one’s own teacher. Truism- a lawyer who represents himself hasa fool for a client.))
After all, it was designed for creatures that walk on their hind legs, that have two arms, shoulder-to-shoulder about three heads wide… Or am I being hopelessly naive?
((Sure. But as much as I would like to(never mind why), I cant play Brahm’s Lullaby. Time and seasons and limits to things)))
IMHO, that “he’s got that magic ability”
((Need a teacher, then 90%perspiration 10%inspiration))
The only difference between a genius and a regular guy is that the genius has good ideas more frequently.
((Vive la difference))
Having said that, if everyone were geniuses no one would have invented beer.
((Beer? In the US they havent invented it yet. Old Coor’s advertisement: ““Its the water””.Make mine TsingTao, Tecate,
Bohemia, Negra Modelp, Singha, Kingfisher but youse dont have to give me a Bud-ask not for whom the Bud tolls-it tolls for you!!))
Again, I agree
A good teacher is needed.
So what is a good teacher? One who applies knowledge evenly or discriminantly? One who talks about his art in plain language or one who gets so caught up in his love affair with it that he allows all the heavenly glory to blot out the tangible finger?
Can any Sifu say for certain what the end result of training a student will be, the first time he lays eyes on a student?
I don’t pretend to know the answer to this. I do know, however, that more people have been swindled throughout history by smoke, mirrors and snakeoil (****ed JOW! my hands are itchy) than by the presentation of basic realities.
For a student to be caught up in/controlled by in the romantic mysticism of WC is one thing, for a highly experienced person, that to me is tragic.
Or is it much more simply that some take comfort in the knowlege that mysticism will drive much of the competition away?
If a message is taught in code and mysticism, then a message is not clear and therefore the job of the Sifu is finished. For all Sifus should know that one is not a Sifu without students. And students are not students without a Sifu.
It is a shame seeing many Sifus who make their own mysticism to cloud the minds of their students.
Using simple terminology is what got us to this confusion in the first place. However, using simple terminology actually allows the students to learn better, and thus a Sifu may do his/her job properly.
It is also our job to demystify the arts and allow students to think realistically. Otherwise students may end up getting hurt in situations that they counted on their mystic training to get them out of. Hope this helps!!!
Any Ideas on how to make it for the many rather than the few?
hehehe
Put an AD in INSIDE KUNG FU!!!
I always feel out of place here…
I might suggest that wrestling, boxing, muay thai and other ring sports, do not seem to have the problem of getting caught up in “mysticism.” They are also willing to teach anybody who will learn, not treating knowledge as if it were some sacred gift to be passed in secret behind closed doors.
Perhaps some sifus could take a page out of those books in an attempt to demistify? It seems there is little cloudiness in those arts, and much good instruction is to be had from many places…
merryprankster post:
I am not sure that “mysticism” is the best word to to try and deal with comparisons involved. No one word may do either. Its true that the above are sports. First rate wing chun isnt-an oft repeated point but not always understood. Even in those sports
there are little moves that are unique to the user or the occasion.
Such as Archie Moore’s advice to hit Joe Frazier on the top of the head at the soft spot which he did which caused Smoky Joe to collapse and bounce. Skills in those sports reach a plateaux
in their development and then maintenance until decline.
Wing chun is a longer journey and with the right guidance, you keep on improving much longer than in sports. You see and sense things that were not self evident before. Most people get impatient with the journey or dont have the right guidance
and fall of the wagon. Not mysticism. Right knowledge and right practice IMO of course. Yours may vary..
Skills in those sports reach a plateau then maintenance then decline because of the stress of ringfighting, not because of some inherent flaw in the system. It is quite possible for a person to execute the journey of wrestling or judo or what not and continue on into later years. My wrestling coach was 50 and still actively coaching and improving his judo. However, the nature of intensive competition, regardless of the sport, creates physical problems later in life. The same would be true of WC if it had a competition circuit as vital, talented and aggressive as the sports I outlined. I’m not knocking WC by saying that.
What I was suggesting was that the “demystification,” for lack of a better term might be found in the teaching styles of those sports, not that the training methods or goals themselves be adopted. There should be little “mystery” in any art, if indeed, they are, as is often stated, efficient biomechanical principles properly applied and practiced. So I agree that it is hard work over time–always–but there is a willingness in boxing/wrestling/judo/MT, etc, to say “Ah, look–see, you aren’t executing this principle correctly and that’s why this doesn’t work for you, try this…” so you go out and experiment with that and find something that works for you with that principle in mind. Maybe you don’t step as deeply, or your hand placement is slightly different, but the principle of the movement remains the same.
However, it has been my observation that the answer most frequently received when WC people ask for help on this forum is a slightly haughty “the answer is in the forms.” Well, that may be true… the answer to physics is in the principles of calculus… but you have to know algebra first in order to execute the techniques necessary to apply the principles of calculus. If you don’t, it’s a hopeless mess…
Response to MP’s points below
The answer to me is in how the forms are taught. The forms are not expressed in mathematical terms and not immediately transmissible. many first rate Asian things—music, arts, martial arts involve cumulative skills acquired through good tutelage-
hence inherently difficult to mass produce. The west often ends up attempting to mass produce and now Asians are imitating that to0…large kung fu chain schools etc. I love music but am no musician. A layman’s analogy…witha few lessons-- sometimes none… one can play tolerable guitar, classical guitar is a different thing… sitar? the west is yet to produce a single SUPERB sitarist…
why>? Not race or etalent issue. Staying the course under proper guidance for cumulative skill building and enlightment…
requires a different kind of commitment than mpst people give to TCMA.
Ah, see, now we’re getting into a “culture” slant that I find abhorent, for the most part. To truly appreciate anything it must be studied, whether Asian or not. I don’t expect that forms are mathematical formulas. I cook–a LOT, and without meaning to come across as a food snob or egotistical jerk, I’m quite good at it. It takes time invested in the proper techniques and the ingredients to understand balance and flavor, whether it’s European mediterranean, Arabic, Central Asian, Chinese, Japanese, Thai, Cajun, Creole, Jamaican, etc. Obviously none of that is precise mathematics (how much allspice in the jerk rub? Depends on the allspice…)
Of course I hate fusion cooking, that b@stard child, for the most part, so perhaps there is something to be said for “classical,” 
…
Let’s not discuss what Americans have done with Cantonese… and the even worse things they’ve done to Szechuan and Hunan…ShangHai seems largely unadulterated though… hmmm… maybe all the pungency turns people off 
I guess my point though, is more that all of the “sports,” seem to have more exposition, along with the trial and error process of personal experience and the hefty dose of “forms training,” (shadow boxing, shadow wrestling, drills, etc). Look at Cael Sanderson–undefeated in wrestling in college, and YEARS in the making–hardly a quick way to success!
I think there is something to be said for the expository style. Finding the right balance is necessary of course… I’ve had instructors that just drone on and on and on… ok, let me go PRACTICE this now, for heaven’s sake!! But there seems to be, in ring-type martial arts, more exposition than what seems to go on here. The difference in approach seems to be endemic (pardon me if I’ve used that wrong…I’m in a rush), in CMA, less so with the Japanese, Thai, Koreans, Vietnamese, etc.
I’m not arguing that it’s right or wrong. I’m saying that as long as the expository style is not used, you can’t make it for the many–and the idea that this reduces the quality of the product, is kinda silly. Good boxing instruction, Judo instruction, MT instruction, San Shou instruction, etc, abounds.
Whether you make them life-long pursuits and truly take them to heart is up to the individual.
I think with regards to WC. Peoples expecations of what they think it is…compared to what it really is, often conflicts.
In alot of ways you need to really trust your sifu…almost like a child trusts a parent. (hard to put into words)
S. Teebas
You’re absolutely right. However, what happens when you have a Sifu you cannot trust. Case in point, Temple Kungfu, On another forum. Sifus who say something and are another? What would you do about something like that?
what happens when you have a Sifu you cannot trust. Case in point, Temple Kungfu, On another forum. Sifus who say something and are another? What would you do about something like that?
If you can’t trust them…just leave. If you want your skill level to be as high as possible this type of realtionship is essiential. If i couldn’t find it in a WC school id rather learn another style where it does exist.
Peoples knowledge, skill, and ability to put the theory into action speak alot louder than: " I learnt off the secret grandmaster and have secret techniques, but cant teqach it to you till you’ve been under me for 10 years"…or whatever BS they spin. You can tell if somone is the real thing. …How? I find these type of people have so much knowledge they dont have the insecurity of needing to hold back information; because there is so much to learn…why hold someone back?
Some very good people i have met in MA’s freely teach all they know because in relation to the students, they are light years ahead of them in skill.
Where’as others i have seen who may be sightly better often recognise they may not be so far ahead, and therefor dont tell the student what is missing otherwise they’d get their butt kicked IF they told all they knew as soon as the student was ready to learn it.
So to answer your threads question, i think if you want to make Wc for the many and not the few (hmm… dont know if its really ever going to be possible however) Id say it’s in YOUR hands.
Because first you need to have a high skill level, then freely teach all you know to all willing to learn. The thing is, most people arent ready for putting in the time…the consistant effort into learning WC. WC is designed to be a simple system, but in all honestly you really need to be into it if you want to advance. Alot dont have the obsesison people like us do
I totally agree with you. S. Teebas, for the more you share tenfold is brought back.