Kung Fu Federation

[7starmantis]

Actually, the argument is whether the Kung Fu federation and Olympic Kung fu is a good or a bad thing.

Actually thats the original topic of this thread, not the argument that was at hand, but thank you for trying.

Butterfly kicks, Lotus Kicks, Imitating the movements of Taoist immortals, Pretending to be the monkey king, and climbing up your staff like its a tree.

I wouldn't consider most of those kung fu, so I guess we have nothing left to discuss.

7sm

 

[InvisibleFist]

You don't consider 8 drunken immortals Kung fu? You don't consider monkey king staff Kung fu?

I don't get it...if your approach is totally streetfighting OK, thats fine. But why do you want to kick everybody else out of the kung fu boat.

BTW, what about pretending to be an insect?

 

[InvisibleFist]

OK, wow...um, aside from your own opinions, do you have any sources that you could site to show performance "elements"? You should spend some time researching Chinese culture and history a bit, it gives great insight into kung fu.

You should check out Dr Meir Shahar, he's one of the few serious scholars researching the history of kung fu. Here's a link for you to check out. It doesn't have to do so much with "performance" per se, but it does concern the complex interrelation between Chinese Martial arts and Qing-era popular culture (opera, novels...the stuff that would later become kung fu movies.) Kung fu the martial art and kung fu the performance art (the "fist of legend") are not as separate as you assume.

Here's a link to some abstracts:

http://www.aasianst.org/absts/1996abst/china/c52.htm

 

[InvisibleFist]

Also Check out:[size=-1] "Theater of Combat: A Critical Look at the Chinese Martial Arts," Journal of
Asian Martial Arts, 1:4, 1992[/size]

 

[InvisibleFist]

Here's an excerpt from the work I just cited:

"
Theater of combat: A critical look at the Chinese martial Arts, by Charles Holcombem, Historian.
Vol. 52 No. 3 May.1990, Pp.411-431
Copyright by Michigan State University Press



Some martial arts enthusiasts themselves admit that "the relationship
between the martial arts and entertainment has a long history in China."
[63] Martial entertainments are known from the beginning of the written
record. One of China's oldest books, the Book of Songs, documents an early
division of theatrical performances into civil and military; the Rites of
Chou describes a "dance with bows and arrows"; and texts and stone reliefs
from the Hah dynasty attest to martial acrobatic performances. [64] These
intertwined traditions of theater and the martial arts came together in
their most peculiar form in the "butting game" (chiao-ti hsi) of the Ch'in
and Han dynasties.

The eighteenth century T'u-shu chi-ch'eng, an encyclopedia in 10,000
sections (chuan) that is one of the largest and most complete ever compiled
anywhere, lists this butting game as its first entry under the subject of
boxing. In the original form of this game, people donned cow's horns and
butted one another, in commemoration of a mythological event from the time
of the Yellow Emperor. [65] Eventually, however, it became a generic name
referring to games of combat such as wrestling, acrobatics and other
assorted forms of entertainment. This transformation was in progress in 209
B.C., when the second emperor of Ch'in "made merry with games of butting
and comedic actors." In this, one of their earliest manifestations, the
martial arts appear to have taken the form of faintly ridiculous
entertainment. [66]

When true drama evolved in China during the Sung (960-1279) and Yuan
(1279-1368) dynasties, military entertainments composed a popular part of
the new theatrical tradition. Stage-fighting was a principal attraction in
the famous Peking Opera of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and
fantastic acrobatic feats were a regular and expected part of performances.
67]

Robert Fortune, an Englishman, witnessed one such performance in rural
China sometime between 1853 and 1856, and left the following account:

An actor rushed upon the stage amid the clashing of timbrels, beating
of gongs, and squeaking of other instruments. He was brandishing a
short sword in each hand, now and then wheeling round apparently to
protect himself in the rear, and all the time performing the most
extraordinary actions with his feet, which seemed as if they had to do
as much of the fighting as the hands. People who have seen much of the
manoeuvering of Chinese troops will not call this unnatural acting.
[68]

As Fortune noted, such stage fighting was an accurate, if exaggerated,
portrayal of actual Chinese fighting techniques. It would be a mistake,
however, to dismiss this theatrical tradition as a mere imitation of the
real martial arts. Image and reality have reflected each other for
millennia, and real martial artists have often found the most practical use
for their skills in earning a living as entertainers.




In late imperial times Boxers toured the countryside, fighting in
competitions at market fairs as a way of life. An eighteenth-century
satirical novel, The Scholars, provides an excellent description of a
typical knight-errant (ywhsia) hero who is "seen at his best in a sword
dance," and who turns out to be something of a fraud. Today, in Beijing,
martial arts experts can still be found performing breathing exercises and
splitting bricks with their heads in sideshows at amusement parks. [69] If
the actual moves of the martial arts are enmeshed in the theatrical
tradition, the image of the martial arts hero comes from another source
altogether. This is the knight-errant, champion of the down-trodden, who
roams the land righting injustice with his practiced sword arm. [70]

 

[7starmantis]

You don't consider 8 drunken immortals Kung fu? You don't consider monkey king staff Kung fu?

I don't get it...if your approach is totally streetfighting OK, thats fine. But why do you want to kick everybody else out of the kung fu boat.

BTW, what about pretending to be an insect?

Lets keep things honest here. I dont consider alot of the fancy movements and technqiues performed by many people including "shaolin monks" true kung fu, that is correct. I never said my appraoch was total streetfighting, again you are beginning to twist my words. Also, I know no one who pretends to be an insect, I assume that was a crack about mantis kung fu, a little transparent aren't we?

You should check out Dr Meir Shahar, he's one of the few serious scholars researching the history of kung fu. Here's a link for you to check out. It doesn't have to do so much with "performance" per se, but it does concern the complex interrelation between Chinese Martial arts and Qing-era popular culture (opera, novels...the stuff that would later become kung fu movies.) Kung fu the martial art and kung fu the performance art (the "fist of legend") are not as separate as you assume.

Here's a link to some abstracts:

http://www.aasianst.org/absts/1996abst/china/c52.htm

Kung Fu is much older than Qing era and thus that arguemnt is quite moot in my opinion. Dont assume that because something can be used as a performance, that the base of it is performance, or even that the true form contains performance qualities. Your source is weak for this arguement here.

As a point of policy, posting 4 times in a row when you could combine said posts is looked at rather poorly. In the future, you may wish to use the "edit" feature to add to a post which hasn't been responded to or even read by others.

See, I just edited my own post here for an example.
Lets return this thread to its original topic, if you would like to continue this discussion, feel free to start another thread on the topic.

7sm

 

[47MartialMan]

Hmmn, that was interesting InvisibleFist. However, I think that you mis-interpreted some of the meaning. There were performances, but that was for:

1.) Hiding methods from others?

2.) Hodong themselves from Governemnt Forces?

2.) Entertainment of troops?

True, per the opera and town shows like a carnival act, but given that these were to make money.

But it will take Occidentals, to view a demostration of maartial skill as a perforamnce the same it took one to beleive Kung Fu was an actual martial art. The term had first appeared in a Jesuit Missionary's writing. Therefore, like the term King Fu", "performances", is used out of context.

Surely, you are not saying that a martial art was developed for "entertainment performances"?

You may have to define performance as performing a fighting ability or "stage demo/act"

And this was somewhat interesting, where did you get these terminologies?
Butterfly kicks, Lotus Kicks, Imitating the movements of Taoist immortals, Pretending to be the monkey king, and climbing up your staff like its a tree.

 

[clfsean]

And this was somewhat interesting, where did you get these terminologies?
Butterfly kicks, Lotus Kicks, Imitating the movements of Taoist immortals, Pretending to be the monkey king, and climbing up your staff like its a tree.

Those are techniques/skills found in CMA...

 

[47MartialMan]

Messing with him to see HIS response.

 

[7starmantis]

Messing with him to see HIS response.

Lets keep our discussions honest. True response to true questions, I dont like this backhanded stuff to see someones response.

7sm

 

[47MartialMan]

Honest-I wanted to see his response.

 

[InvisibleFist]

They're all real CMA techniques. The Taoist immortals are from 8 drunken immortals (yes, its a REAL form) the staff climbing appears in several monkey forms. Butterflys and lotuses are spectacular jumping kicks with little martial value.

 

[InvisibleFist]

Getting back to the original topic. I beleive tournaments are good, because it gives us a chance to watch other styles do their forms, cross hands with people who don't fight exactly like us (very important) and meet other CMAers. They also provide motivation to step up training in preparation for the event. I DON"T beleive that tourneys should be the end all and be all in ones training.

 

[47MartialMan]

I habe to agree. if they do it with other orders under a set of rules, CMA's should be able to.

 

[7starmantis]

Getting back to the original topic. I beleive tournaments are good, because it gives us a chance to watch other styles do their forms, cross hands with people who don't fight exactly like us (very important) and meet other CMAers. They also provide motivation to step up training in preparation for the event. I DON"T beleive that tourneys should be the end all and be all in ones training.

Getting the chance to see other styles forms is interesting, but you dont need a tournement to do that. Plus, what forms are you seeing and by whom? Your going to see flashy, posed forms that will attract attention and get high scores. Your not going to see every form of a system, and most likely not going to see an extremely high skilled player even at that. You may see a good tournement player, but can that same player turn around and use that same form in a pure self defense situation? If not, do they really understand the form? Forms are but one tiny part of CMA.

You get to "cross hands" with people who dont fight exactly like you? Again, this could, and should, be done without a tournement to initialize it. What kind of fighting do you get at a tournement? Do you get true self defense, pure application? Not at all, you get flashy, quick, sometimes opposite from principle fighting which will get a point and win a match. That whole philosophy goes against CMA principles of fighting. Dont get me wrong, I'm not saying tournements are all bad, just that they dont accomplish all the myriad of things people try to say they do. Its simply a day of fun and play, and if you realize that, it can be cool.

Tournements dont provide motivation to step up training that is not included in the tournement. It only provides motivation to step up training of pretty forms, geared "sparring", and such. The treu applicatino goes out the window, and if you think it doesn't count how many people are disqualified every tournement for "excesive face contact" or contact outside the target areas, or just exsesive force.

The Olympic goal for Kung Fu or CMA would be simply these things, and that isn't promoting true CMA, but rather fun play type parts of CMA. The goal should be to promote true understanding of CMA, but we all know that can't happen in that setting.

7sm

 

[DBACPhoenix]

I honestly think that both ends of this argument have valid statements. In regards to performing(entertaining) aspects of kung fu, the first thing that comes to mind is the Lion Dance. For many centuries the lion dance was conducted by different schools during celebrations for the emporer. In fact it was one of the only ways rival schools could compete against each other. Knocking the head off another lion would put that school to shame and being the first to retrieve the greens would be met with praise.

Now it seems that 7sm is looking at things in more of an abstract way, and in this way he is correct. Many of the styles of kung fu are not visually stunning to the unknowning eye. 7 Star mantis itself is primarly comprised of fighting principles and techniques with very little glamor, but while a spectator may not find it as amazing as some Wushu forms, a trained martial artist will view the styles in a completely different manner. And to this affect I think fancier "performance" forms are necessary. In order to educate the uneducated their attention must be directed your way, and in martial arts this is normally done by something spectacular. It is only after a persons interest is peaked that you can educate them in the art.

Now aside from the tangent that seemed to happen here, the main discussion that started this thread is tournaments and their validity with martial arts. I personally do not like to enter into tournaments. I have 15 years of TKD and Kenpo experience, and I came to a realization while participating in these styles that eventually let me to 7-Star Mantis... I was training under a set of rules governing my techniques. These restrictions prevented me from excelling. This is how tournaments are run ( at least in the states ), you are bound by rules that prevent you from truely using your style. The argument of competition against other styles does not exisit here if both participants are unable to use their styles to their extent. Unfortunatly this would probably result in massive injuries and most likly deaths. When 7sm says he fights his kung fu brothers I'm sure they fight with a level of control. When I fight my kung fu brothers (and sisters) I don't go all out and pummel them making sure they don't come back unless they come back with broken ribs and black eyes, but we do fight unprotected at full speed with control (hence why only advanced students should do so). This level of control can't be guarenteed in a tournament of cross-style competition, and while it is one of the only viable ways to truely gain from competition, it is infesible.

These are reasons why I don't participate in tournments, if I can't play by my rules, I don't want to play. While there is something to say about getting some raw fighting experience, it is just that and lacks martial value.

I particullarly enjoy this discussion and I hope I get some feedback from those who have contributed thus far.

Phoenix

 

[47MartialMan]

Nicely posted DBACPhoenix,

But the info in yours and 7SM's recent posts also pertain to UFC? Aren't those like tournaments? How com there sre no Kung Fu stylists entering in those or created one fo CMA?

 

[7starmantis]

Phoenix,
Glad to have you on the boards, welcoem to MartialTalk. Good post, you make some good points.

I honestly think that both ends of this argument have valid statements. In regards to performing(entertaining) aspects of kung fu, the first thing that comes to mind is the Lion Dance. For many centuries the lion dance was conducted by different schools during celebrations for the emporer. In fact it was one of the only ways rival schools could compete against each other. Knocking the head off another lion would put that school to shame and being the first to retrieve the greens would be met with praise.

Good point, but is Lion Dance really considered kung fu? I guess this whole discussion comes down to how we define kung fu. I wouldn't personally consider Lion Dance to be kung fu or CMA as its really not a martial art.

Now it seems that 7sm is looking at things in more of an abstract way, and in this way he is correct. Many of the styles of kung fu are not visually stunning to the unknowning eye. 7 Star mantis itself is primarly comprised of fighting principles and techniques with very little glamor, but while a spectator may not find it as amazing as some Wushu forms, a trained martial artist will view the styles in a completely different manner. And to this affect I think fancier "performance" forms are necessary. In order to educate the uneducated their attention must be directed your way, and in martial arts this is normally done by something spectacular. It is only after a persons interest is peaked that you can educate them in the art.

Another good point, but while education is important today and serves a great purpose, it was not the base or reason for kung fu. We have to look at why CMA were "created". Was it for education? Was it for health? Was it for protection? All of the above? We will all probably differ on that questions and I dont know that there is proof for either answer. However, I personally dont believe education was a part of kung fu. It may be something we need to be concerned with today, but I dont believe back hundreds of years ago when these systems were created that forms were created to hold the attention of people to lure them into studying the system. I honestly dont see anything that makes me think performance was a contributing factor to CMA being born or "created". Today, I will agree with you, but what has been added to the systems for todays audience isn't what I would consider true CMA either.

If this is all the case, what we are attempting to compete with is something meant for other reasons, and is thus not holding true to kungfu principles. I do believe there aer alot of performers and performance arts that have taken alot from CMA, but lets not confuse them with CMA in itself.

7sm

 

[7starmantis]

Nicely posted DBACPhoenix,

But the info in yours and 7SM's recent posts also pertain to UFC? Aren't those like tournaments? How com there sre no Kung Fu stylists entering in those or created one fo CMA?

Yes, the UFC is just another "tournement" with rules and specific rules for specific style of fighters. There are "full contact" events for CMA.

As far as seeing CMA fighters in UFC, that is a different thread, actually its allready been done here:
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12565&highlight=UFC

7sm

 

[InvisibleFist]

7*, you train in SanShou????

How is SanShou any different from what the Kung Fu federation is trying to accomplish?