Taoist Tai Chi versus Traditional Yang

[Xue Sheng]

I don't want to call the Beginners Class "Fluff" but it somewhat is because many times it's being taught by someone who knows the sequence of the movements and not much else, but this is only for 3-4 months.

I can't tell you how much I wish you never said this.

A beginners class is the root, the basic the beginning of the training of taiji and IF it is not taken seriously all you get is a bunch of students with bad habits and bad taiji that IF they are to advance they need a WHOLE lot more work to correct the mistakes of an inadequate teacher that views the training of beginners as not that important.

Like with Xingyiquan and Santi Shi (which the TTCS does not emphasize either) it is the root of the root and without that base you have nothing

Those students now have years of training ahead of them to make those movements their own, guided by much more proficient instructors who had to go through a lot more to become a continuing instructor.

Too late, they were taught bad form already and NOW it is going to take a whole lot of unnecessary time and effort on the part of the student and the teacher to correct it. But if the training of beginners is viewed as "Fluff" by the more advanced in the TTCS then it is likely the majority of their bad habits that they picked up from their previous bad training that was not taken seriously in the first place by those responsible for their training will be taken equally as lightly from that point on.

If the training of beginners is seen as "Fluff" by those more advance in the TTCS I have to say I am highly unimpressed by the TTCS and before this I have been trying very hard to look at this without bias and give the TTCS the benefit of the doubt.

 

[DaPoets]

Perhaps I was refering to it as "fluff" because it's such a short period of time and because it is so short, people don't have time for bad habbits to form. Everything is new for the 1st number of years and in my opinion it takes years for bad habbits to actually form. The real work comes in the continuing classes, the beginners classes are more of an introduction to what Tai Chi has to offer.

Most don't even remember the details of their beginers classes after a while because they learn so much more in the continuing.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Perhaps I was refering to it as "fluff" because it's such a short period of time and because it is so short, people don't have time for bad habbits to form. Everything is new for the 1st number of years and in my opinion it takes years for bad habbits to actually form. The real work comes in the continuing classes, the beginners classes are more of an introduction to what Tai Chi has to offer.

Most don't even remember the details of their beginers classes after a while because they learn so much more in the continuing.

Picking up bad habits can take seconds.

 

[Flying Crane]

Perhaps I was refering to it as "fluff" because it's such a short period of time and because it is so short, people don't have time for bad habbits to form. Everything is new for the 1st number of years and in my opinion it takes years for bad habbits to actually form. The real work comes in the continuing classes, the beginners classes are more of an introduction to what Tai Chi has to offer.

Most don't even remember the details of their beginers classes after a while because they learn so much more in the continuing.

oooh, I dunno about this. Sure, whenever someone learns something new, it takes a while to get it right. That is just part of the process. But it's important to have an instructor who knows the difference, so he can steer the student in the right direction and cultivate the propagation of good habits and good technique. If the instructor doesn't understand the difference, the students are allowed to think that their poor technique is correct, then bad habits become engrained. And nobody even knows the difference.

 

[East Winds]

" Hence the saying in Chinese boxing circles "Learning taijiquan is easy but to correct a wrong style is difficult". In other words, more haste, less speed. And if these people pass on their mistakes to others, they will be doing a great harm" Yang Cheng-fu

Need any more be said?

Very best wishes

 

[kubrick]

Perhaps I was refering to it [beginers class] as "fluff" because it's such a short period of time and because it is so short, people don't have time for bad habbits to form.

Most don't even remember the details of their beginers classes after a while because they learn so much more in the continuing.

I reckon you could pick up a few bad habits in the 4 months before you can access continuing classes. More to the point though, should an instructor be passing on bad habits ... whatever the level?

 

[Xue Sheng]

To get back to the comparison and to expand it a bit I have looked at the various forms of Single whip from different Taiji styles. I have not yet found a picture of Zhaobao single whip. Or perhaps I have. Not knowing Zhaobao forms all that well it could be that it is this one but I am not sure

Single Whip

Yang

Cheng Manching
http://djsoooonice.com/myspace/group/cheng-man-ching-single-whip.jpg

Chen - Chen Xiaowang

Hao – I am not sure here if this is single whip form Hao style or not.

Wu - Shanghai - Southern

Wu – Beijing - Northern
http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Dunes/9413/images/styles/taiji9.jpg

Sun

Taoist Tai Chi Society
http://www.newmarkettaichi.com/images/group_small.jpg

Thoughts?

There is another posture that I am very interested in comparing to what I have seen in multiple pictures form TTCS and as soon as I have them I will post those as well

 

[Xue Sheng]

Punch

Yang
http://www.geocities.com/yongnian/tj16.jpg

Chen
http://www.taoistsanctuary.org/pictures/cxwpropunch.jpg

Wu/Hao
http://www.martialdevelopment.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/yang-zhenduo-parry-block-punch.jpg

Wu
http://www.egreenway.com/taichichuan/images/ST44P21b.jpg

Sun – 12e

Taoist Tai Chi Society

Thoughts?

 

[mograph]

Is it possible to sink and root (in a forward bow stance) if the head is ahead of the knee?

 

[Xue Sheng]

One thing I see here is that the punch from Wu style looks much more similar to the one form the TTCS than Yang.

As my sifu once said Wu is much better at attack than defense and this may be because the center is so far forward.

 

[mograph]

With regard to the Wu (2) punch, we can't be sure if the player was posing or was snapped while in motion. Given the apparent age of the shot, I think it was a static pose. I also think that in a number of cases, and maybe this one, the extended pose might be intended as a representation of the moment after the emission of fa jing, not as a stable stance.

If that were true, then it might also be possible that other players would copy this stance, irrespective of fa jing, believing it to be the Standard Form.

It's a theory.

 

[Xue Sheng]

With regard to the Wu (2) punch, we can't be sure if the player was posing or was snapped while in motion. Given the apparent age of the shot, I think it was a static pose. I also think that in a number of cases, and maybe this one, the extended pose might be intended as a representation of the moment after the emission of fa jing, not as a stable stance.

If that were true, then it might also be possible that other players would copy this stance, irrespective of fa jing, believing it to be the Standard Form.

It's a theory.

I am no expert on Wu I learned only one form and it was Northern Wu many years ago but there are a lot of VERY forward postures in the form that I learned. Also what I ahve seen of both Northern and Southern Wu there are a lot of front weighted stances as well.

 

[mograph]

Just to fill in some information gaps, here's one for the traditional folks: how is traditional Yang style taught in your school?

- How do its instructors treat middle-aged, stiff beginners?
- Are all students taught to do the postures the same way, or are different bodies given different paths? If so, is it expected that those paths will converge at some point? If so, at what point?
- Will all students be given the full extent of the head instructor's knowledge, or will some never receive it? If so, why?
- Are any students turned away? If so, why?

Thanks ...

 

[East Winds]

When I teach, I teach EVERY student the same way, irespective of age or physical ability. I teach the postures as I was taught by my teacher, without deviation and without adaptation. (I practise Tradtional Yang Family Taijiquan as transmitted by Yang Zhen Ji, the 2nd son of YCF). Some students are able to do it that way, some are not because of age, physical constraints or simply inability, but at least they are all shown the same way. I do not knowingly hold anything back. I demonstrate applications for each posture, but do not teach applications until students know the whole form and can execute it in a competent manner. (This can take up to 18 months or longer). Applications are also taught in separate classes, so that if students do not wish to pursue applications, they do not need to. However they do know what they are supposed to be doing with hands and feet etc. I never turn anyone away from classes, but advise them always to work within their own limitations. I teach strict adherence to Yang Cheng Fu's 10 essences and these essences are the foundation of all my teaching.

Hope this helps

Very best wishes

 

[mograph]

Thanks, EastWinds -- this is interesting. Would you say that the goal of a traditional Tai Chi instructor should be to transmit the form as he was taught without deviation or adaptation?

If that is true, I definitely see the merit in it, as it prevents degradation of the form.

I think I now see a difference between the traditional way and Mr. Moy's way: the traditional method of accurate transmission does not attempt to generate an effect in the student's body. (I assume) it transmits the form and offers feedback on the accuracy of the student's adoption of that form.

In Moy's case, the priority was not the transmission of a form, but to effect a change in the student's body using whatever means he had at his disposal. The form was not important: a change in the student's body was the goal. (I'm not saying that traditional Yang style cannot change the body -- of course it can. Instead, I offer that Mr. Moy's practice attempted to change each student's body using the path that was appropriate for that student. If it took him away from the form, so be it.)

Assuming this to be true, it might verify the positions of both opposing camps on Mr. Moy: If you wanted a change in your body (that you could see sooner rather than later?), you would go to Mr. Moy, but if you wanted an accurate transmission of the Yang style form, you would go elsewhere.

Maybe this leads us to an unsatisfying conclusion: that it makes no sense to compare Yang style form and TTCS form, since the goal of Mr. Moy was not to transmit the Yang style form without deviation, so of course it will deviate.

However ... regarding that goal, Mr. Moy is no longer with us, and no longer able to tweak each student's form to best suit that student. I believe that what we see in the TTCS is a beginner form, a mild calisthenic designed to give mild health benefits to the most students while avoiding injury. It could be argued that this is what the students were taught until Mr. Moy could get around to each student and give him/her what he/she needed at that moment.

But since Mr. Moy is not available, the current students depend on their instructors to have the same level of, if you will, "tweaking" ability that Mr. Moy had. It remains to be seen whether anyone left in the TTCS possesses that level of skill. Given that the organization is very large and discourages instructional initiative and innovation on the part of instructors, it may be true that the method of Mr. Moy that I stated earlier is not being practiced. I suppose this was to be expected: I've heard that Mr. Moy gave the TTCS about five years to survive after his death. An organization that depends so much on the skill of its leader cannot survive (for long) in its original form after the leader's death. This may explain why the TTCS is focusing more on the Taoist Cultivation Center (temple) and less on the Tai Chi instruction.

Bringing us back to the form discussion, my conclusion is that the TTCS form is a generalized beginner form, practiced by students waiting for a master who will never come. It's not Yang style, but it isn't trying to be.

The question that remains may be: can it still be called "Tai Chi"? Maybe another thread may spring from this discussion: what elements of form, practice and instruction makes an exercise "Tai Chi"? Or does it really matter what something is called?

Thanks for reading.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Thanks, EastWinds -- this is interesting. Would you say that the goal of a traditional Tai Chi instructor should be to transmit the form as he was taught without deviation or adaptation?

I'm not EastWinds but IMO this is impossible.

You have to maintain the basic principles however

As my sifu has said no two people have the same body so they cannot do the form exactly the same. His Sifu was Tung Ying Chieh and my Sifu was told by Tung Hu Ling (Tung Ying Chieh's oldest son) that his (my sifu's) form was very close to Tung Ying Chieh's, closer than Tung Hu Ling's was. But I would not question the ability or knowledge of Tung Hu Ling or my Sifu based on this.

Yang Luchan's form of Yang style (which evolved from Chen style) was first changed by his son Yang Jainhou and then further changed by his grandson Yang Chengfu. And they get progressively taller form Luchan to Chengfu too. And if you look comparison pictures of Yang Chengfu and his student Tung Ying Chieh you again see differences and some of those are based on size of the practitioner. And again it you look at pictures of Yang Chengfu and compare them to Yang Jun you again see differences.

 

[mograph]

You have to maintain the basic principles however.

Would Wile's translation of the "Lost Tai Chi Classics" be a good place to study those principles? Or is there another place to find a list of the generally-agreed-upon principles?

 

[Xue Sheng]

Would Wile's translation of the "Lost Tai Chi Classics" be a good place to study those principles? Or is there another place to find a list of the generally-agreed-upon principles?

For Yang Style (IMO)

The Essence and Applications of Taijiquan by Yang Chengfu

Mastering Yang Style Taijiquan by Fu Zhongwen

The Red Book by Tung Ying Chieh – however here the English translation is bad so it is much better in the Chinese. But you can get some pretty good sections of it here that are translated fairly well.

Yang Chengfu’s 10 Essentials
http://www.itcca.it/peterlim/ycf10pts.htm

 

[pete]

mograph, you've raised a very interesting and profound point.

personally, i have no first-hand experience with the TTCS whatsoever, and without getting into 'qualitative' analysis, it does appear that they practice 'a' yang-style, albeit not 'the' yang-family-style... just as the cheng man ching is 'a' yang-style, and the so-called 24 is 'a' yang-style.

what is really a dichotomy here is the approach used by TTCS to restrict their instructors from searching out instruction in other styles or arts, or even exploring the martial aspects of the form... yet, attempting to transcend the style as it was taught to them and use creativity and innovation to individualize or 'tailor' the art to the individual.

where does the innovation come from? its comparable to a medical student studying one text book throughout med-school, perhaps a very good textbook, but only one nonetheless... then, while in residency using innovation and creativity in the E/R!

you can't have it both ways! To study, practice, and train a single style (one textbook) you got to stick to the script, otherwise its finger-painting not art. If, however, you venture out, and seek teachings from other styles, arts, and teachers (ie, study from several text books), you may be able to draw innovation from proven methods in other styles. It may no longer be the in the original 'tradition', but at least there is a basis for your methods.

Please note, this is in no way a qualitative statement nor opinion on either 'traditional' yang style vs TTCS, or an opinion on whether the single style vs several styles is better. That is an individual decision, and would have many other variables determining what is correct for each person.

My point, based on mograph's post, is you can't have it both ways!

pete.

 

[East Winds]

Xue Sheng,

"As my sifu has said no two people have the same body so they cannot do the form exactly the same."

Absolutely agree. However, everyone can do the 10 essences irrespective of body shape or size and if you do the form incorporating the 10 essences, then you are doing the form as transmitted by YCF. If you do the form and deviate from the essences, then you are no longer doing Yang style Taiji. Look at the "Wushu" forms of Yang and you will see an abandonment of the 10 essences. I you look CLOSELY at Yang Cheng-fu, Tung, Zhen Ji, Zhen Duo , or Yang Jun, yes they look different because of body shape, age and size. BUT THEY ARE ALL DOING THE 10 ESSENCES!!! the key to Yang style Taijiquan.

mograph,

You have raised some very pertinent points but I have to agree with Pete in his interpretation. Moy's original concept may well have been - "the priority was not the transmission of a form, but to effect a change in the student's body using whatever means he had at his disposal." but the priority of the TTCS eventually became the generation of cash above all else. Instructors are not allowed to deviate from the teachings of the TTCS and are actively prevented from studying other forms. The incorporation of the 10 essences into the Yang Family form is designed to "change the body" and promote good health. They also ensure that applications will work. Moy, by removing the essences, removed the health giving aspects of Yang style Taiji and replace them with some suspect "Taoist Internal Alchemy". The "stretching of the spine" so beloved of the TTCS causes the distortions in the body that you can see in ALL of the TTCS postures.

Pete,

I agree with your interpretation. Well stated.

Very best wishes