Guys,
Ive been thinking about the story of Yim Wing Chun and a thought occurred I would like to throw out there for discussion. Its probably been voiced before here but Im newJ
If the tale of the origin of Wing Chun is a fabrication we can still learn/deduce 3 things.
1. Whoever made it up wanted us to know that this is an art where the weak may overcome the strong.
2. Whoever made it up wanted to show us that the principles can be utilised in combat in a short period of time. Before your overly amorous suitor comes a knocking.
3. We are not supposed to view Ng Mui (without whom the art would not have left the Southern Shaolin Temple) as the most important in the Wing Chun history. The person of most importance is the person its named after, the first student, the person who embraced Wing Chun concepts and made them their own.
From a more personal point of view I feel perhaps WC has to be a fractured art. This melting pot is its strength not its weakness. This seems too much of a good thing for the story to be anything other than a parable. As well as everything else Wing Chun is also a diagnostic honing tool, an engine of re-invention and a means to update itself. A living martial art (but only if we ensure we share our points of view and are willing to be open).
Regards,
Pedro J
Further reading
http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/meng/truthrevealed.php
P.S. I am not trying to sell this as 'fact' I am mearly taking a rough stab at motives for the structure of the story...because I thought it may be of interest.
Ive been thinking about the story of Yim Wing Chun and a thought occurred I would like to throw out there for discussion. Its probably been voiced before here but Im newJ
If the tale of the origin of Wing Chun is a fabrication we can still learn/deduce 3 things.
1. Whoever made it up wanted us to know that this is an art where the weak may overcome the strong.
2. Whoever made it up wanted to show us that the principles can be utilised in combat in a short period of time. Before your overly amorous suitor comes a knocking.
3. We are not supposed to view Ng Mui (without whom the art would not have left the Southern Shaolin Temple) as the most important in the Wing Chun history. The person of most importance is the person its named after, the first student, the person who embraced Wing Chun concepts and made them their own.
From a more personal point of view I feel perhaps WC has to be a fractured art. This melting pot is its strength not its weakness. This seems too much of a good thing for the story to be anything other than a parable. As well as everything else Wing Chun is also a diagnostic honing tool, an engine of re-invention and a means to update itself. A living martial art (but only if we ensure we share our points of view and are willing to be open).
Regards,
Pedro J
Further reading
http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/meng/truthrevealed.php
P.S. I am not trying to sell this as 'fact' I am mearly taking a rough stab at motives for the structure of the story...because I thought it may be of interest.