Contemporary Forms

[Koshiki]

There's a short thread in the TKD subforum on "Creative Forms" intended for performance, and are on which I know nothing. However, I was wondering what the minds here thought about a (slightly) related topic.

Back in the famous "day", it seems to have been all the rage for advanced practitioners to codify the essence of their fighting system into a form. We all know this, many of us study those same forms.

Today, it seems to be more accepted to utilize older forms of previous generations and centuries, and to find your own interpretation of the existing material. Contemporary greats of various styles will have extremely unique views, applications, understandings etc.

However, it seems to be in some cases considered unnecessary, showing a lack of understanding, or even disruptive for "masters" of today to codify their own unique learning into a form.

What do you think, should heads of styles, school systems, etc be creating forms to record their own personal approaches, or should they be satisfied with specifically the forms of yesteryear?

It's a subject I'm somewhat divided on, so I'm very much interested in whatever rollicking debate may come of this...

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If you have learned many forms in your system, one day you decide to combine all those forms into 1 form. It may be a challenge task for you to do so. The draw back of this approach is if your system already has n forms. Your system now will have n + 1 forms. It may add extra burden to your future generation who train in your system.

If you have not added any new information into your new form but re-arrange information from many old forms, IMO, it doesn't add any extra value into your system.

But if you can create "new"

- entering strategies,
- techniques,
- combos,
- finish strategies,
- ...

it will be worthwhile for your new contribution to your system. We all like to leave something in this world after we die. It will be up to the future generation to judge those value.

 

[MyrddinEmrys]

Kung Fu Wang makes some good points.

A few related thoughts:

My memory of some of the history is a bit fuzzy, but I think some of those famous or semi famous masters from back in the day weren't really that far back. If I remember right, some of the famous names in tai chi were alive during the 20th century, and almost all the famous names from bagua were alive during the 20th century as well. This means that most, if not all, bagua forms are somewhat recent inventions. I also think I've read of more recent Chen tai chi masters either making new forms or reworking old ones.

I think sometimes what motivated masters to make new forms was to combine the various styles they'd learned and experiences they'd had. I think that's at least part of what happened when Sun Lutang to make Sun style tai chi and Gao Yisheng to create Gao style bagua. I don't know if they kept whole forms they'd already learned and either tweaked them or added more or if they just completely replaced their old forms with their own new ones.

If I remember right, on Adam Hsu's site, he talks about at some point in your bagua training, you take what you've learned and make your own form. In general, I think bagua might be more open to new forms or modifications to old ones than some other styles might be. Making your own personal form does have its appeal even if it's only for personal use.

The solution to the n+1 forms issue is to add something new so that the additional form is justified (like Kung Fu Wang suggests) or to throw out the old forms. I think that second idea might be rather scary for many people. If you throw out an old form you risk losing forever a piece of history or art. There's also the paranoia type fear that if you throw it out, you'll lose some secret technique or principle that you hadn't realized was there.

I once saw an interview with Tim Cartmel and he talks about how all the famous old masters learned one thing, then made changes and made their own styles. None of the current traditions would exist if no one ever was willing to break or modify past ones.

So, do I think modern masters should make new forms? If someone has studied styles X, Y, and Z and wants to find a clever way to practice the principles of all three in one concise form that can be used to extrapolate out specific techniques for different situations, then perhaps they should. A new form could combine multiple styles, add new ideas, or rework things in a way that makes the learning process easier for students, all of which have some value. Should they add that form to the list they already teach or should they throw out old forms? As an insatiably curious person who loathes the destruction and loss of knowledge, I'm very hesitant to throw any form away, but I understand that's probably happened already as every style has evolved into what it is today. I think we shouldn't be so attached to tradition that nothing new is allowed, but not so dismissive of it as to just make up random stuff all the time and ignore what came before.

 

[Koshiki]

But if you can create "new"...it will be worthwhile for your new contribution to your system.

Definitely. I intended to imply with the original post that unequivocally "new"material would be explored through the new forms.

Clearly, there is no point in taking some segments of Bassai, interspersing them with the major portions of Sanchin, and then sprinkling a healthy dose of Naihanchi over the top of it all. Do that and you've created Karate salad, and not necessarily a good salad either. I intended to take discussion more along your second line of explanation: In most contemporary martial arts, a wide selection of forms are present. The system from which I come is composed of, primarily 18 forms. Too many, if you ask me! We don't need more.

But, as you say, what if what a practitioner does is truly different, perhaps derived from style X, but different enough to perhaps justify a different form?

My memory of some of the history is a bit fuzzy, but I think some of those famous or semi famous masters from back in the day weren't really that far back.

Oh, definitely true. For my own part, my school studies the Taekyoku forms (about 100 years old), the Pinan/Pyong Ahn/Heian forms (a couple decades older), Naihanchi/Tekki (maybe twice that in anything resembling its current iterations), Bassai (old) and Sanchin (old) and Tensho (new version of old stuff).

So, the bulk of our material is undeniably 20th century or close to it, which is why I find it odd when people deride newly created forms. However, most systems, mine included, seem to already have so material that no one could ever truly develop a really deep, intuitive and expansive understanding of it all, so new forms seem disruptive and distracting.

Making your own personal form does have its appeal even if it's only for personal use.

My system actually requires this. When testing for black belt, every student must create a form demonstrating their personal understanding of the art. No requirements are placed on the form except that (perhaps obviously) every motion must have a clear and identified practical function, in other words, no flashy stuff for the sake of performance art. However, that form is never taught to others, and is generally not considered something which must be remembered even by the individual; it is more a demonstration of one's understanding of the principles of kata.

The form I personally created is certainly physically entertaining, but it's not something I can currently perform, and looking at it now, I realize that it was, in every real sense, crap.

None of the current traditions would exist if no one ever was willing to break or modify past ones.

Undeniably true. A truism, even.

I think we shouldn't be so attached to tradition that nothing new is allowed, but not so dismissive of it as to just make up random stuff all the time and ignore what came before.

Honestly, that's probably the only answer that truly bears scrutiny, but knowing the somewhat antagonistic nature of this platform, I was hoping it would take us a while to arrive there...

 

[MyrddinEmrys]

Honestly, that's probably the only answer that truly bears scrutiny, but knowing the somewhat antagonistic nature of this platform, I was hoping it would take us a while to arrive there...

I intend no antagonism.

 

[Koshiki]

I intend no antagonism.

Perhaps that was a poor choice of word. I assure you, I don't feel that most people here are in any negative way antagonistic, however, a fair few of us have some pretty strong opinions, the collision of which often leads to lengthy, interesting, and enlightening debate.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If you can create a form that include all the:

- Judo throws, or
- wrestling take downs, or
- BJJ ground skills,

that will be a valuable "summary" form.

How about a "summary" form that contain all the "joint locks", or "elbow strikes", or "knee strikes", or, "punches", or "kicks", or, ....

 

[geezer]

What do you think, should heads of styles, school systems, etc be creating forms to record their own personal approaches, or should they be satisfied with specifically the forms of yesteryear?

It's a subject I'm somewhat divided on, so I'm very much interested in whatever rollicking debate may come of this...

The heads of systems will do what they want to do. Some for better, others for worse, so I won't speak to that. Each case must be judged according to it's merits. I can only tell you what I do with my own little group.

In the first martial art I studied back in the 70s, the instructor did this. He flat out told us that the lower level rank forms were his own creation, shortened and simplified excerpts from more complex traditional forms taught at higher levels. He claimed that in his experience students often were confused by the more complex forms and learned better basics starting out with this paired-down material. It made sense to me at the time.

A little later I switched to Wing Chun which, compared to it's cousins among the Southern Chinese boxing systems, has comparatively few forms, each of short length. My seniors would never have dreamt of creating new forms, but they did create plenty of solo and two-man drill routines. And my old sifu, Leung Ting did make a couple of minor changes in the forms he learned from Yip Man and Leung Sheung. Admittedly the changes are relatively small and were made ofter considerable deliberation including some of the first WC research trips back to the mainland back in the 80s when it was still quite difficult to gain access. The changes primarily involved re-inserting a few useful movements that he found included in old mainland branches of WC. But when I asked them if he put these movements back in to "restore" the system. He replied , Nonsense! who cares what the form may have been like 'originally' if the movements were no good. I put them back simply because it makes the form better.

Finally I also train Escrima. My greatest influence, Rene Latosa, made up forms to help us develop strong basics. He had us practice these slowly and smoothly, almost like taichi, then as fast as possible, then emphasizing power, and then blending all three, flow, speed and power. He had us work both them solo and as two-man sets training each movement set or combination against a feed. When it got too comfortable, he told us to scramble the order, add a punch or a kick to each combination, or change the weapon we were using or try the same set empty handed. The forms evolved as we did.

Now I teach NVTO WC and PCE Escrima. I approach the WC traditionally, much as I learned it. I don't mess with the forms, but I do mess with the drills and training sets as I see fit to promote learning.

On the other hand, like my instructors I teach the Escrima according to a curriculum I worked out myself, and I have changed and adapted the forms I learned, and have created new ones as necessary. They are not old, but the fighting concepts within them are. And just as my teacher told me, I tell my students that these forms aren not something to be preserved like a great work of art or music. Rather they are learning tools. They are like a boxer's shadow boxing. If they get too routine and comfortable, ...change them. Add a punch or kick, change the distance and timing, challenge yourself, ...and above all make it work for you.