on the yang family long form

[bigfootsquatch]

It seems that the only people who do the yang family form as Fu Zhong Wen/Yang Family performs it is THEM. Everyone seems to have quite a few deviations otherwise. Even people who claim to have learned directly from the above do not perform the moves as they did. I'm not saying a form should be picture perfect, BUT why are moves such as the one leading into the first single whip done so differently. I know Erle Montaigue called the move Fishes in Eight, I don't know if that is the universal name or what....

Anyway: 1:27 is the move I'm talking about
Most tend to do that move like this....(.24 is the move)

I know the history of Cheng Man Cheng and how many consider his form not a yang style and all that, but many perform the yang family long form more similiar to his style than to the traditional family style such as....
eyes to the front instead of to the side on ward off left
transitioning into the first single whip
an even the more compact stances

Why do people refuse to do the yang family form as it was handed down or is there something I am missing?

 

[East Winds]

bigfootsquatch,

No, you are not missing anything. The problem is deciding WHICH is the correct form that was handed down. Handed down from whom? If you considering the form as handed down from Yang Cheng-fu to Fu Zhong Wen or Tung Ying Chieh or Chen Wei Ming or the two brothers Yang Zhen Ji or Yang Zhen Duo, then this is probably as it was handed down. If you consider the Cheng Man-Ching form then that is certainly nothing like the form handed down by Cheng-fu. The "Fishes in Eight" move comes from the Yang Shou Zhong (or the Hong Kong side of the Yang form). This was certainly not a move used or demonstrated by Yang Cheng-fu. So where it came from is a bit of a mystery. As for looking straight ahead in the Left Ward Off, look at any photographs of Cheng-fu and you will see he is looking straight ahead. What makes Traditional Yang- Traditional Yang and not some other derivative, is the incorporation of all of the 10 Essences. As I have said on this board many times, I think CMC mis-understood the purpose of the repititions in the Long Form and in removing them, I think he emasculated the form. Erle Montaigue of course claims to be performing the Yang Lu Chan form which again is nothing like the final Cheng-fu form. The flaw with Mr. Montaigues form is of course the external manfestation of Fa Jin. Yang Lu Chan changed the Chen form to conceal the Fa Jin within. So when you talk of trasnmitting the "correct" from, you need first to decide who indeed HAS the correct form.

Very best wishes

 

[bigfootsquatch]

EW,

I appreciate your answer. So I guess this is why yang family tai chi can be so controversial? No one really knows for sure exactly what even Yang Cheng Fu's form(much less Lu Chans) was since each of his students do it differently! Like you said though, his 10 essences are what defines Yang Tai Chi to begin with. It is just so frustrating to try and sort through all of the bogus out there. At least in the other main tai chi styles, you can follow the lineages better, Sun style especially. Anyway, who do YOU think does the most accurate Yang form?

 

[East Winds]

bigfootsquatch,

I think the transmission that comes from Fu Zhong Wen, Tung Ying Chie, Chen Wei Ming, and the three sons (Shou Zhong, Zhen Ji and Zhen Duo) is pretty close to what Cheng-fu finally transmitted as his form. And although there appears to be differences in the performance of the forms listed above, the apparent differences can be accounted for by Age, physical ability and speed of performance. Once you take all these into consideration you can see that they are in fact all doing the same form, and all performing with the 10 essences intact.

I agree entirely about the other forms having a much truer continuity of form transmission, but lay squarely the Yang confusion at the door of Cheng Man-ching and the Chinese government of the 50's. Perhaps some of the blame can also be laid at the door of the Yang's themselves for not protecting their heritage more vigorously. However conditions of political upheaval in the 40's, 50's and 60's perhaps made that somewhat difficult.

Very best wishes

 

[TaiChiTJ]

Speaking on the martial side of the art, Frenchman Thierry Alibert performs quite close to the Yang standard mentioned above (the one that is NOT Cheng Man Ching), and derives good self defense from it. I have been "surprised" a bit by a few of his applications.

:ultracool

 

[grydth]

bigfootsquatch,

I think the transmission that comes from Fu Zhong Wen, Tung Ying Chie, Chen Wei Ming, and the three sons (Shou Zhong, Zhen Ji and Zhen Duo) is pretty close to what Cheng-fu finally transmitted as his form. And although there appears to be differences in the performance of the forms listed above, the apparent differences can be accounted for by Age, physical ability and speed of performance. Once you take all these into consideration you can see that they are in fact all doing the same form, and all performing with the 10 essences intact.

I agree entirely about the other forms having a much truer continuity of form transmission, but lay squarely the Yang confusion at the door of Cheng Man-ching and the Chinese government of the 50's. Perhaps some of the blame can also be laid at the door of the Yang's themselves for not protecting their heritage more vigorously. However conditions of political upheaval in the 40's, 50's and 60's perhaps made that somewhat difficult.

Very best wishes

You are certainly entitled to possess and repeatedly post your negative opinions on Cheng Man-Ching... I have the same freedom, of course, to respectfully disagree.

I had hoped we were reaching an era of tolerance in Tai Chi, where people could choose and practice what they wished... and do that without condemning the practice choices of others. I do find it unsettling that an obviously accomplished practitioner needs to keep disparaging a deceased master.

You assert that the Yang family did not "protect their heritage more vigorously." Can you, in fact, point to ANY contemporary disavowal or condemnation of Cheng Man Ching by the Yang family? Can you point to ANY actions they took against him?

These "conditions of political upheaval".... can you explain why these would affect the Yangs and not other families? What specific conditions had what specific effects on the Yangs? Can you cite a source that shows what actions they would have taken?

I think blaming Cheng Man Ching alone for decades of confusion in Yang family transmission is by far an oversimplification. I trust you are aware of a number of Yang family derivatives.... why, pray tell, would they be blameless?

In a prior post (above), you alleged that Cheng "emasculated" the Yang practice. You are asserting that his lineage has produced no martial artists of note? I'm wondering how many CMC practitioners from these parts you may have associated with.... I'm not thinking anyone has worked with my first sifu for over 15 minutes and come up with that opinion.... I realize the continuing debate over how much was deleted and the postures lost....but I believe the verb used is extreme and inaccurate.

I mean you no disrespect and have toned this down as we can hopefully debate the arts and not each other.

 

[bigfootsquatch]

Every Yang does the form differently. Perhaps they all possess the 10 essences, but phsyically the form does look slightly different. I've almost gotten fed up with finding the proper Yang variation to study and have considered switching to Sun Style for that very reason. On another note I don't think Chen Man Ching caused as much confusion as the Yang themselves for not protecting their style more and for not having passed on the older forms. Even if they didnt want to teach the older forms, at least they could have cut the crap of the others who claim to teach the original forms.

 

[jks9199]

Every Yang does the form differently. Perhaps they all possess the 10 essences, but phsyically the form does look slightly different. I've almost gotten fed up with finding the proper Yang variation to study and have considered switching to Sun Style for that very reason. On another note I don't think Chen Man Ching caused as much confusion as the Yang themselves for not protecting their style more and for not having passed on the older forms. Even if they didnt want to teach the older forms, at least they could have cut the crap of the others who claim to teach the original forms.

Perhaps you're looking in the wrong places...

I and my partner can demonstrate "identical" techniques that look very different. I'm a 270 pound guy; she's a 140 pound woman. For that reason, and others, we often express the same principles and tactics in ways that look different on the surface.

 

[Rabu]

I would like to chime in, if I may.

As for the commentary on the 'correct' form...oddly stated.

A teacher offers their art to the student, who may change or alter it, perhaps even improve it in doing so. In that way the teacher is like a bow and the student the arrow. The teacher offers guidence and direction, the student flies their own course.

I have heard demonization of both the Yang family and Cheng Man Ching, in relations to their practice and attitudes about the art they pass to their students. Really, all I want to know...can they push or not? Do they have a solid foundation in the principles of a martial art?

I have also heard great praise for both, and many others. I would prefer to work with people who have either little to say or perhaps only work towards bettering their practice, which would require them to evolve over time and work their art for themselves, rather than clinging to the coattails of people past.

I have seen a number of iterations of Yang forms, having only learned the 24 form myself, and the simplified version at that. All of them share immense similiarities, and often some individual flavor which speaks to the teacher and their methods.

I always hear the argument regarding who has it right. Sincerely, the argument is boring and pointless. The forms are out there and living and breathing at this point, guided by those arrows shot by the masters who shared their art. The 'Yang family' holds no copyrights to other peoples knowledge and it would be offensive to suggest so.

Best of luck in your practice, enjoy and simply disregard the noise. Find a good Shifu with skill who wants to share the art and learn.

Regards,

Rob

 

[Nyarlathotep]

If there's one thing you can always rely on in discussions of the relative merits of styles and which best embodies the essence of Tai Chi....
It'll always be claimed as the one that they themselves practice.

But if there's one thing you can always be sure of, it's that the practitioner's skill is more important than the form they have learned!

 

[bigfootsquatch]

if our bodies are engines and martial arts is fuel, then we want to be sure we are putting good fuel into our engines so that we run properly...food for thought

While I do appreciate the personalized knowledge of a teacher, many make modifications and still call it by the original name, which it no longer is. Modifying something takes away from the originality of it. Let's say a kickboxing instructor adds grappling into the classes. Is it still kickboxing or is it MMA now?

I've enjoyed everyone's comments; keep em coming!

 

[grydth]

if our bodies are engines and martial arts is fuel, then we want to be sure we are putting good fuel into our engines so that we run properly...food for thought

While I do appreciate the personalized knowledge of a teacher, many make modifications and still call it by the original name, which it no longer is. Modifying something takes away from the originality of it. Let's say a kickboxing instructor adds grappling into the classes. Is it still kickboxing or is it MMA now?

I've enjoyed everyone's comments; keep em coming!

Does a change take away from or improve - does that not depend both upon the change and the view of the beholder?

One can lament a loss of "originality".... or celebrate it as an evolution. We expect almost all other things - indeed, even following generations - to improve and evolve. Why trap Tai Chi in the past, why freeze it in time without the inspired changes of a future master - who may equal or even surpass the founder?

This is why I hope we'll have some tolerance return to Tai Chi. If you wish to do things the original way - I wish you the best. If you believe new iterations make a great thing even better - I hope you prosper.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

Fuel for thought

Does Traditional always mean Better, or does it depend on the degree to which the teacher has mastered the essences?

Does New always equal Corrupted, or are there as many forms as there are people practicing?

Besides surely the real value of Tai Chi lies inside the form.
When I was a kid I didn't care about the color of the wrapping paper or the shape of the box my birthday presents came in either.

(resists the urge to shave head and call other posters grasshopper)

 

[oxy]

if our bodies are engines and martial arts is fuel, then we want to be sure we are putting good fuel into our engines so that we run properly...food for thought

While I do appreciate the personalized knowledge of a teacher, many make modifications and still call it by the original name, which it no longer is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

 

[bigfootsquatch]

Oxy,

If you modify Yang Tai Chi to the point that it is no longer what the Yangs envisioned it to be, then it quite simply isn't Yang Tai Chi. There is no logical fallicy in that.

 

[bigfootsquatch]

Fuel for thought

Does Traditional always mean Better, or does it depend on the degree to which the teacher has mastered the essences?

Does New always equal Corrupted, or are there as many forms as there are people practicing?

Besides surely the real value of Tai Chi lies inside the form.
When I was a kid I didn't care about the color of the wrapping paper or the shape of the box my birthday presents came in either.

(resists the urge to shave head and call other posters grasshopper)

Well I do agree that the real value lies in the form, but if the form isn't being taught properly due to it's modifications then where does that leave us? Yang Lu Chan and the 2nd and 3rd gen. Yangs were some of the best tai chi martial artists. Surely that should speak something for the traditional forms, along with their huge investment of practice.

Anyway, this discussion has gotten away from topic, so feel free to continue on without me. Thanks for the advice and answers from those who gave it.

 

[oxy]

Oxy,

If you modify Yang Tai Chi to the point that it is no longer what the Yangs envisioned it to be, then it quite simply isn't Yang Tai Chi. There is no logical fallicy in that.

There is, actually. That is why I included the Begging the Question link. It's not a logical fallacy in that it's definitely wrong. It's a logical fallacy because your reasoning is incomplete and unsound through unsupported (but expected to be true) implications.

In your very short reply, you imply many things. Your reasoning requires that certain premises be accepted as truth without any reason to.

For example, the very small part of your sentence "what the Yangs envisioned it to be". For any of your reasoning you have in your previous post to have merit, you would first have to know what the Yangs envisioned their Taiji to be. Then, you have to ask whether the first Yang to learn Taiji really sought to create a new style or was he just adapting Chen to his personal preferences. For any of your "Real Yang" (no true scotsman) reasoning to have any use, you have to assume that there is somehow a universal law which states "Yang starts here" and "Yang ends here".

Another example of you begging the question is:

if our bodies are engines and martial arts is fuel, then we want to be sure we are putting good fuel into our engines so that we run properly...food for thought

This requires anyone to accept this as true to also accept the implication that any slight deviation from a "standard" not only is "not good fuel" but also that our "engines" is unable to "run properly" on this other form of fuel.

As far as any martial arts is concerned, there are usually two main aspects of "run properly": it's good for our health; it's good for fighting.

For any of your complaints about the slight differences in Yang form to have any merit, you have to establish that there is some main standard in which to move your body. Then you have to prove that this is indeed healthy and also good for fighting with. Then you have to prove that there is no other way to get this optimal state.

Then you have to realise the implications of this if you actually do try to define it. Because then you would have implied that Yang Taiji is the superior martial art. You would have implied that Chen is inferior to "proper" Yang Taiji because, obviously, Chen moves in different ways to Yang. However, if you don't agree with these implications (which I'm quite sure you wouldn't), then you would have to agree that modifications to whatever the "original" Yang is is not a priori bad fuel. Nor can you a priori state that this different fuel is not good for your engine.

And, as others have said, evolution of the martial art happens. On the general scale, you beg the question that Yang is defined by a point in time, rather than defined by its evolution. In much the same way, if you define many things by a point in time rather than its evolution, you beg a whole lot of questions. Most of which are not absolute/universal/objective standards and most of which clearly cannot have complete dominance over another.

 

[TaiChiTJ]

And then there is Yang Sau Cheung, Yang Chen Fu's son. The video is poor.

Ip Tai Tak was Yang Sau Cheung's student:

http://www.iptaichi.org/video3.html

:ultracool

 

[Nyarlathotep]

Well I do agree that the real value lies in the form, but if the form isn't being taught properly due to it's modifications then where does that leave us? .

By not being taught 'properly' I take it you mean traditionally.
Provided the applications and essences are intact and it is equal or superior as a martial art, then surely it still remains good T'ai Chi.

So what that would leave us with is the beginning of a new style of T'ai Chi divergent from, but based upon the original.
Much as Yang style diverged from Chen through the alterations of Lu Chan.

What I am resisting here is the temptation to equate traditional with superior and the deification of the lineage's originator.
By no means am I suggesting that half baked T'ai Chi is of any value.

 

[bigfootsquatch]

By not being taught 'properly' I take it you mean traditionally.
Provided the applications and essences are intact and it is equal or superior as a martial art, then surely it still remains good T'ai Chi.

So what that would leave us with is the beginning of a new style of T'ai Chi divergent from, but based upon the original.
Much as Yang style diverged from Chen through the alterations of Lu Chan.

What I am resisting here is the temptation to equate traditional with superior and the deification of the lineage's originator.
By no means am I suggesting that half baked T'ai Chi is of any value.

I meant more of along the lines of people forming their own schools before they have completely learned the art from their teacher. Perhaps they do not understand why a certain move is done the way it is, so THEN they change it. I understand, to a point, about why the Yangs have modified the forms over the years, though I do not necessarily agree with it. Of course Lu Chan reshaped Chen style accordingly, but he was also an exceptional martial artist who modified it only after 30 or so years of intensive practice. Sun Lu tang modified Hao Tai Chi to form Sun Tai Chi as most know, of course he only spent his whole life studying internal arts, AND he no longer called it Hao/Wu style after the modification. Cheng Man Ching's form is not considered Yang anymore. Chen Pan Ling modified the Older Yang Style and meshed with other knowledge to form CHEN PAN LING Tai Chi, not Yang/Old Yang.

When people modify things out of ignorance rather than experience, then we start getting bad tai chi, or half baked tai chi as you said. Most martial artists wouldn't be laughing at tai chi or treating it as a health art if it would not have gone through so many "progressive" modifications.

This post wasn't just aimed at you, I just quoted you since I liked your post best. Sorry if my message sounds scatterbrained.