POST #4: Of MMA and TCMA Part 2

Part 1 was dedicated to a critique of the notion “Mixed Martial Arts” and all things modern which fall in that category. In order to show that I am not biased and above “brand loyalty”, this post will be a critique of certain elements prevalent among many Traditional Chinese Martial Artists. This applies to classical arts in general, but as my focus is TCMA, just substitute, at your discretion, whatever ‘X’ art you think relevant.

There are many issues I have with the contemporary practice and dissemination of TCMA (don’t think it’s just the one I will be mentioning in this post), but for the sake of maintaining a theme, I will only be tackling one at a time.

This post will be directed at those who train in TCMA, but misrepresent the art form. Misrepresentation includes such statements as “my art is too deadly to use in competition”, “it is a secret that I cannot show people”, “our art is meant to kill so we cannot demonstrate it practically” and other such related nonsense phrases. Misrepresentation also includes the claiming of knowledge and training in TCMA, but come show time, absolute horseshit.

(Look! A bad word. Clearly no bias on my part!)

Allow me to briefly clarify something. Depending on the goals set by the individual learning TCMA, there will obviously be different categories and levels of judgment. For instance, a person who wishes to learn TCMA primarily for health reasons is not expected to become an expert fighter; that individual will instead be judged on health improvements. If they learn to fight on the side, kudos to them. Likewise a person who wishes to study TCMA in order to gather cultural information will not be expected to become an expert fighter; that individual will be judged on the amount of relevant cultural material learned and understood. This post, and the subsequent criticisms, is aimed at the individuals who claim to learn TCMA for the purpose of fighting; individuals who SHOULD be judged on their ability to engage in physical contests.

For this particular category, there are, in my opinion, essentially five different types of TCMA fighters. I will list them in (my personal) decreasing order of respect. They are:

• The Traditionalist Fighter
• The Hybrid Fighter
• The Self Defense Fighter
• The “Kick Boxer” (notice how it’s in quotes. More on that soon enough)
• The Internet Warrior

The TRADITIONALIST FIGHTER is something of a myth, wrapped in a fairy tale, placed in a dream. TFs are those that can utilize the skills in a textbook fashion with little to no deviance in structure or general shape, despite the modern variables involved in fights. If the form he learned requires a 45 degree bend and two hands held parallel while swiveling on a center, then in a fight he will do exactly that, PERFECTLY and EFFECTIVELY, in any given context which the movement would be deemed appropriate. Essentially, watch a 70s/80s Hong Kong Gung Fu movie and watch how they fight. Excellent choreography. Spectacular fight scenes. Natural grace. Mind boggling speed and precision. Authentic patterns and movements abound. That is the Traditionalist Fighter (obviously a movie is dramatized skill, but I hope you get the picture). I’m sure there are a few out there; emphasis on the word FEW

(I've never seen one. However, since I'm not a fan of absolutes, I always leave a 1% margin of error. Hence FEW).

Everyone who started learning Gung Fu at some point wanted to reach this level of fantastical skill. Most people realize soon that unless you have absolutely nothing else to do other than learn Gung Fu, this vision is harder to hold than water in a broken bottle.

(the video clip came from a 1981 movie choreographed by Lau Kar Leung, an absolute Legend in martial arts choreography and a real life master of enviable renown. He's the old man in the brown who fights the villain in white.)

The Hybrid Fighter is the classification those who train for combat should aim. The HF MAY not readily adopt classical ready stances I.e. very erect side horse stance, Ji Ng Ma, Diu Ma etc. There are exceptions obviously, but usually in non-demonstration/uncontrolled environments, the HF would probably opt to stand like any kick boxer or disciplined combatant in the modern era: erect, slight curvature of the back, hands up to protect head and upper body, or perhaps head and a lower guard for the middle, possibly a side stance to decrease exposed surface area blah blah blah. From here, he seems like any other fighter in a ring. Even the initial punch/kick might seem indistinguishable from the modern kick boxer. However, that is where the similarity ends. Once the initial attack is given/received, the HF will pressure, maneuver, and fight primarily with the techniques he trained so hard i.e. claws into joint cavities, tripping with horse stance, double fists, finger strikes, swinging forearms, retreat and attack using Tau Ma stance. He only falls back onto the simple jab-kick phase when the distance is too great and the caution too high. The HF is, at most, 10% ‘kick boxing’, with the other 90% being the classical patterns and skills of his chosen discipline.

(the video clip used portrays the Buk Sing Choy Li Fut group, a sub set of the Choy Li Fut system. The Lacey's are very well known and of excellent martial pedigree due to their intensive training, with actual tangible results, and admirable devotion to the art)

The Self Defense fighter is in the middle of my range of acceptability. I will talk about those who engage in TCMA for the purpose of self defense IN A DIFFERENT POST as this is another issue I have with TCMA . However, as I said, one criticism at a time. Suffice to say that I am OFFICIALLY neutral, but UNofficially leaning toward discouragement regarding learning TCMA for self defense purposes (as a primary aim TCMA training).

Now we get into the real thick and murky business of wading through the sludge and scum which abounds within the world of people who train in TCMA (I used moderately distinct imagery to create a sense of disgust while distancing myself from actual profanity. Just as effective no?)

I have very little respect for “Kickboxers” (note the quotation marks). I do not mean those who practice the myriad of disciplines that fall under the purview of kickboxing I.e. Muay Thai, Sanda, Savate, American Kickboxing, Shoot Boxing etc. Individuals who practice those disciplines are good athletes and usually a credit to their discipline simply due to the fact that those who practice it use it. “Kickboxers” refer to, and hence the quotes, those that spend the time to train in TCMA… but fall back onto what could only be described as a pale shadow of an imitation of kickboxing. Let me paint you a picture:

Everyday, for several years, you train yourself hours at a time. You plant yourself in stances to strengthen your standing and rooting power. You kick 1000 times the many different types of kicks you know. You practice an assortment of punches and hand strikes coming from every conceivable angle. You slap sand, gravel and metal beads to toughen your hands. You condition the tips of your fingers the same way, spending hours jabbing them into sand, gravel and metal beads. You spend hours using nothing but the tips to grip onto jugs of water. You now possess fingers that can easily slide in between joints and damage soft tissue and muscle. You learn how to properly angle yourself so that with minimal force, you can topple people larger than yourself. You strike trees with your forearms to harden the bone in the wrist, forearm, and toughen the skin and flesh of your muscles so that they, on top of your fists, may be used as effective bludgeoning tools. You learn how to lead with a simple jab, but rush in close to seal off the opponents arms while being able to position your elbow right at his plexus, effectively being able to knock your opponent down in one strike ad nauseum… … … …

You now get into a fight (either for competition, self defense, or because you‘re an undisciplined asshole), and the first thing you do is throw a jab. So far so good. You throw a sloppy kick… maybe you simply lost balance. Then you lose your head and everything goes out the window. You are reduced to flailing. No stance. No root. No calculated maneuvering. No legs-hip-torso-arm union. Just erratic shiftings along an imaginary line, hopping in imperfect circles, jumping and swinging your arms in hopes of an opening. THAT, my friends, is PURE embarrassment.

In the above described situation, it would be BETTER to LOSE attempting to use real TCMA techniques.

Some might question why.

Why would you rather lose attempting to use techniques you might not be prepared to utilize?

It would be better because, though defeated, people will simply say that HIS Gung Fu was no good. He would simply need to train harder, smarter, and educate himself better regarding the ins and outs of different fight strategies. He would need to spar more and study different styles to become better versed and tailoring his chosen skill sets to best others.

However, in the above situation, his Gung Fu isn’t simply no good. It’s not present at all. So you claim to know TCMA and they challenge you. Instead of attempting to show TCMA in combat, you fall back on something you never really learned and therefore cannot even properly imitate.

What does that say?

That says that even though you spent the time, suffered the bruises, cuts and breaks, dripped the blood and sweat and tears… you have no confidence in what you train.

There is no pride.

Not only is your Gung Fu absent. Your fighting spirit is absent. It is no longer ‘HIS Gung Fu is no good’. It becomes ‘Gung Fu IN GENERAL is no good’. A chef that does not eat his own recipes cannot be trusted. Corporate leaders hesitant to invest in their own company cannot expect the public to believe in the company either. Such is the case with TCMA practitioners, who train for combat, but fall back on something entirely different. “Kickboxers” (note the quotes) are detrimental to the fighting pride and heritage of TCMA.

(I would like to make a note that the above description and criticisms are leveled at TCMA people that train to fight in competitions or for general scuffling purposes. In the event of surprise attacks in dark alleys, I don't think it matters what you do so long as you come out alive. If it turns out that flailing saved your life, then gosh darn it who am I/you to complain in that situation? The anger and resentment is not aimed at those attempting to get home safe to their families, but at those who parade the fact they learn TCMA... but have squat to show. THOSE people are my intended targets).

The final category of TCMA fighters are those whom are dubbed as Internet Warriors. In the truest sense, I believe most of them are not fighters, but that is merely an assumption on my part based on the colloquial label assigned to them. As the title implies, I.W. do not frequently voice themselves in a true public forum but rather hide behind their cyber walls and interact on forum boards. They are inflammatory speakers who watch competitions and demonstrations and have little to no useful critique of the happenings. They come in two varieties:

• Those critical of TCMA practitioners as being shit

• Those that defend TCMA practitioners with an assortment of excuses, much like those made in the beginning of this post.

The latter group is usually composed of TCMA practitioners or, even more depressing, starry-eyed NON-EXPONENTS who have been pulled into the world of classical gung fu movies and wonderful displays of martial strength via demos etc WITHOUT EVER HAVING EXPERIENCED the bitter training and the ‘eating of the late night congee’.

(the latter statement is a Chinese colloquialism translated into English. It is equivalent to ‘burning the midnight oil‘. Back in the day, you stayed late to train late with fellow older martial brothers to help flesh out what you have learned over a period. In the end, you had a light snack/meal of congee.)

Regarding the first group, they will be addressed in a different post. The reason is that they fall under a more specific topic which will be later addressed and TAGGED as “GAMES”. Suffice to say that the first group either criticizes groundlessly, due to having no skills themselves, or criticizes on faulty premises, which is what that future post will address.

The second group is the real danger to TCMA. Regarding the defense statements, I have this to say:

Why join a competition if you did not prepare to fight according to their rules?

If you have the intent to join a specific competition that has specific rules I.e. no eye gouges, no groin kicks, no punching the back of the head, then it is the responsibility of the fighter to train according to those rules and attempt to excel according to those rules. If you want to test your skills based on a different rubric, perhaps one which allows eye gouging and groin kicking, then join that type of competition. It is simply ridiculous how many comments there are online saying things like

“oh if he didn’t have gloves on he’d kick his ass”

or

“this is bullshit. That Shaolin monk/Gung Fu fighter/karate kid would whoop that jiu jitsu guy/mma guy etc if they didn’t have gloves/allowed him to use his deadly techniques”.

All of these points are POTENTIALLY valid. However, the success of those two points hinge on two important factors:

• that they didn’t have gloves

• that they were not in THAT particular type of competition with THOSE explicit rules.

The jist of this is that you entered a competition unprepared. Don't cry about losing at something you knew the rules for but refused to prepare accordingly.

We move onto the second subgroup of the Internet Warriors: The individuals who have had little to no training the martial arts and have their sources of references as movies, books, hearsay stories (My friend knew a guy who heard a story from his brother who trains with a man that was in the Army/Special Forces/Shaolin Temple/Taoist Sage............ you get the picture I'm sure)

These people are idiots. Plain and simple. It is a shame to consider them part of the martial community but, like any other type of community, there are elements that the majority would rather not acknowledge or deal with. These people, by popular opinion, should not belong, but they belong nonetheless because they are insistent in stepping foot into territories that would rather them not be present. This can be somewhat equated to ethnic minorities in a somewhat hostile country; the major ethnic group in charge of the country would rather they just move on out, but they have to let them stay or else the majority will be accused of racial prejudices.

(For the record, I am NOT endorsing ethnic cleansing. Just the first example I could think of. Ethnic minorities enrich an area they reside in by simply bringing variety and distinctness. I am not a racist. Please don't accuse me of being one. Like I said, first moderately well fitted example for the situation I could think of. Remember, Me=NOT A RACIST.)

These individuals, these Internet Warriors, just shit all over the place and leave nothing but bitterness and embarrassment. Their great disservice is injecting themselves in conversations that they know nothing about and, therefore, force people who might sincerely want to learn something, to muck their way through the garbage. Most people just throw up their hands and surrender, coming to premature conclusions that, more often than not, cast a negative light on TCMA. This is the great disservice these starry-eyed Internet Warriors engage… they take up room and valuable time and distract people from the genuine knowledge attempting to be disseminated. Sure they might even have read a few books on martial theory and combat philosophy. They might even have seen a few videos and listened in on a few demos and martial seminars/conventions. This all amounts to about less than a thimbles worth of experience and they, as individuals who perpetuate the nonsense and illusion of experience, amount to even less because of their intentional misleading of others and general irresponsible and assholish behaviours.

...In the above section I realize that I come off sounding rather belligerent. Under normal circumstances I am a very passive and nice guy... pussy cat like in fact. And I know writing in blog format seems to, at least superficially, point a shy trembling finger in my direction in accusation of being an Internet Warrior myself.

You know what I have to say to that?

I've already acknowledged that the internet is not the way to teach... and text only formats are not the way to go when learning something that is so definitely physical. I mentioned this in... my first post I believe. However, as I also mentioned in that post, and perhaps the second post, I would be remiss to the promise I made if I did not utilize a little bit of everything in order to fulfill my charge. So, in the words often ATTRIBUTED to Voltaire (though incorrectly so) "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." You are perfectly free to draw your own conclusions based on what little bit/moderate amount/all you have read. If I end up doing a bad job, that's why I made an open invitation for constructive criticism, questions and debate.

So what is the take home message of this rather lengthy post?

TCMA practitioners are abundant. However, the bad reputation TCMA has recently received is justified by the nonsense that seems to be prevalent in most circles. Misrepresentation is a major issue within the community and, sadly enough, there might be an equal number of genuine as well as disingenuous representatives. Those who do dish out judgment must bear in mind that not all people learn TCMA for the purpose of combat as it is rich in cultural information as well as an all around good work out. Thus before an individual decides to judge, it must be first made abundantly clear that you are judging according to the right mind set and utilizing the proper rubric i.e. don't judge the historian by the standards of a fighter. Judgment must be reserved for the appropriate categories.

Train Hard. Talk Less
~Thunder Palms

POST #3: Of MMA and TCMA PART 1

There is a lot of nonsense surrounding the whole phenomena of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA). A lot of it is promoted by MMA establishments, possibly due to ignorance or possibly due to a particular redefining of the word ‘mixed’. There is also a lot of nonsense coming from the Traditional Chinese Martial Arts. People hide behind certain phrases like “our art is meant to kill” or “we don’t fight because it’s too deadly to use in competition” etc. This post will be one of several, and it will be tagged for easy search, dealing with the concept of Mixed Martial Arts and the concept of Traditional Chinese Martial Arts. To maintain a sincere air of balance, I will alternate between posts, critiquing both MMA and TCMA regarding their own specific issues. This particular post will focus primarily on the incorrect notion and definition of Mixed Martial Arts.

Mixed Martial Arts is a term applied to modern day fighters, in and out of the ring, who train in several distinct disciplines in order to become a well rounded fighting machine. Thus we have arts such as jiu-jitsu being utilized by an individual who also trains in Muay Thai, Shoot Wrestling, Western Boxing etc. That is what people consider to be Mixed Martial Arts today. Bruce Lee is considered, by a large majority, to be the father of Mixed Martial Arts because Lee, though trained mostly in a classical Chinese art, decided to broaden his horizons and would eventually add western fencing, western boxing, karate, tae kwon do etc to his training regiment, and create the now ever so popular martial philosophy of Jeet Kune Do. Though the recognizable core of his fight philosophy is heavily the Chinese martial art of Wing Chun, it was considered a milestone in the combat arts for championing the idea of learning from many different sources and taking the good while leaving what you consider personally unhelpful. The take home message I suppose is the idea of Mixed Martial Arts being a mix of different styles and forms of combat to make yourself more efficient at fighting. However, Lee certainly was the not first, nor the last, to have conceived of this notion. This has been done for thousands of years.

Traditional Chinese Martial Arts has a history spanning thousands of years. It goes past the popular Shaolin Temple and has its roots in the most basic of martial combat employed during warfare. Thus it can be said that any country that has ever waged war has a type of martial art. From how a shield should be worn and used, to where a bayonet should be aimed, these are all forms of martial combat. TCMA is essentially a slow crystallization of knowledge, passed through generations, being added and subtracted from, in order to arrive at what we have in the modern day. Any two TCMA styles are no more than half alike in either fight philosophy or fight techniques employed. I say half because, when all is said and done, barring accidents and mutations, we all have the exact number of limbs, joints and digits. Someone, somewhere, is going to arrive at the conclusion that a certain way of punching is ideal for a certain situation and, without consultation, someone else will arrive at the same conclusion, though perhaps through a different process. Thus, as I said, half alike due to the limitation and semi-uniformity of the human body, but so very different in other aspects.

Unless we travel back to the very Genesis of martial combat, all modern forms of fighting, even what we consider to be classical styles such as Japanese Karate, TCMA etc are mixed martial arts. Karate is both indigenous to Okinawa as much as it is heavily influenced by Chinese Martial Arts. The foundation of Okinawan unarmed combat, as well as weapons combat, can all be traced back to the Mainland. However, the past masters took what they thought relevant to their situation, made it distinctly Okinawan, and trained with the express purpose in mind of making it their tradition, their lore, their form of combat. And it is true. Under the eyes of a casual observer, Karate and certain styles of Gung Fu are very different. Outside of the occasional punch and kick, the structure, stepping, breathing, tempo etc are all very different. But those that have made it even a casual open-minded study will note the many similarities in the movements, techniques employed etc. How can Karate NOW not be considered a mixed martial arts system when already, many hundreds of years ago, Karate THEN was already a rich container of different philosophies, foreign as well as indigenous techniques, and a separate mindset which allowed the art to evolve in a very different manner than its sibling/cousin arts elsewhere in Asia?

When asked what makes MMA MMA, many fighters will point that they incorporate striking and grappling into their fighting styles. Thus they have a good “stand up” as well as “ground fight” game, two crucial elements which they say are ‘mixed‘ into a single training mindset. If we were to break it down to just bare bones elements, then any style of TCMA would have to be considered an MMA. At the very least, all TCMA styles have a stand up striking plan. In fact, this is a major criticism most classical arts must suffer from the more modern fighters; that the focus is too narrow on only a stand up game and there is no alternative fight plan. TCMA also have distinct joint and limb locking techniques; techniques that do not revolve around striking at all, but on subduing an individual through a very dynamic movement followed by a firm static force. They also have a plethora of weapons (ranging from the typical sword, spear and staff, to the less typical chain whip, rope dart, cane, needles etc) that are wielded differently and, though usable in all situations, have certain cases where they would be more effective than others.

(A well made spear is almost categorically better than an equally well made staff if only in the fact that the spear can be used as a staff while also as a stabbing implement).

Ground fighting… I will address that in a separate post; not because I have nothing to say, but because I have something inflammatory to say which will tie in better with a separate theme. But nixing the ground fighting, TCMA has three elements to “MMA’s” two.

Why is TCMA not considered a mixed martial arts? A possible argument would be that Modern MMA is a mixture of very distinct styles of combat from various regions around the world that focus on different strategies and techniques. This I call bullshit for two reasons, and I will include a short and a long explanation. The first short reason is that any person who watches any MMA competition will see that it almost always boils down to a semi-homoerotic punch and grapple fest (let the author now note that he has no issue with homosexuality. It is perfectly natural in my opinion and is nothing to be negatively excited about). To aid in this terse description, allow me to link you over to the web comic “Penny-Arcade” which, though simplifying to a degree… isn’t actually that far off:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/7/15/

The second short reason is that TCMA has been combining distinct styles of combat to form new theories, techniques and schools for centuries.

There isn’t a very long explanation required for the first short reason. It is almost self-explanatory. But to elucidate briefly (I will be touching on this topic in a different post), what the hell is the point of learning such disparate forms of combat and discipline if, when utilized, it boils down to nearly identical tactics, techniques and counters? It is a game of rock, paper, scissors where everyone takes the rock from the same mountain, the paper from the same tree, and the scissors from the same store. The only difference is who has the bigger rock, the thicker sheet of paper, and the better brand of scissors. How they use the tools, however, are all the same. This only works in a game. I will leave off explaining THAT particularly inflammatory bit in another post as well.

Regarding the second short point, there are several hundred distinct, documented styles, of Chinese Martial Arts. The emphasis is on the word documented, as it is hypothesized that throughout history, there have been some which have died off for various reasons, or are simply undocumented due to continued secrecy in practice

(the latter is mostly due to family styles which are strictly within the family).

But there are very real examples of how classical mixings created the more contemporary arts.

(I use contemporary loosely, as something with a history of several thousand years can be said to be more contemporary when dealing only within the span of a 100 or so years).

A very real example would be the Northern Mantis style. The Northern Mantis style (and within this branch there are several distinct sub-branches as well which differ quite broadly regarding focus i.e. Eight Step Mantis [Baat Bo Tong Long], Seven Star Mantis [Chaat Sing Tong Long], Six Unity/Harmony Mantis [Lok Hap Tong Long] etc) was created by a Buddhist martial monk who, after being incapable of defeating his older martial brother, went off to the forest to train. He gained deep insight after seeing a mantis kill and devour a larger insect. He spent months prodding the mantis with bits of straw to see how it would react to aggression from different angles and speeds. From that he developed particular hand techniques he found impressive. Thus we already have a mixture of two distinct styles. One is the core knowledge of the traditional Shaolin Buddhist martial arts. The second is the distinct handwork of the Mantis (and if you have ever seen Northern Mantis, you will agree that it is very distinct in handwork). And the third is the footwork; the method of advancing, retreating, side stepping, jumping, kicking, and blocking with legs. Those elements were borrowed, and of course slightly modified, from the Monkey style. Three distinct elements, borrowed from three distinct arts, were combined to create a new fight philosophy, new techniques, and new training schemes intentionally to develop a different type of fighting style and fighter. How is this not mixed martial arts?

After such a drawn out exposition, what is the take home message? As I said, under the headline “Of MMA and TCMA”, I plan to write several posts directly addressing the interaction of these two. Each post will have its own point. This one was geared at expressing my opinion that the scoffing and low opinion of TCMA by MMA practitioners is not one properly fueled by a definitional difference. For in truth, I think I have made it at least 80% clear that, by definition, TCMA should be considered MMA in both a classical as well as modern light. The conflict comes from somewhere else, and that will be addressed in a different post.

Train Hard. Talk Less.
~Thunder Palms

POST #2: Of History and Lineage

I will take this occasion to mount a defense of my character and 'mission'. For the casual reader, they will perhaps be confused as to why such a defense is necessary. For the veteran traditionalist, even the ones who claim to rise about conventions, they will understand why a defense might be required, though I am prepared for criticisms despite my defense. Every post I make will be geared toward dissemination of some aspect of the art, and this post will be no different. However, at the same time, this is to be a defense of my actions; my Apologia for those that are students of philosophy and familiar with Plato.

History is very important to Traditional Chinese Martial Arts. It was popularly believed that since Traditional Chinese Martial Arts (henceforth abbreviated as TCMA) is so enmeshed with the cultural history of the country and its people, only the Chinese could possibly learn it properly; "the spirit of gung fu", as my uncle said, "lies intrinsically within every Chinese person." Just as how it is very hard for deep seated foreigners to learn and care about the history of distant countries, their goals, values, habits etc... so it is the same with TCMA which, until the present, was very localized in development and practice, and therefore possessing a very strong ethnic flavour. This is quite evident in many of the naming schemes utilized for certain patterns, forms, and various martial theories. Examples would be martial philosophies based on Yin and Yang, forms of combat and exercises focusing on particular animals, and names for certain movements like the posture "One Finger Stabilizing the Heavens."

Because cultural/social history is so ingrained with the practice of TCMA, it is only logical that lineages be a very important concept as well. Lineages stretch back for generations, sometimes a bit tenuously and sometimes quite bold and exact. There is an unspoken, or perhaps occasionally expressed, notion that the further back your line extends, the more prominent/authentic/noteworthy/'powerful' your system must be. This connection, from present day back to a point in time far removed from what we contemporarily experience, is a note of pride and distinction in many martial arts circles and individual practitioners. People can hearken back to an age of heroes, revolutionaries, invincible fighters and vigilantism, pointing to those individuals found within their school, their lineages, all but lost to history and say, "I am directly linked to that man/woman through the art I practice/teach." In this way, it is quite similar to those that adhere to any sort of discipline ranging from distinct forms of achitecture to secret family recipes. And, much like guilds during the Middle-Ages and the Renaissance period, fraternities started forming around these perceived distinctions; people joined together in brotherhoods, and families began keeping secrets to ensure only those accepted through proper trials would be allowed access to their distinct methods. From this a sense of prominence arose just for being a part of a certain group of high esteem and renown. Thus strong lineage adherences are not a concept to simply wave off as irrelevant. They are an integral part to the study of TCMA systems. Though arguably detrimental to an efficient promulgation of an art, such concepts served, and still serves in many areas of the modern day Gong Wu, as a binding agent within families. Such a model promotes a certain retention of distinct elements even between similar schools.

After that somewhat lengthy introduction, I will now bluntly state the issue I must defend. My history is very much in line with the system(s) I practice. I do not adhere and teach what would be considered controversial claims regarding the history of different systems of TCMA I study and/or train. However, my lineage is extremely debatable. My family members knew this (particularly my uncle) when they decided to teach me. I will mention "my uncle" a lot as he was the primary teacher that I chose to identify and learn from after selecting to train under his speciality; that being the Hung Family Fist aka Hung Gar Kuen. I have NO defensible lineage, and it is because of this that some traditionalists have formed negative preconceptions, and have voiced annoyance, at my efforts and status. Thus begins my Apologia.

I mentioned in my first post that my uncle wanted me to rise above the politics and commercialism that runs through the heart of modern day CMA. When he taught me, he made it expressly clear that he would not mention lineages, names or other possibly contemporary individuals whom he may have taught. All he mentioned was that he learned from his father. I never met the man and my uncle never told me his name. Since my uncle has since passed several years ago, I will never know and I must accept this as a fact of life. However, during a particular instance where I pressed him for certain names, he gave me a rather long lecture. The following will be the bulk of his words to me. He spoke mostly Cantonese and some very broken English. This, coupled with the fact that it was about 5 years ago, makes the exact wording questionable. However, the ideas expressed are 100% true to that moment:

[Uncle] "What good is it to know a name? So you can try to gain credit for other people's efforts? The only reason why you should know a name is to let people know you did not CREATE. And even then, just mentioning a title like 'brother' or 'my master from -insert country/city-' would be enough. It is important to give credit where credit is due. However, outside of that, dropping names should be avoided. Listen. Gung Fu is about hard work. There is no short cut. There is no secret. Even the Chinese characters for 'Gung Fu' translates to 'Man with merit gained through effort'. What other people did will be their credit, and make sure you give them that credit. What YOU do will be your credit, and your hard work will guarantee that you will get that credit. If people case so much about names and lineage, making it AS IMPORTANT, or MORE IMPORTANT, than training, then they do not really have the best interest in mind for the art. My father trained me and a few others. I train you and a few others. You may train your children and a few others. As long as YOU PRACTICE and have QUALITY to show for the training, then people have to shut up. There are a lot of people out there who possess quality but cannot teach because they do not have a strong lineage, or they are not cunning enough to work a business system. There is too bad because there are a lot of shit teachers who are cunning and cling to names. They are why Chinese Martial Arts today are laughed at by karate people and white people in general.

[PAUSE...Uncle looks down and then looks at me with fiery eyes]

Why was Lam Sai Wing famous? Because he learned from a famous master? Maybe. But DEFINITELY because he was a righteous man, an excellent fighter, and a producer of many famous fighters. Why was Wong Fei Hung famous? Because he learned from his famous father? Maybe. But DEFINITELY becase he was a righteous man and doctor who paid attention to the common people and defended them from local gangs, corrupt officials and general violence. DEFINITELY because he produced such great fighters like Lam Sai Wing, Tang Fong, and many others. Take away the fact that these two learned from a famous master, and they would still be considered admirable folk heroes for the deeds they did. Let me ask you [insert my name]: Why is Hung Hey Gwun famous?"

[Me] "Because he created the Hung Gar Kuen system, the art that Wong Fei Hung and Lam Sai Wing practiced. He was also a famous revolutionary that fought against the corrupt foreign government and went to spread his fighting system to the common people so they could better fight for themselves."

[Uncle] "Right. He CREATED the art. Yes he was influenced by his training, but he still took what he learned and created something relatively distinct. At some point in time, someone has to create something for it to be passed on. As you can probably see, you can be famous for three reasons. The first is to create something... something worthwhile. The second is to be skilled... good at what you claim to do. The third is to belong to a famous group. Out of the three, only the first two are hallmarks of true Gung Fu. The third is an accident. You might claim that it takes a lot of work to find a famous school. But it would be better to use that effort to train. Do you want to be famous simply because of an accident?"

[Uncle puts his hand on my shoulder and speaks gently]

"Remember this. Train hard and talk less. That way when you show in the future, people cannot talk bad at all about your skills. They may pick on something else, but they have to shut up about your skills."


And that concluded that lecture. Afterward he turned around and just yelled some instructions at me. It was from that conversation, some five years ago, that I have my favourite saying and little signature at the bottom of every post.

So ends my defense of my lack of lineage; my lack of textual qualification to do what I do. Surely I must have a lineage, but if asked for proof, I must confess to have absolutely none. I have been criticized before, but that has yet to stop me from trying my best to teach with credibility and responsibility.

Train Hard. Talk Less
~Thunder Palms

POST #1: The WHO, the WHAT, and the WHY

To remain somewhat anonymous on the interwebs, the WHO will remain partially ambiguous. Suffice to say that I am a 23 year old male who graduated from the University of California, Riverside with a BA in Philosophy minoring in Creative Writing and Religious Studies. My professional aspiration is to become a lawyer (father's idea but I soon jumped aboard), but retire as a teacher/professor of Philosophy. I have studied and trained in traditional Chinese Martial Arts for most of my life and have made it a personal mission to seek out not only other forms of Chinese Martial Arts, but to also inundate myself with as many other forms of martial combat as well. I have therefore amassed an extensive collection of practical knowledge regarding Japanese martial arts, western boxing, Thai kick boxing and a few other more contemporary schools of practice.

WHAT this will be is a semi-formal gathering point of my experiences with traditional Chinese Martial Arts. I have been family trained since the age of 4 in various distinct styles; I have picked one to focus my efforts since the age of 10. The training not only centered on the physical, but on the history and martial theories involved. My Uncle once said that I was more of a natural scholar than that of a natural fighter since I always asked questions galore before doing anything. That's why he affectionately called me "Scholar Warrior". It might also have something to do with my ear. The cartilage pattern for my ears are different from each other. My Grandmother told me that one shape emphasized book learning and the other shape emphasized a fighting nature. So I suppose Scholar Warrior is a nice nickname. The title of this blog is "The Modern Day Gong Wu". Gong Wu is a Cantonese phrase which literally translates to "Rivers and Lakes". It was the poetic designation of the Martial Arts Society that was so integral to the cultural history of the Chinese people. Thus I name this page the modern day Gong Wu; a contemporary gathering of the traditional.

The WHY of this page is somewhat personal. This blog, though not my preferred method of transmission, is to be one of my many efforts to fulfill a promise I made to my uncle before he died. The promise I made was -to promote true traditional Chinese Martial Arts, by any viable format, in a society which misunderstands and misrepresents the richness and efficacy of one of the oldest systems of armed and unarmed combat.- He wanted me to rise above, to complete forego, the politics and commercialism that dictates the mainstream form of dissemination today. Thus I have always trained for free, taught for free, and now I type and post for free.

Some extraneous information that would explain my future posts would be that my speciality lies in southern styles. I also deal a lot with practical theory and the exploration and integration of "foreign" concepts to better the traditional Chinese system. Also, to clarify, I understand the limitations of transferring knowledge over textual posts is limited for something as physical as Traditional Chinese Martial Arts. That is why the majority of these posts will be aimed primarily at disseminating practical theories with a smattering of physical examples. I also want to point out that I do not suffer any level of delusion that I should be called anything remotely like a Master. Master/Sifu is an Honorific that is granted by OTHER PEOPLE who think you deserve the designation. Even then, a truly secure person wouldn't insist on being called that. You are called a Master because you live and act like one, not because you insist on being called One. Besides, 23-24 is too young. You need life experience as well as martial knowledge to be considered a Master. So bear in mind, I have no false beliefs that I am an authority. Other than that... I believe the rest will be revealed in time.

Train Hard. Talk Less.
~Thunder Palms