OK, now for something completely different. Random? Yes. Well thought-out? Are you kidding!? Anyway, the other day the subject of how cultural norms and prejudices influence how people approach fighting arts and sports. For example in my father's generation (WWII era) low blows, kicks and hitting a man when he was down were taboo. To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check out the fight choreography in any old cowboy movie or TV show from the '50s or early 60's. Only the bad guy in the black hat would resort to such "dirty" tricks. Of course, other cultures also have their preferences and taboos and, outside of actual, life and death combat, have strong ideas about what a proper and honorable fight "should" look like. This undoubtably has as much to do with the form and "flavor" of most traditional martial arts than actual "effectiveness". Take Wing Chun for example. It is supposed to be the most purely rational and scientific solution to the problem posed by empty-handed combat. Yet my old Chinese Sifu would disparage many proven fighting techniques and tactics with an almost emotional (rather than rational) vehemence. For example, headbutts were out. They were brutish and primitive ...as though punching someone in the throat isn't? Another area Wing Chun and most other Southern Chinese arts not only neglected, but almost disdained, was grappling and groundfighting. I heard it described as rude, primitive, and as "fighting like dogs in the dirt". The ideal for Wing Chun would have been the scholar warrior, someone like the physician and kung-fu master Leung Jan, and later the wealthy and educated young Yip Man. That is, someone who was wealthy, educated, and well mannered who could (supposedly) fight without resorting to brute force, like a lowly laborer, and without, heaven forbid, rolling around in the dirt like a dog! OK I've been in and out of WC since 1979, but I never really got that part. I wrestled as a youth and never really figured out why WC didn't go there ...when some of it not only worked really well, but was also a lot of fun (in my opinion). Then the other day, while cleaning up after the dog, I more or less stumbled across the answer. Poop! I mean think about it. Up until modern times (and in much of China, that would not be until the mid 20th Century) animals were still used to pull carts through the crowded dirty streets. I'm thinking horse-pucky. And before the hard times and famine during the war and subsequent Cultural Revolution, dog-poop too. And dirt. And garbage. What "scholar warrior" would train to roll in that? Any thoughts?
One might say that rolling in poop is a small sacrifice to survive. I see where you are coming from with the so-called primitiveness of groundfighting - going to the ground doesn't look good.
..........this is the kind of crap you ponder when you learned a martial art from a guy who made you call him sifu and you belive that wing chun is in anyway "supposed to be the most purely rational and scientific solution to the problem posed by empty-handed combat"
Yeah, only a commie would kick anyone in the nuts, shoot him in the back, or order a pre-emptive strike against Irak... What? Wait? Glad that hollywood is still at spreading the truth about American fair play, benevolence, do goodism and democratization of the heathen around the world... Osu!
In terms of self defense, fighting on the ground should be avoided for practical reasons, for example what if you are dealing with multiple attackers. The ground could be death. I am not saying one shouldn't learn to do it, they should. Because often the fight ends up down there. But for me it's like, last resort.
Yep. After all Ronald Reagan got his start playing a cowboy in 1950s Hollywood movies and TV shows (Death Valley Days anyone?). And, then George W. Bush just liked playing cowboy.
Now, now. Don't go blaming WC. I've pondered stupid stuff my whole life. And about WC... if you don't think that's what the true believers really think it's supposed to be, then you've never spoken to any of them. Or maybe it's just me. I'm skeptical of everything.
I trust you should know. You Brits seem to have a lot more Southern Kung Fu exposure than we have. Over here it's mostly WC, some Hung Gar and CLF. Maybe some SPM in New York or San Francisco ...or other stuff hidden away somewhere... But honestly, I haven't seen much groundfighting. Maybe you could recommend a source or post something?
A very dated point of view, from another person's perspective. I remember being in school, (1990s) training with boxers, they didnt like the idea of "kicking" (pointing towards myself, assuming I did KungFu) As Sifu Ben said above, its a myth. Yes there are ground fighting sequences, but at the same time, many styles are not designed to look like wrestling/jiujitsu. My Dad's words of wisdom when he taught KF. "Punch face, kick groin, stomp on ribs, run before Police gets you" Obviously I didnt adhere to all his words (and not suggesting MAPpers to run from Bill) but you get the idea.
Only gentlemen scholar warriors that create their own bubble to live in, protected by others that do the real fighting for them can afford the luxury to disdain the reality: Violence is messy, brutal, dirty, dangerous, and painful... you can end up maimed for life, handicapped, or dead... and in the case of a century ago, most people needed their two hands, legs and eyes to provide for themselves and their families... I can understand that headbutting, biting, eye gouging, tendon cutting, skull smashing, limb tearing, and disemboweling might not have appealed to the gentry of 19th century China, and that they'd have rather not talked about it at tea time... yet, it was the reality of what was going on! Dog poo on your lapel might be the least of your worry when ambushed by 20 in a dark alley of Shanghai circa 1880 Osu!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwsJ63Uu51Y"]Cai Li Fo Kung Fu Leopard Macao - Choy Li Fut .MPG - YouTube[/ame] Here's a CLF form with a fairly typical short groundwork section. And here's a big video of Fujian Dog boxing, the famous Chinese ground style [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G90RpGs_ajs"]Gou Quan (Dog Boxing) - YouTube[/ame]
Thanks for those clips Sifu Ben. The second one (Dog Boxing) had a bit more of interest, like that leg lock right at the end. The CLF form didn't really have that much of what I had in mind as "ground-work". I guess I was thinking more of a grappling art like BJJ or wrestling. Even WC has scissor-sweeps and kicks from the ground. Actually, pretty effective stuff, as far as it goes, but traditionally nothing like some of the good grappling arts, IMHO. But, at least in the hands of some instructors, it's evolving. Who knows what things will look like in another generation or too.
Forms are abstracted movements, context is everything. Against an opponent in your guard that CLF sequence becomes scissor sweep-reverse scissor sweep-pendulum/flower sweep-sit-up sweep, with break-outs for spinning armbar, spinning heel-hook and spinning kneebar. Regardless of which, even as is it negates your dirty floor argument.
Umm no. It's actually not. If you're not interested to consider the bigger picture then I'd refrain from posting in such threads. It's a valid question why WC tends to abhor ground work. When considered against the background that it comes from and Chinese culture and attitudes it opens up a whole lot more valid questions and interesting tangents. But you have to be open to discussion. If you're not then there's really no point in continuing to post the same hackneyed responses to anything WC that we've seen at MAP for years. That's coming from someone who's no fan of WC in pretty much any respect.
wow. really liked the dog style stuff. the CLF forms looked a lot like what i've seen of silat. the dog style stuff before 4:40 are actually really similar to the drills i've dont in wrestling and bjj (and the acrobatic stuff is what i've seen my olympic/commonwealth games hopeful training partners do). even the throws and groundwork after 4:40 were really awesome and even the same as wrestling and bjj tactics, some great stuff for taking the back and awesome sweeps that i've actually learnt and that leglock was great. bloody hell that was awesome.
I'll reply with a bit of a ramble here: What you've said in a sense does speak directly to a certain portion of Chinese society. The whole abstract of living within walled courtyards within walled cities within a very stratified and hierarchical social and family structure for many of the upper class wouldn't have been abstract at all but rather the daily reality. I think there was always a portion of Chinese society that for the most part was kept away from the messy, brutal reality of the common man. It would have been your aristocratic banner-men who'd become so far removed from their Manchu warrior ancestors as their position in society came less and less to rely on their ability to be martial and more and more on their ability to be politically maneuverable. Of course this was liable to come crashing down - especially as China edged towards the Republican era and many banner-men who held rank and title of sorts were now forced to take up jobs and police men, rickshaw drivers and the like as the Republican government faltered. Public executions via beheading became extremely common under the Empress Dowager Cixi... your rickshaw drivers and your common man who made his living in the streets and in public (barbers, cobblers, laborers etc.) would have been familiar with this. Your well educated, well read, well groomed court officials and their families... less so. At least in a very direct sense. I've often though people don't quite grasp just how brutal justice was in Republican era China. I've got dozens of images taken from glass negatives shot during that era that show public executions by beheading. You start to get a real sense of just how often these occurred and how pragmatic they became at performing them. Even down to cauterizing the neck after beheading to make it less messy to clean up. Grim stuff. Exactly. China of eras past was by and large agricultural. Physical labor was the norm for most people. With every new technological leap forward there was upheaval. The donkey carts hated the newer rickshaw pullers... the rickshaw pullers hated the electric trolleys... and so on and so forth. All with their own acts of violence, discord and social upheaval. Absolutely and that would have not been something that was gone over in detail at the teas and the posh meetings. It would have been considered below the standard of conversation expected of scholars and educated people. Given that the night-soil (eg. human waste carriers) were still a large and viable portion of the labor population - your common man on the street wouldn't have been so adverse to a bit of dog mess on his trousers - many rickshaw pullers for a long time wore slightly more than loin cloth... but your ranking officials in their Empress mandated Manchu style clothing with their ranking embroidered squares on their robes and their hat-knobs of varying designs wouldn't have broken form to roll on the ground. In fact they wouldn't have been out for a stroll in what were essentially Republican era ghettos anyhow. As western dress worked it's way into China culture... it would have been primarily the wealthy, the well educated and the overseas educated who wore this mode of fashion. Not your street laborers by a long shot. Fascinating subject... and one hell of a tangent.
Traditions usually had some practical beginning and only later had other reasons/functions. The beginning of the lack of grappling in Wing Chun could have started with the way that challenges were conducted over a hundred years ago. Challenges were a central part of a master's existence and could not be refused. The challenger stipulated whether an armed or unarmed match was desired, and the host had to accept. Further, the guest chose whether the match would end in mere defeat or death. Again, the host could not deny him this. In a mortal clash the winner was immune from legal action. Through the early years of the Republic (up to 1920), such contests were common. Unarmed fights were the rule generally, but, because any kind of weapon could be stipulated, a fighter had to be grounded in weapon tactics or face defeat. Thus, these experts properly should be called combat experts rather than boxers. So you had basically combat experts that knew of boxing, wrestling, weapons, etc. Wrestlers would have been very common among hosts and challengers. The use of grappling and having to defeat grapplers would be a part of training and fighting. On the cultural side, grappling would not be seen separate from boxing, but you would have some that were better at striking and others who were better at wrestling. It just could be that those that were better at striking formed the lineage that became Wing Chun. Maybe the first ones were great wrestlers too, but they did not teach all the grappling they knew. With the secrecy that was part of the Chinese culture, it could be quickly lost this grappling knowledge in just a generation. I read a small bit about Shang Tung-sheng who told once how his wrestling teacher cried on his deathbed, lamenting the fact that he had withheld so much from Shang. So even the great martial artist Shang did not get all the knowledge of his wrestling teacher passed to him. It would not take much for Wing Chun lineage to lose all wrestling knowledge given the same type of circumstances. An instructor who was never taught the wrestling could easily fall under the conclusions that there was some practical reason the knowledge was not there, such as that rolling on the ground was considered dirty. When in fact, the knowledge could have just failed to be passed down from the previous teachers, diluted more and more each generation, due to secrecy. IMHO. (information from Comprehensive Asian Fighting Arts, by Donn F. Draeger and Robert W. Smith. Fourth printing, 1983)
Osu Rebel Wado, Great post too. Mind you, I am not challenging what you are saying, I would simply like to know where this knowledge about the formalism of challenges that you put forth comes from... for my own research. Are there books, or links you would like to share? Osu!
