Peer Review discussions of Wing Chun Lineages

[planetwc]

I'm wondering if what is causing some of the turmoil around these lineage discussions is that we don't really have a process and/or set of ground rules for discussion.

It seems to me that are goals are the communication of new ideas, theories and principles within particular lineages, and that once that presentation has occured what should come next is the peer review process.

That process should be one that provides for methods of critique and probing inquiry. Those kinds of questions should be discussed openly and honestly by BOTH sides (presenter and reviewer).

Unfortunately, it seems this devolves into personality disputes and percieved agendas.

I'm wondering if there is a way out of that, and into something which enables one to present topics for discussion and allow for RIGOROUS analysis, commentary and followup discussion.

My thoughts are that whenever someone makes bold assertions they should not be surprised when their is bold questioning of those same assertions and requests for more detailed substantiation in terms of logic, history and reasoned discussion.

So the question is: are we in the Wing Chun community such as it is up to this level of discussion?

In the end, it may come to groups or people agreeing to disagree, but without resorting to personal attacks or hard feelings. Do we have that in us?

Are we a kung fu family able to see ourselves as a family with mutual respect as a ground rule or are we just squabbling "factions" with a relationship only bounded by the name of Wing Chun Kuen?

I often find it's the latter with a thin veneer of respect, but who knows?

Regards,

David Williams

[Zhuge Liang]

It's very difficult when everyone believes they're right, whether they admit it or not. =)

Let me pose a couple of rhetorical questions. How many of us don't immediately roll our eyes when we see a video clip of some other lineage doing their SLT, or CK? How many of us are genuinely willing to entertain the possiblity that other paths might just be as valid as ours? More often than not, we write off entire lineages/styles after we've seen a picture or a clip or perhaps even after touching hands if we notice something that doesn't fit into our own wing chun framework. Frameworks between lineages/styles are different almost by definition. You don't fault an orange for not being an apple. Yet we do it all the time. Horse is to high (but relative to what?). Elbows are too far out (but what is the context?). Hands are too stiff (have you actually touched hands?). Lineage A does not focus on concept 123 (but neither does your lineage focus on 321).

So there's that. But despite this, I think that it is still possible to exchange information so that all parties benefit. Unfortunately, I don't believe it can be done over an internet forum. For example, Jeremy's information about HFY time/space technique optimization sounds interesting, but without feeling it, all I have is vague understanding and doubt. Similarly, those who haven't felt our lineage's soft power (particularly from Ken) will have a very limited notion of what it feels like and how effective it can be.

The only real productive way to do this, I think, is to get together, discuss, and touch hands. Unfortunately, there are problems with even this. First, you have to get people who are adequetely experienced/skilled enough to represent their own lineage to attend. That probably rules most of us out (me for sure, anyway). Then of the few remaining, they have to participate with little to no ego involved. It can't be, "I want to show everyone that my Wing Chun is better," but rather "I shall empty my cup, and see what others have to offer." Easily said, not easily done. Tell me that you're not interested in winning, even a little bit, when touching other lineages' hands and I'll call you a liar. Judging from how our different lineages get along, that probably rules nearly everyone else out. =) Then of course there are factors like time and geography.

Sorry to be so pessimistic. Maybe someone can change my mind. I think we need more people like Kathy Jo and Rene doing PR for their lineages.

Zhuge Liang

[Grendel]

Hi Dave,

A very thoughtful post. I am however of the opinion that we will continue to talk past each other at best, and at each other at worst. It has ever been so. :rolleyes:


Originally posted by planetwc
I'm wondering if what is causing some of the turmoil around these lineage discussions is that we don't really have a process and/or set of ground rules for discussion.



Originally posted by Zhuge Liang
The only real productive way to do this, I think, is to get together, discuss, and touch hands.

I agree with getting together unreservedly without all the caveats and hedging you suggest.

The simple fact regarding the redoubtable Kathy Jo is that she plainly lays out what she is taught, letting the facts speak for themselves without resorting to dubious metaphysics or equally dubious historicity.

Regards,

[kungfu cowboy]

More often than not, we write off entire lineages/styles after we've seen a picture or a clip or perhaps even after touching hands if we notice something that doesn't fit into our own wing chun framework.

Maybe, but sometimes you can just tell when something sucks though. And as with any craft or skill, the really really good practicioners who can use it and teachers who can teach it are usually small in number. So the majority of stuff you will see will be average or below.

[anerlich]

A couple of weeks ago my school received a call from a university student doing a Master's Degree in Journalism, who wanted to interview a cross section of martial arts schools for her article.

I ended up being johnny on the spot for the interview; the student was a lovely and intelligent young girl who trained in Capoeira and asked some very good questions; I've certainly found less interesting ways to pass the time. I spoke to the best of my knowledge about WC and BJJ.

When she asked me about whether we visited other schools and whether they visited us, I basically had to answer, "No. Unfortunately, Wing Chun at the highest levels is cursed with a number of prominent egotists who try to score points off and denigrate each other. Ego is rife. What you are talking about is highly unusual." She asked about history, and I had to say, "we have traditions and lineage, but much of what passes as history in Wing Chun is either self-serving spin doctoring or complete fiction. Nobody really knows that much about a lot of important historical issues."

I actually found this to be somewhat embarassing, and was glad to move on to BJJ, where everyone is friendly to one another except at comps (until their matches finish) and training at other peoples' schools is widely accepted, almost encouraged.

In WC it all comes down to marketing.

[reneritchie]

Hey Andrew,

Good points and it is embarassing. FWIW, though (and while things may be different in OZ) there is quite a bit of BJJ politics around here (from the is it Jujitsu or Judo derived, to Carlos vs. Helio founded it, to the various Rorion issues, to the 'creonte' stigma that seems to be building, to disagreements over who should be what belt, etc.) In general, though, the BJJ people I've met have been very receptive to the idea of visiting other schools and training together (and the idea of drop-in fees at schools is just brilliant). But I've always found politics in MA, be it Judo, Karate, Bagua/Xingyi, etc. It always breaks down to the 'me' is better than 'you' tendency.

Dave - I think sometimes, for some people, it suits them better to have controversy than resolution. Look at the MA rags of the past, and the current message boards of today. What were the hot topics, and what are the current hot threads?

RR

[Grendel]

Originally posted by reneritchie
Dave - I think sometimes, for some people, it suits them better to have controversy than resolution. Look at the MA rags of the past, and the current message boards of today. What were the hot topics, and what are the current hot threads?

I see no value in "resolution" if it involves a willingness to believe in nonsense and fabrications. :rolleyes: It is easy to get some folks to believe anything. "You can fool some of the people all the time, most of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people, all the time." Or, words to that effect. :)

The scientific method requires proof of assertions (hypotheses) through experimentation and observations. The burden of proof is not hard to bear if the theories are valid and able to be tested.

Although academic historical theories do not require "scientific" proof, there is rigor that can be applied in sorting out conflicting "histories."

Regards,

[anerlich]

Rene,

point taken re the BJJ politics in the US. Here in OZ it's still a relatively small scene with very few black and brown belts. Things have obviously "matured" (if thats the right word) rather more in the US.

To my mind, a lot of this comes down to greed and the illusion of scarcity. Like there's only a limited pool of potential students ,and you've gotta grab as many as you can for yourself. You have to put your peers down lest they try to take what belongs to you.

Ego.

AN