When does a lie turn into a legend?

[kal]

I'm curious about what the "statute of limitations" is on people who make up a style with a false lineage. How long before that lie is considered a "legend"?

For example, the Wing Chun origin story about Ng Mui and Yim Wing Chun is most likely not true. So whoever invented Wing Chun and gave it that origin story was probably lying. Maybe it was Leung Jan.

Anyway, nowadays even if people don't believe the story, they say it is a "legend" rather than a lie. But how about during the lifetime of the inventor? Was he considered a fraud or a liar in his time?

Same thing with Hsing-I. The person who created the art and then made up a lineage back to Yueh Fei was lying when he did it. But now that lie is just referred to euphemistically as a legend or myth.

So how about today's frauds like Shaolin-Do? Today they are considered fakes and liars. But in the future, will their lies just become part of the style's "legendary origins"?

Fundamentally, are today's frauds any more dishonest than the founders of Wing Chun, Tai Chi, Hsing-I etc. who gave their styles fake lineages?

[golden arhat]

the difference is that xing yi and wing chun seem to work, shaolin do looks very far from good

in the old days u couldnt just "make up" a system because if u just did some movements based on what u saw some time because everyone would know u were making it up

u needed real training and to have put real thought in to this new stle

nowadays u can make up a system by doing kick boxing for a few months and copying some froms and apps from the mo=vies

and because its what everyone else sees working at the movies (that being their only source alot of the time as to what real MA is) and believe that its legit

[Lama Pai Sifu]

I would guess that about 7/10 ths of all martial arts history is probably incorrect or just ourright fabrication.

To prove my point:

The story of the Shaolin temple, being the birthplace of Southern KF styles, monks with unbelievable skills, etc, etc, - was never heard of before 1909. The story was debunked in written form as early as 1919. In fact, historical documents, (actual written manuals) dating back to as early as the 1630's, DO claim that Shaolin was known for it's Staff play, and not much more. One of these manuals was actually written by a monk at the temple and still exists today, in the hands of a famous Taiwanese collector (of MA books).

So, not unlike greek and roman mythology, the Chinese seem to have come up with quite a lot of legends to fill in gaps in oral tradition, or explain origins through the witnessing of 'animal folley', etc. Truth probably is, people invented lineage stories - the same way people are doing it today - some to gain credibility when they have no well known teachers, and some to just to avoid saying "no, we don't know how old it is, no, we don't know who started it, no we don't know where it came from", etc.

I think, as martial artists, we probably need to spend a whole lot less time on lineage and who taught who bullsh1t, and focus more on getting better.

I think the modernization of traditional styles, with uniform curriculum and forms would be the best thing ever, but I don't think it will ever happen. I think if all CLF people or HG people did their forms the same, it would be too easy to identify which teachers or which schools would be the best/better. Problem is, its never 'apples and apples' it's always 'apples and oranges' even within the same styles, because they have different branches, and different lineages, etc.

If we all did the exact same CLF, it would be abundantly clear - 'oh, these schools here are pretty f*cking good, while these schools here are pretty sh1tty.'

It's not unlike religion; we have so many factions within each major belief system. "well, since I can't be the top dog of my religion, cause this guy was here before me or has more followers or is more famous, I'll claim that there was another book that was hidden (with a different message - which ONLY I possess) or I'll interpret out holy book differently - and start my only branch/faction - which I'll be the head of. Sounds familiar???

Organization of the styles and some kind of standardization, would allow us to promote and propagate the styles so that their future would be secure. Lineage wouldn't be nearly as important as current skills. It doesn't mean that people couldn't have loyalty to their past teachers, but seriously - 90% of all discussions/arguements on this forum are about lineage and history. We spend far too much time with it.

I'm not a fan of TKD. BUT, their standardization (and I can't say I'm a fan of what they did to thier art - it was probably pretty decent Karate with Killer kicks, going back even 50 years ago - however, it is probably one of the more modern martial arts (smallest history) and it is probably one of the largest, if not THE largest MA today. Organizational-wise (more major federations), School-wise (probably more TKD schools than any other single style) and more practitioner-wise (the ATA - American TKD Association will boast over 1,000,000 active students by next year).

Again, I would never teach TKD, or a TKD version of my Chinese Martial Arts, BUT, you have to look seriously at thier CONCEPT and what they have accomplished in the last 40 years in this country alone. It's staggering.

Anway, just a morning rant, hope I didn't derail the thread. I still think that most lineage and more origns of styles is bogus. I can't think of the title right now, but I'll post it up later - it's a terrific that my classmate David Ross recommended - which debunks most of the martial art history we come to accept as fact. I'll look for the title, or if David reads this, please post it.

Peace,

MP

[brothernumber9]

in the old days u couldnt just "make up" a system because if u just did some movements based on what u saw some time ...

Maybe I'm wrong but I thought that's exactly how a whole bunch of systems got created "in the old days".

Every system was "made up" at some point.

[unyma]

I think the flip side of that argument is that if you create a standardized curriculum and strive to make everything apples and apples that you lose creativity over the long term and that degrades the art. Of course some creativity isn't particularly useful or effective but in order to have really good you also have to have really bad. It's the nature of things.

Using TKD as the case study, and I know nothing about TKD. you point out that 50years ago it was probably pretty good karate. One could argue that the standardization is what changed it to something less good.

It's kind of like the public school system. There is such a push to test kids to a standard that unique ways of teaching and learning are considered to risky and teachers are nearly forced to teach the same things the same way regardless of any other considerations.

All that being said, I totally agree that the lineage issue is way down the importance list and effectiveness is what matters.

Mitch

[sanjuro_ronin]

Modern example:

...99% of fights end up on the ground..."

[golden arhat]

Maybe I'm wrong but I thought that's exactly how a whole bunch of systems got created "in the old days".

Every system was "made up" at some point.

i explained my point just under what you quoted

why dont u try reading it

or quoting exactly what i said instead of whatever u want to hear so that only your point applies

idiot

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

There are no standardized people, so you cannot have standardized styles. To try and force a standardized system when people themselves have no standardizations would ruin the arts we love, and cherish.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Within a given system you can standardized principles and concepts and even techniques to an extent.

Most systems have this be default and even in their offshoots, you will still see the core of the "parent system".

I think that issue is quality control in terms of representation.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Well, if you want to write a book documenting the stylistic standards that already exist so far as a styles principals, core techniques, special training methods and overall flavor i guess that would be Ok, but to set up a system to totally standardize a style with strict guidelines as to it's makeup and curriculum would not only be bad, but virtually impossible...especially in the Chinese arts where diversity is the driving force.

[SPJ]

stories are just stories. legends are just legends.

the thing about story and legend is that even tho they are not true.

there are many versions of them, too.

:eek:

it was called chen family boxing methods

tai chi is the name adopted only recently.

--

[Mr Punch]

I know the thread isn't really going this way but someone should point out that some of the origin legends were supposedly told like that precisely to keep their origins secret or coded. It may also be a load of old pish but I have heard that this applies especially to the arts that were started around the time of the dissolution of the Shaolin monastery... which may include Hung Gar, Pak Mei and Wing Chun.

As for nowadays, I don't see any reason for it other than marketing.

[brothernumber9]

"the difference is that xing yi and wing chun seem to work, shaolin do looks very far from good

in the old days u couldnt just "make up" a system because if u just did some movements based on what u saw some time because everyone would know u were making it up

u needed real training and to have put real thought in to this new stle

nowadays u can make up a system by doing kick boxing for a few months and copying some froms and apps from the mo=vies

and because its what everyone else sees working at the movies (that being their only source alot of the time as to what real MA is) and believe that its legit"

There.

That's the whole quote. And I still say, that I beleive in the "Old days" people still made things up with fantasized applications and STILL were able to propagate the styles even until today. The only difference is that they didn't have movies. I won't name particular styles, that would just induce a big flame war.
There are alot of styles that are built on the legend of someone who was supposedly a great fighter 150 yrs ago, and not another notable fighter has been produced from those styles since. Just look at all the no-touch knock out BS that's out there and claim to be hundreds of years old.
Hucksters were around long before we were born.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Don't know what anyone cares about these stories/legends/myths/lies anyway, not as if any of that can help YOU.

I came from kyokushin, tons of crap about Oyama and very few people in the system pay attention to it, BS or not, makes ZERO impact on an individual basis.

[GeneChing]

I'm going to say it takes about a century for some fabrication to become established as a legend. I say that because I think a generation needs to die off - the generation that bore witness to the fabrication - and a new generation needs to uphold the tradition of the fabrication as legendary. Of course, this is a totally rough figure and I think with the current progress in information sharing, this time period is very subject to change.

I think a more important question is not how long it takes. It's how many people are needed to believe in it. How many people need to believe in something for it to be true? This is a big question now in our age of information. It's not just about martial arts. It's about the Moral Majority, Britney, and hanging chad. It's about everything. I hope that's so political that it gets this thread locked...:rolleyes:

[PangQuan]

All legend revolves around my ego, and my ego revolves around crotch kicking....therefore, crotch kicking is the beginning and the end to all things.

its a cycle

[kal]

Of course, this is a totally rough figure and I think with the current progress in information sharing, this time period is very subject to change.



your point about information sharing raises another interesting question. Is the era of legends over thanks to the availability of the internet and things like youtube?

put another way, would someone like Morihei Ueshiba have become the legendary figure he did if he had been born in today's society? Or would he have simply been lost in the noise of all the UFC and MMA stuff that is so prevalent today?

[xcakid]

I'm going to say it takes about a century for some fabrication to become established as a legend. I say that because I think a generation needs to die off - the generation that bore witness to the fabrication - and a new generation needs to uphold the tradition of the fabrication as legendary. Of course, this is a totally rough figure and I think with the current progress in information sharing, this time period is very subject to change.



So 100yrs. Before my Shaolin I-Ching Bu Ti style will become recognized as "traditional"? I need to get on it.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Depends, the cream rises to the top, if he was really good, he would have hung with the best and been known for his skills...sort of like Bass Rutin

[sanjuro_ronin]

your point about information sharing raises another interesting question. Is the era of legends over thanks to the availability of the internet and things like youtube?

put another way, would someone like Morihei Ueshiba have become the legendary figure he did if he had been born in today's society? Or would he have simply been lost in the noise of all the UFC and MMA stuff that is so prevalent today?

Maybe, but like Rd said, if he was good, no one can take that away.

And the UFC and MMA thing, though with us to stay, the fad part is over, like the kung fu of the 70's and the ninjas of the 80's and so forth.

Fad die but the systems stay, in one form or another.

[GeneChing]

Where will MMA be in 100 years?

Hey Pangquan - didn't I trademark crotch kicks here on the forum? Don't make me come after you for infringement.... ;)

[BoulderDawg]

I think given all the upheavel in China and the very ship shod record keeping and recording there's very little doubt that the vast, vast majority of the original art (If there ever was such a thing) has been lost.

I've never been to China but I have a feeling that learning Kung Fu over there has become a big business. They are vastly more interested in making money teaching rich Americans then preserving the art.

I don't know. I would be happy to be in a program that made no claims of linage at all but rather taught a good sound program.

[sanjuro_ronin]

lineage will mean less and less ( outside politics) as the years go by, one of good things MMA has given us and future generations is the knowledge that ability far outweights lineage.

[Knifefighter]

lineage will mean less and less ( outside politics) as the years go by, one of good things MMA has given us and future generations is the knowledge that ability far outweights lineage.

Lineage will always play an important role in styles that don't regularly compete in open venues.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Lineage will always play an important role in styles that don't regularly compete in open venues.

Only to those more interested in politics than effectivness.

[BoulderDawg]

Lineage will always play an important role in styles that don't regularly compete in open venues.


Are we talking about dance here? The "art" as opposed to the "fighting skills"? And do you honestly believe there are styles that are done in the exact same way they were a 150 years ago?

[golden arhat]

Where will MMA be in 100 years?



it will be even better

for the simple fact that people can look back at tv shows and see what was good and wasnt and comparen it to how they are doing it

[PangQuan]

Hey Pangquan - didn't I trademark crotch kicks here on the forum? Don't make me come after you for infringement.... ;)

ahem...i mean my ego revolves around GENE's Crotch (tm) kicks (tm)



Lineage:

Lineage will always be important to many styles if nothing more than to simply remember those who were actually involved in the progression of said art. Not so much about the deeds that each lineage holder had done, but more for historical purposes of names, places, dates. as much as can be remembered.

give a style that has a very detailed lineage 100 years, and you will see 100 more years of even better record keeping due to modern technology and mass communication.

sure the old stuff is shrowded in confusion and often mystery, but thats only a portion...the future is yet to be written, and by some, it will be written as accurately as possible.

[xcakid]

Where will MMA be in 100 years?




it will be even better

for the simple fact that people can look back at tv shows and see what was good and wasnt and comparen it to how they are doing it



The way the world is being pVssified, we will no longer have martial arts 100yrs from now.

Ban guns
Ban knives
Ban Martial Arts
Ban self defense
Ban agression

Welcome to the new world people.

[PangQuan]

not in the united states of pangquan!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

[SifuAbel]

EVERYBODY rattles on about "lineage". I was trained by "x" is inevitable.

It doesn't matter what you do. You had to learn it from somewhere and thats the point.

Even KnFi has a "lineage". :rolleyes:

If my teacher's teacher, with over 50 years of experience, decided he was going to create a style based on his experience, I would be the second in line to try and learn it.

It would be a far cry from the strip mall Sokes that make up a style in their back yard from smattering of things they stole from other styles while at the last high school gym tournament.

[golden arhat]

banning things does nothing

the martial arts will always survive

and human nature will always prevail

[KC Elbows]

I think given all the upheavel in China and the very ship shod record keeping...

Um, upheaval, yes, but I wouldn't call the record keeping ship shod. Where there is vested imperial interest in how an event unfolds, dodgy, where there is none or merely academic interest, amazing stuff is in there. You have to remember, these were people who had military sectrets, trade secrets, etc. Amazing processes that they worked with, and compulsive record keepers, to my knowledge. If an unexpected comet passed, it HAD to be documented and there HAD to be an official explanation for what it had to do with the emporer's current affairs. Because of this, the jesuit's expertise was sometimes sought out to be better prepared for astronomical events.

"...and recording there's very little doubt that the vast, vast majority of the original art (If there ever was such a thing) has been lost."

China is vast, and commoners from one region probably never really saw another region. The problem with the 'original art' idea is that it means a lot of these other regions were just twiddling their thumbs at that time, and had no approach to warfare at all. It's more likely that over time a number of regional approaches influenced each other, so that the similarity between kung fu styles is sometimes more a similarity at the fringe of its thinking, and not the core, later additions to an earlier core. Thus, you get crane hands somewhere in just about everything. However, its also possible that they came up with it independently in some cases. Way too much research to do for that many styles.

Anyway, there's tons of styles whose proponents have recorded their methods in better detail than english language kung fu books tend to suggest. I suspect the non-martialized ideology that colored communist support of martial arts has inadvertently been adopted by english language martial arts authors as well. Lots of forms without any other real info.

Still, notes are not enough, so the ideal is a practitioner who knows plus a body of written notes from the past, in case anything is forgotten. This exists for plenty of kung fu styles.

[Knifefighter]

Are we talking about dance here? The "art" as opposed to the "fighting skills"?

Lineage is not a question for people who are out testing, competing and improving in open venues. You can't really question someone's lineage when he or his students are kicking your or your students' behinds.

Lineage arguments are usually reserved for those who don't put themselves out there and hide in their training studios making claims about their deadly techniques.


And do you honestly believe there are styles that are done in the exact same way they were a 150 years ago?

I doubt much of anything is done exactly the way it was 150 years ago.

[KC Elbows]

Lineage is a fair means to judge who during a particular period produces notable fighters. It is part of the reason the Gracie name is relevant: while some family members will be better than others, the overall skill level should be good, as long as the lineage continues to be relevant. Choosing the Gracies because of their pedigree is perfectly valid, and, I suspect, was quite common among mma circles.

Just distinguishing between lineage and lineage arguments.

However, one could make the case of lineage, in the sense of accrued reputation, contributing to a loss of dynamism in a line of teaching. Once one only has to maintain an image to make a more stable life than fighting or teaching alone can, the incentive will be much higher for most to do so, regardless of style.

[David Jamieson]

legends are lies to begin with, so are fairy tales and so on, but we all tell them or listen to them anyway.

it's part of the sub-culture to fashion it's own lies that are presented as truths.

there is no sub-culture of pure truth as far as I can tell.
religious, political, grassroots or otherwise, everyone and every group has a skeleton in that closet somewhere.

there is no person here who has not lied. it's part of being human. :p

when it gets out of hand and you start believing your own lies? well that's a whole other potato and you are most worthy of the pity you get fo that. hahaha

[kwaichang]

Interesting line of posts heck even Gene got involved. So, I offered my son free guitar lessons from a friend who is a great guitarist, he declined and wanted to learn in his own way to develop his own style of playing. He is a very good guitarist. Early on someone said SD was fake well it isnt the forms are traditional and contain the traditional aspects of the CMA. To say a style does not have its roots where it says it does and to call the history of the style a lie is nothing but pure EGO . Every system has the start in someone wanting to be all they can without the help of others as long as they can fight or play a guitar well is all that matters and that is what makes them legit. BULL KC

[Yum Cha]

Lineage,
Don't ignore the fact, lineage goes both ways, up and back.

For example, would Yip Man be as highly regarded if he didn't have the link to Bruce?

Like most information, its not what it is, but how you use it.

The term Master is only significant if it is given to a teacher by his students. The measure of a lineage is not necessarily the skill of the teacher, but the strength of his "children".

Legends,
Lots of legends are lessons, and in the lesson is the truth, not the legend itself.

[monji112000]

Bruce opened most (western) eyes to Kung Fu. Wing Chun became a popular style becouse of him. Really though all Kung Fu benefited from Bruce. Hell I wouldn't have started any martial arts if I didn't first watch Bruce lee "fight" in movies.

[bredmond812]

I think the point of lineage is for students who want to learn the style to know that what they are learning is coming from a good source. Most people would want to learn calculus from Newton than from your neighborhood drug addict. Dont let lineage arguments interfere with the benefits of lineages. To repeat: through lineages we know if its legit or not.

B red

[Yum Cha]

Monji, welcome to the forum. Bruce was a wuss, 7* would throw him down an elevator shaft and jump in after him. It was all done with smoke and mirrors by doubles, using the same technology used to fake the moon landing, but that's besides the point...

B red
Spoken like a true consumer. The whole issue people have with lineage is that it is a crutch used by unqualified people to appear qualified. You will find that all the notorious frauds always have fancy lineage, whereas some of the best have it, but you won't know about it, or them for that matter either.

Truly qualified people from good lineage usually don't rely on lineage to demonstrate their skill.

Its not like buying a pedagree dog.

Good lineage is valuable, yes, but no guarantee, and no insurance policy. Skill lives with the man today. What you see is what you get, don't get fooled by smoke and mirrors.

[bredmond812]

sure there are more factors to getting a good education than a good name. Here at UD Davis, I always hear that UC Berkeley is just a Grad school, and that undergrads are not really taught anything, and the class sizes are too bit. I dont know who is right. I know that Universities and Kung Fu are not quite the same, because you can not know anything, but still land a high paying job for the rest of your life, but maybe my point gets across.

What is my point...I guess i am saying that Berkeley is a good school no matter how you slice it, despite what some haters at my school say, and lineage is still a generally good way to know if you are getting the goods or not.

you mentioned fancy leniage. and then you go on to say that all the frauds have it and all the best have it? i dont know exactliy what you are saying.. maybe just that you everybody has some kind of leniage and you cant necessarily determine what somebody's skill is like just because of their leniage. is that right? Is that what u are saying?

[Yum Cha]

...you cant necessarily determine what somebody's skill is like just because of their leniage. is that right? Is that what u are saying?

Yes.

I think I said something like all all frauds will have a fancy lineage, but only some of the really good guys will. Its a must have for all the best dressed wankers this season.

[GeneChing]

In 100 years, will MMA have lineage?

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

and lineage is still a generally good way to know if you are getting the goods or not.

Reply]
No, it is not. You could have a teacher who learned from many, and made up a lineage to make himself legit.

I know of one for instance who was a small time private student of Won Ark Wei. When he started teaching suddenly he was claiming to be the INHERITOR of Won Ark Wei's lineage. It took me quite a bit of searching before i found who the real top dogs of that line were...and it definetly wasn't the individual in question.

Also, you can have someone who does have a legit lineage to a famous master, but just never got the essence of the art, and teaches like crap.

Then there are those famous masters who write people into the line for money,but teach them crap on purpose...only thier most senior and closest friends and or family got the real thing, so thier lineage today is still a crapshoot in quality, unless you know the story behind the scenes...of which only the few, who are generally unaccessible know.

You are better of going to tournaments, and seeing who the local talent is,than relying on lineage.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

In 100 years, will MMA have lineage?

Reply]
It already does, it's just not thrust in everyone's face and grandstanded about.

[PangQuan]

In 100 years, will MMA have lineage?

Reply]
It already does, it's just not thrust in everyone's face and grandstanded about.

really?

could someone tell me the MMA lineage?

i cant spell worth a ****

[SifuAbel]

The lineage starts with Moses as he parted the sea. Thats grappling. :rolleyes:

Every school will eventually have their own "lineage". Its inevitable. Why can't people get that?

Especially in MMA, since people insist it has become its own style. Instead of it being a venue.

[Knifefighter]

really?

could someone tell me the MMA lineage?

i cant spell worth a ****

There is no "MMA lineage". Each MMA school has its own particular lineage.
For instance:
Brazillian Top Team (Minotauro; Arona, etc) - Carlson Gracie - Carlos Gracie
Chute Box (Ninja; Silva, etc) - Roberto Piccinini - Rudimar Fredrigo

[PangQuan]

There is no "MMA lineage". Each MMA school has its own particular lineage.
For instance:
Brazillian Top Team (Minotauro; Arona, etc) - Carlson Gracie - Carlos Gracie
Chute Box (Ninja; Silva, etc) - Roberto Piccinini - Rudimar Fredrigo

that makes a lot more sense then MMA having a lineage.

to me, the term MMA is getting more similar to, for instance Kungfu.

kungfu isnt as style. neither is MMA. its just a way to say what many people are doing that is similar yet may be stylistically different.

[GeneChing]

Does boxing and wrestling have lineage?

[Knifefighter]

Does boxing and wrestling have lineage?

Sure they do... however, ability is what counts, so most people don't pay much attention to lineage. Since most boxers and wrestlers compete, there is no need to worry about lineage.

[PangQuan]

Sure they do... however, ability is what counts, so most people don't pay much attention to lineage. Since most boxers and wrestlers compete, there is no need to worry about lineage.

so i guess one of the reasons CMA might have such a big deal in regards to lineage is frauds.

so many frauds out there trying to pull a fast one. at least with a solid lineage you have a first line idea about the person.

at least you will know that the person with the lineage behind them may have been around solid material....as to how well they learned etc....still has to be looked into.

of course, my first Sifu never talked about lineage. Ever. but at the same time, he is a solid guy who really knows his stuff. i guess he just isnt concerned with it so much.

[Takuan]

This thread made me think "What about Bruce Lee?"

Was I the only one that read David Chen's article in KFM this year?

:rolleyes:

[Yum Cha]

In 100 years, will MMA have lineage?

Just to add to the discussion of MMA lineage:

"Gracie" ju jitsu?

"Worked with Tyson, who was trained by Dundee" (Did Angelo ever box?)

"University of Iows wrestling Alumni"


And of course, let us not forget, "Trained by David Ross, student of Chan Tai San"