Just a Theory

[ShaolinDan]

This is just my own theory, curious to see what people think about it. I haven't read much at all about historical kung fu so perhaps this is silly, or perhaps it has already been acknowledged true. You tell me.

Traditional kung fu forms (at least most styles?) move in a straight line and use very solid stances. While the individual techniques may be good, the straight movement and 'heavy' feet aren't too 'realistic.'

My theory is that these characteristics were realistic when they were developed. I believe the earliest kung fu was trained by soldiers...who fought in armor and in formation. I think fighting shoulder to shoulder in heavy gear would make the stances much more realistic...you can't dodge around in formation. And if you can't dodge around, there's no reason to be light on your feet--and if cavalry is charging, you'd better be rooted. :)

What do you all think?

(I happen to still think forms are useful training [antiquated or not]--but that's neither here nor there...if possible I'd love to just stick to discussing the origins theory above. Thanks :) )

[TenTigers]

Not all forms do this.
Southern forms in particular, do not move in a straight line.
There are different patterns of stepping-Sup Ji, Gung Ji, Maai Ji, Bot Gwa,Moi-Fa, Jee Ji, Yuen Ji, etc.
Often, forms are divided into:
Gung-Faht=developmental-structure, power generation, breath, etc., and
Kuen-Faht =fighting techniques, strategies, concepts.

[taai gihk yahn]

a few thoughts:

1) historically a lot of TCMA was derived from classical Indian MA; so, if you look at how arts like kalaripayattu do their "forms", it's often done in a straight line, especially the basic practices, which, if one considers the way something like this might propagate from on culture to the next, logically it would be the basic routines and practices that would be most often shared as opposed to the advanced ones; additionally, the "solid" stances are probably to some degree at least related to yogic asana practice; or they may also have links to standing wrestling competition where the point was to throw your opponent to the ground (as opposed to rolling) - this concept can be traced to various ancient texts such as the Old Testamaent where Jacob wrestles the Angel, the Epic of Gilgamesh where he wrestles Enkidu and the Herculean legends where he wrestles the giant Antaeus - all of these were "stand up" grappling matches, and, personally, I believe this concept probably cross-pollinated throughout the ancient civilizations of the times, which included India; specifically, I think given the individuals referenced above, this sort of stand-up wrestling was seen as the purview of men who were not commoners who might otherwise roll around on the ground - since yogic / kalari practice was probably more geared towards nobility / warrior classes, the concept of staying on one's feet permeated these arts to some degree, hence the emphasis on strong stances; of course, I am making some presumptive leaps and perhaps overgeneralizing, but I am trying to consider it from a pan-cultural / pan-generational perspective, looking for the undercurrents common to them all vis-a-vis the basic nature of the human experience (whew!)

2) TCMA is also linked to symbolic aspects of proto-Taoist / shamanic practice (be it the more indigenous arts or the Indian-based stuff which could have been retrofitted to make it seem more "authentically" Chinese, of course); as such, you have several possibilities: the forms can be done in a pattern the if viewed from above can be "read" as a linear character; for example, the 一, the 工, the 王 or the 十 patterns are all symbolic of various things beyond their explicit meaning;
also, in regards to the stomping that one frequently sees (and which can be a precursor to assuming a "strong stance", shamanic practice (in many cultures) involves stomping on the earth during ritualized movement, for various reasons; as such, this aspect could conceivably have drifted down over the generations as well, finding it's way into forms (not to say that the stomping may not have been "interpreted" differently at different times by different people as well);

finally, as far as battlefield warfare - I personally think that individualistic MA practice had very little "play time" in regards to this because I am thinking that most infantry was basically treated as cannon fodder and was culled from the ranks of peasants and such - meaning that the training had to be fast, simple, context specific and probably involved things like training the men to respond to appropriate signals and move as units and also psychological training to keep them from freaking out and scattering during battle, despite the fact that they knew they were headed for certain death (basically to increase the "group think" aspect of the psyche, which is de-individualizing - personal MA training tends to have the opposite effect, at least to some degree - although I could see that group forms practice would create more cohesion, and as such would have to be kept very simple so it could be done by large numbers of people at once without needing a lot of individual "correction" which would run counter to the idea that you knew a lot of these guys would be dead soon, so why bother investing time and resources to improve an individual skill set)

anyway, good question, I like to try to think about this stuff as well with a degree of objectivity...

[David Jamieson]

all forms were built from the movements of mike tyson whilst dancing with wayne brady in a remake of a bobby brown video.


recognize!

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/6cd1e6dbb4/every-little-step-with-mike-tyson-wayne-brady?rel=player

[TenTigers]

@TGY-yeah, but people can understand what I wrote.....

[David Jamieson]

@TGY-yeah, but people can understand what I wrote.....

he's got more englishes than the rest of us, that much is clear...

[taai gihk yahn]

c'mon guys, I gotta do SOMETHING with that Waldorf / Steiner education I had - where ELSE can I put to use 14 years worth of curriculum that continually references ancient mythology in one form another?!?

[ShaolinDan]

Thanks for your insights.

I'm not really thinking about kung fu as we know it today though (or in the last couple hundred years)...I guess I'm thinking about the real roots of kung fu. It's purely theory but I think the first formal fighting techniques were probably developed in the military for soldiers. Once the precedent was set it spread/evolved from there.

TGY, I don't know much about Indian MA, is it truly accepted that cma's roots are there? Still, I guess I could make the same point about their MA.

Anyway my guess is that the variations/levels you guys mention came about after the initial structure was developed.

But yeah, it's just a guess, please let me know if there's any evidence that would negate this idea.

[bawang]

Traditional kung fu forms (at least most styles?) move in a straight line and use very solid stances.


northern kungfu comes from the military.

footwork is not in forms. form is a list of techniques for memorizing.