Contemporary Wushu vs. Contemporary Wushu

[KC Elbows]

I just had an interesting conversation with a friend of mine.

He recently moved out here from Chicago, where he studied external wushu for eight years from the same teacher, and taught some as well. After moving here, I introduced him to a talented woman who teaches wushu here, and he has been enjoying these classes.

He was talking to his new teacher, and she asked to see his broadsword form. He performed the form, and she said"your old teacher is very traditional". She said the same regarding his nan chuan, eagle, and mantis forms.

Now, his old teacher learned on the mainland, and the forms he teaches are the old compulsory forms, and any serious fighters are expected to take part in sparring sessions under his tutelage. His old teacher had also learned chi kung and much of his tai chi from traditional teachers, I believe Yet, it is still what most here would consider contemporary wushu.

On the other hand, his new teacher teaches the newer wushu routines, and only teaches applications for the internal stuff. The internal forms are the PRC compilations.

A few questions:

-Has anyone else heard of such differences between contemporary wushu teachers?

-The original contemporary wushu forms were, from my recollection, put together by various kung fu teachers to show the general traits of the style. Who were the teachers who put these together? (please don't say the PRC, as they only organized it, and I'm quite sure that some political beaurocrat didn't create the wushu sets)

-Is anyone else familiar with a contemporary wushu school that holds regular sparring?

[norther practitioner]

I have heard similar stories KC. You are right, the (older even more so) routines are based on the old or traditional styles. Also, some masters (exp. some outside PRC) will do a mix of wushu and traditional training because some left PRC when, or just after the whole revolution happened. Just some thoughts, sorry I don'w have any specifics

[KC Elbows]

Cool. As far as gaining the traditional stuff after leaving the PRC, I know that my friends old teacher(who was also my first kung fu teacher) learned a lot when he was still there. At the uni there, where he learned a lot of his forms, he met an older guy who practiced a version of Sun style tai chi. He kept trying to learn from the guy, but the guy wasn't interested in teaching. One day, the sun stylist saw him practicing some form, and he was like "That's nice. What is it?" And my old teacher said "I'll teach it to you if you teach me your sun style"

[Royal Dragon]

Actually, this makes sens as modern "Wu SHu" was dirved from the original Combat arts. Also, anything that is NOT pure traditional is often classified as Wu Shu, especially if it is designed to work in the modern competitive arena.

For example, lets say a teacher from a traditional style wishes to compete ih the fast paced exciting Wu Shu competitions. He will probually enter his form and lose.

His next step would be to adjust or modify his form so that it doeas well under the Wu Shu competitive rules. Now, you have a "Traditional" form done in a "Wu Shu" fashion.

Now, take our traditionally trained teacher who is board stiff with his traditional stuff and slowly morphes into a Wu Shu teacher. His "Wu Shu" STILL retains the traditional flavor, and in reality is now somewhere in between the contempary and traditional.

It's NOT a black and white issue gentile men, it's a mulit faceted full color issue with players from both sides meeting in the middle, changing sides or playing both sides at once.

My guess is this is fairly common.

RD

[GLW]

Out of curiosity, who is the new teacher in Kansas?

As for the differences...

In the 1950's and 1960's (prior to 1966 when the Cultural Revolution began), the people putting together categorized Wushu routines were not doing flowery stuff. They were taking traditional sets and combining them or combining aspects of a class of styles into new routines that could then be used to train many things. Those routines were different from traditional in only the age of the routine. For example, in many of these new routines, they would take an old routine and try to even it out for right and left sides. Many older routines can be right side heavy.

After the Cultural Revolution, the older generation were told it was OK to go back and teach again. Now, after 10 years of meetings where you are told you are bad for doing what you do, and then all of a sudden being told to start again, how likely are you to be going all out to do things again. The attitude of many of those teachers was "You say to do this, but how do I know you won't watch and then come and arrest me for 'old thinking' later"

So, the first batch of students did not get the depth and they definitely did not have the depth of basics that the previous group had. Also, the teachers were all 10 years older...wiser...and less trusting of the governement and more likely to temper their opinions with what they felt comfortable with.

Then there was a shift back to more traditional ways. But, by then, the older generation was beginning to retire or die...and you had a group of incompletely trained folks who were young in the 1960's but trained before the Cultural Revolution...all vying for the next promotion and status....So...you end up with the new generation not necessarily being willing to learn from the older one.


So...you end up with some who are 'Traditional' in approach and some who are not....And even with one teacher or another, the flavor also depends on how close to their teacher they really were.

[RAF]

Hey Royal Dragon:

Did you catch my post under the taiji section about Adam Hsu's seminar on tai zu chang quan. I would be real interested in your experiences if you take the seminar.

I don't want to get into heated exchanges over contemporary v. traditional wushu: there is enough room for both. But the training and conditioning methodologies are an important factor separating them. Its not that I want to see contemporary wushu done away with etc., I just don't want the traditional wushu to lose its identity or be confused with the contemporary styles and changes. Much of the traditional training is simple (no hidden secrets other than proper alignment and breathing), slow, and boring (payoffs may take a year before you feel the changes).

Part of the problem with traditional wushu is that many of the old masters hid or only partially taught their systems and then the partially trained students somehow became martial artists. Its perfectly understandable why they hid it but its also tragic. The trend has to be reversed or much of what we know of traditional wushu will vanish.

[KC Elbows]

GLW,
Her name is shao li. Very nice lady, and very athletic. My friend likes studying with her, as with his old teacher, he gained skill in the martial side, but needed work on the gymnastic(which he also likes). She is phenomenal at the gymnastic stuff(well, she's pregnant now, so not much of that at the moment).

[shaolinboxer]

Shi Yan Ming teaches contemporary wushu, and holds sparring classes I believe.

[firepalm]

The first set of international compulsory routines were started back around the beginning of the ninties or very late eighties. There were essentially seven routines (Long Fist, Southern, Taiji, Broadsword, Straight Sword, Staff & Spear). All routines with the exception of Taiji, were based on then current Chinese national champions 'individual' routines. Long Fist for example was based on national champion Yuan Wen Qing's form. Each routine was simplified and then used as the standard for all World Wushu Championships. One of the aims being to raise the international standards and level the playing field. Since then other routines have been added; Southern broadsword, Southern staff, Taiji Sword.
In 2000, China introduced a new set of International compulsories for Long Fist, Broadsword, Straight Sword, Staff & Spear. These routines were designed by committes however & not based on any competitor's routine. These routines are also much more difficult then the previous ones.
For some knowledge of the first set and not the new ones can be perceived as an indicator of how 'up to date' a teacher is. Further the original routines had been adopted into many 'traditional' based schools.
Actually however unless a coach/teacher from China has gone to college for wushu then he or she has probably done very little with the compulsories as China themselves did not utilize them very extensively.
Where the real difference often occurs is simply with age or generation of the teacher many of the older coaches are very often traditional stylists that pretty much 'had to convert'. The original head coach of the Guangzhou (Canton) Wushu Team was Chan Cheung Mien, who was a student of 3rd generation Choy Lee Fut GM Chan Yiu Chi. Chan Cheung Mien had also done Lama & Bak Mei. With the Communist take over & the change persons like Chan Cheung Mien became part of the shaping of contemporary wushu.
Contrary to popular opinion many coaches have very extensive 'traditional' knowledge, Xia Pai Hua one of the heads of Wushu development in China & responsible for the development of San shou/da is in his seventies, very much a traditionalists and probably one of the most knowledgable in terms of 'traditional' principles & applications.
Where the big difference occurs is when you get the younger generation that has pretty trained primarily in the newer forms Mainland forms where emphasis placed on difficulty and so on. Many of the younger generation when retiring will often go to college for coaching and will get traditional instruction as well but do not have the same type of background as the older generation.
When looking at an older generation coach and how they teach there will often be an emphasis on more 'traditional' tenets (waist usage, eye focus, power, etc...) where as with the newer generation younger coaches it may be more towards newer flashier movement.
Just a kind of quick over view...

[KC Elbows]

Thanks Firepalm. Do you know of anyplace I can get info on the individuals you named(both coaches and champions)?

[Royal Dragon]

I knew about it a month or so ago. From the sounds of it, it may be the Ming dynasty era's advanced Northern form. My problem is I'm in Chicago and I have no way to get there.

I asked about having them flim the seminar, but they said it was not possible. BUT, they told me if I attended, they would let me film myself doing the set after I learned it.

If I could get someone local to go, I would have them film themselves doing the form right after (That means BEFORE you get in your car and go for burgers) and send it to me, but Sifu Abel is the only guy I know in that area, and he just moved 500 miles south and can't go either.

I don't know if they are still doing it, but it was mentioned that semi priviate instruction in the set would be done afterwards or maybe the next day, probually for an additional fee.

The school also teaches that set, and I was invited to fly down and learn it . I plan on taking them up on it when the time comes. It would be nice to already know it so all I need are corrections though.

So, anyone willing to attend and get me some video? It's a VERY rare set, and not often taught. I don't think anyone in our line even has it.



Royal Dragon

[GLW]

Firepalm has a lot of it.

With the reformation of the PRC in the 50's, a number of those masters on the 'wrong' side disappeared...

Then, as things progressed, those who got implicated in politics had problems too. For example, I know one teacher who had students approach him to learn dagger and double daggers just before the big riots at the beginning of the Cultural Revolution started. That teacher refused by saying that the only use for those techniques was in fighting in the streets and it was not a good time to do such things. The students went to another teacher. The second teacher taught the methods...the students ended up on the wrong side of the Red Guard...arrested and the teacher ended up spending many years in jail...for teaching.

The early 1950's routines are VERY traditional in flavor. For example, there is a training routine that has just been dug up - 32 Posture Changquan...it was created in 1959 and was a thrid level routine...along with several others. Over the past few years, these old routines are being rediscovered and added back into the curriculum..but sometimes not done well.

The real push for standardization then did come in the late 1980's and early 1990's...with the advent fo the 10 major compulsory sets (Changquan, Nanquan, 42 Taijiquan, Dao, Gun, Chiang, Jian, 42 Taijijian, Nan Dao, Nan Gun) More recently, there are new versions of Changquan, Dao, Gun, Chiang...and the new routines are more physically difficult...but more removed from traditional sets....(IMHO, they are not good or well constructed sets....)...I don't like the direction they are taking...but like they listen to me...:)