Thanks for the comments, guys
SimonW - I actually had you, or those who share your opinion, in mind when putting together this Shaolin issue. If you examine it, we focus specifically upon traditional Shaolin. We mention the wushu performance aspect, but that is really such a minor portion of what is happening at Shaolin Temple now. It just seems bigger because most of the travelling performance groups focus on wushu, so if you haven't studied at Shaolin, you might be lead to beleive that this is all they do. In fact, that's not the case at all, and if anything, traditional Shaolin is on the rise at Songshan. We also go at length to tackle the misperceptions of Buddhist monks and Shaolin monks, both in my cover sotry and in Dr. Shahar's scholarly analysis (which by the way, we're very pleased have published - most scholars of Dr. Shahar's stature wouldn't stoop to publishing in a popular magazine like this). Actually, Shaolin is going to great lengths to promote Buddhism, but we only report on a little of that since, frankly, we're a martial arts magazine, not a Buddhist magazine. Of course, the martial side is more blatent, so it's easy to misinterpret. I often see our role here at the mag to help translate Chinese culture to the west, to alleviate these misinterpretations.
Sorry, the 6/28/4 forum hack ate my reply
Let me see if I can piece it back together...
We appreciate your commnts, Simon. FWIW, the Shaolin Special 2004 is showing the best newsstand sales results so far this year. You may hve your issues with Shaolin, but more of our readers seem to take the opposite stance. We can't please everyone at the same time. That's just an issue of diversity in CMA.
As for Lion Books and Taiwan, we've been running a series - the Treasures of Taiwan - since Mar Apr 2003. It is largely based on a cooperative effort we have shared with Lion books and Wulin Magazine. So it is available in English. Through us. :D
As for Hung Gar origins, Fong Sai Yuk, and San Te, oh man, that just shot down any arguement you might have about the authenticity of Shaolin. Current research is pretty skeptical on these figures and origin myths. It's hard to do serious scholarly research here because it's such a mess. There's some good stuff on Hung moon and Tiandihui, but on the whole, it contradicts the martial myths, or leads us to beleive that it's all a fabrication, all inventions of tradition. We'd love some good penetrating submissions on this, and I think they will come soon, but right now, the research is a bit daunting. That being said, there are Hung Gar articles coming up in the next two issues. Nothing on mantis, Fong or San, but mabye later.
Shaolin kungfu... it's not for everyone!
Well, some may be utterly obsessed with Shaolin, but after seeing and meeting some of the monks in person, I still feel they're nothing short of truly amazing. Not to mention they are some of the kindest, gentlest souls I've met (and still able to whoop my @$$ with one finger!).
It's not required to like Shaolin if you practice martial arts. Authentic DOES, not SAYS. A certain "father of iron palm" claimed to be authentic, but that did not stop him from falling hard from the train of wu de.
You don't like Shaolin - that's okay...
... more for us!
:p
hope you find what you're looking for,
h. ox