And more re books and videos
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sal Canzonieri
I never kept any copies of transcripts, I read them on Usenet, a long time ago.
And whether it was Kentucky or Tennessee, I don't remember, it was too long ago. Look, plenty of people know it happened, and it's a fact. You do the research, I don't have the time or care to. Sorry.
I'm certainly not going to point out where the marks are in the routines.
That's the whole point of marks, isn't it? People spend lots of time and money going to real teachers who teach real forms, why should I betray them?
No disrespect to you, you seem like a decent and rational person, who is just trying to sincerely have a discussion about things. I understand where you are coming from, so please you understand.
There's plenty of threads here in this forum where we all have discussed marks in routines, for years now. I'm not the only person that has ever posted about it.
And in other forums at other sites, I also saw other people mentioning that marks were shown in all the non-Shaolin SD sets that must have come from books. I haev a vast library of martial arts books, the marks are easy to see if you know the forms.
But, when you are citing other posts and threads, and they just repeat the same rumors and innuendos, also without proof, people start thinking, it must be true. You must be part politician, thinking if the same thing is said over and over it becomes the truth. But where is book? The video? And, how do we know the book or video came first? How does someone know it didn't come from the same source GM Sin got his instruction on it, not the other way around?
I do my best to debunk charlatans for a living. I just don't take "believe me, me and all my freinds know its true" at face value.
I don't care about a "mark." I can see a book and see if it is the form I know or not, and go from there. Although, more often than not, they ALL have variations. Even those multiple videos Sal posted of "true" tai ji quan: in each one each "Master" was doing the postures with different positions, timing, angles, combinations, and in different sequence, than the other one. In fact, I have yet to see one "good" practioner do it just like another one. Wrong? No. Different? Yes. NOT the same thing. One copying the other, or all from a common source? I wasn't there, I have no time machine, I don't know and never will. Neither will anyone else, other than the source itself.
I may be no one and may know nearly nothing. But I know at one point in Sal's posts, I was thinking, I'm going to take a couple days off, go to his school (with his permission), and ask for that "one day" of lessons that he says will reveal how much time has been wasted in other schools. I also have to say, although I doubt it means anything, that after the name calling and bickering, I don't think I would waste my time, that is not an attitude, especially in a teacher, I would want to have given to me, or give to someone else.