Your opinions: Internal & External

[joedoe]

I know this has probably been debated numerous times, but I was hoping to get some opinions on some questions and observations I have been mulling over lately.

1) What classifies a style as internal or external? Is it the power generation techniques, and if so what specifically is it that distinguishes them?

2) Is it just my perception, or do some internal stylists seem to have a superiority complex?

To qualify my second question, I once went to visit a kung fu brother in New Zealand and was introduced to a friend of his who taught a style of Tai Chi. We were discussing the two arts, and he proceeded to tell me that "Tai Chi was similar to my kung fu, but more refined". I barely managed to hold my tongue.

Anyway, flame away.

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by joedoe

1) What classifies a style as internal or external? Is it the power generation techniques, and if so what specifically is it that distinguishes them?

Personally, I don't like the internal/external split that much.

As I see it as an attempt by a few masters to raise their art above the rest.

2) Is it just my perception, or do some internal stylists seem to have a superiority complex?

To qualify my second question, I once went to visit a kung fu brother in New Zealand and was introduced to a friend of his who taught a style of Tai Chi. We were discussing the two arts, and he proceeded to tell me that "Tai Chi was similar to my kung fu, but more refined". I barely managed to hold my tongue.

Many do consider the internal arts to be some form of "higher" kung fu and thus feel they got something special.

Like the internal/external classification I think it is a fairly modern concept and distracting from real deal.

If you get caught too much on labels like internal/external, styles, different executions of forms and lineages it will only distract you and thus have negative effects on your training.

Just how I feel about the subject.

[joedoe]

LC, I agree with you - and I guess that is what has prompted me to post the questions As far as I am concerned, different styles are simply different paths to the same goal. In the end, if you have practised dilligently you will be a good MA and the stylistic differences kind of fade into the background.

[Oso]

Incense.

[joedoe]

So you are saying that the difference between internal & external is incense?

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by joedoe
1) What classifies a style as internal or external? Is it the power generation techniques, and if so what specifically is it that distinguishes them?

Alot of different things. The "internal" arts are a "culture", in the same way that Japanese or Korean or Indonesian or Phillipino martial arts constitute a certain "culture," associated with their historical association internally. So you might compare Japanese and Indonesian arts and find that they have a different sort of "quality of movement" to them, a different pedagogy, different cultural aspects, and so on. The internal arts are the same. And just as with these other martial cultures, there is alot of variation between practitioners: some very much espouse the stereotypical qualities of the culture, others less so.

2) Is it just my perception, or do some internal stylists seem to have a superiority complex?

Yes. Just like any other group.

[Oso]

yep, you know you are in an internal school if they don't clean and burn incense to block the moldy odor.

[joedoe]

Originally posted by Christopher M


Alot of different things. The "internal" arts are a "culture", in the same way that Japanese or Korean or Indonesian or Phillipino martial arts constitute a certain "culture," associated with their historical association internally. So you might compare Japanese and Indonesian arts and find that they have a different sort of "quality of movement" to them, a different pedagogy, different cultural aspects, and so on. The internal arts are the same. And just as with these other martial cultures, there is alot of variation between practitioners: some very much espouse the stereotypical qualities of the culture, others less so.



Yes. Just like any other group.

So are you saying that the distinction is cultural? How does that apply to the fact that CMA are divided between internal and external? Or have I misunderstood you?

[Christopher M]

Sorry; I meant like pseudo-cultural, as in the culture of punk rockers or the culture of vegetarians. Not literally cultural in the sense of genetics/geographics.

[Shaolinlueb]

when i think internali think tai chi, slow movement and controlled breathing. when i think external I think normal kung fu with lots of fighting and such. but kung fu also has the internal and tai chi also has the contact (push hands) and when the tai chi is pout to application you can see the power behind it. so really i dont like classifying a style if i dont have to.

[Xebsball]

internal and external are 2 families of styles
thast all

cos you cant claim that the external part is not used on "internal" styles, you still always need bones and muscles to move - and to say those are not used on the "internal" style as much as on the "external" styles is a fallacy (spell?)

[Okami]

Honestly I didn't read all the posts, so if I am repeating anything I apologize in advance.

I have come to the conclusion that the difference between internal and external arts is the order in which the "total person" is developed.

In an external art the body is developed, then the spirit/mind/soul/chi/you know what I mean.

In an internal art, it is the reverse.

I may be wrong, but all styles attempt to develop both aspects of a person, but it seems like they do it in a different order.

Let the comments flood in

[Shuul Vis]

Internal styles generally confuse opponents with secrets or bore them with extremely slow movements. Whereas external stylists tend to hide behind "closed doors" and target thier attackers' family lineage.

[Yung Apprentice]

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!

[Merryprankster]

Internal styles-whatever you do.

External styles--that's what the other guy does.