Originally Posted by
Shaolin Wookie
This is good advice in general. I think one of the main issues is that people have preconceived notions of what asian martial arts should be like. Many students want to kowtow to received knowledge (a bit like colleges in that way), and they want an intellectual brandname/heritage. There should be a patrilineal line of descent, certain customs/rituals, etc.
I've always been a rationalist with a healthy skeptical streak, so I questioned the lineage pretty ****ed quickly. I think most people do, but it's like anything else. Most people at the schools don't really care, and they get defensive because they do not know anything more than what they've been told by senior guys. They therefore don't want to question it when pressed to do so, and they soon become set in their opinions--everyone else must be wrong.
People who get down on teh history neglect the art because they lose confidence in it. I've been around the MA block, so to speak, and I can make the chin-na work standing or on the ground, I can throw, sweep, etc. pretty well, and I can hit hard. My teacher taught these well, but I lost confidence in the techniques a couple of years in (though never losing confidence in the teacher). I can make this art work, but there was a time a couple of years ago where I lost confidence in the art b/c of the retarded advertising campaign. I wanted to feel proud about the art, but it's hard to do that when you disagree about history, etc. We do Jiang style bagua, Cheng Man Ching's modified Tai Chi 64 (originated in Taiwan), etc. When you do the research and correctly identify things for research/background purposes, you just want to be able to talk freely about it. Nowadays, I do, come hell or highwater, raised eyebrows or rolling eyes.
Anyways, I've been putting together a little online resource for the "alternative" history of SD---from Chung Yen Shaolin (Central Plains Wushu) on. It talks about the many different teachers who taught there, GM Ie's opium habit/rehab (his buddies got him back into training to help him kick the habit), and the basic structure of Chung Yen. It also provides background info (Jiang/Cheng Man Ching, Jie Chien [from Jing Woo], Lian Wu Zhang [Jing Woo, too]) for many of the forms. It's not derogatory or "whistleblower" in nature, and I certainly do not have all the information that exists. It's what I've gotten from 4 years of research. So far, it's pretty respectful in all ways, as I see it. It just condenses what we know is true, and leaves out the mythical stuff that's on every SD website.
As a researcher, essayist, and college professor, I hope it'll help a discussion get started about the more practical origins of SD's curriculum. Maybe it'll help those interested in a practical history of what they're doing. I've never been a fan of dogmas.