decline of shaolin do
Goju:
May I ask, how long ago was it that you were 15 and tried that school? I've never met the Soards, and have only heard stories about how they run the schools there, but it really isn't fair to judge all practioners of SD by that single experience.
When I first started in martial arts, I trained in TKD, and my teacher, a Vietnam combat veteran, was very skilled, and emphasized to me basics and fundamentals, and I was proud to call him my teacher and my freind. On the other hand, there's a local TKD school I've visited, run by a well respected very high ranking Korean TKD Master, of international renown, but quite frankly I would be ashamed to perform the way most of those students do, including their instructors. If I judged the entire style by the way the local school looked, I would have a very bad impression of TKD, from only one small segment.
After my TKD school closed, I joined a SD school, and have been with it (off and on) ever since, and with other styles and schools along the way. I have had (due to travel and school closings) four direct SD instructors, before attending the Lexington school regularly, and having the benefit of at least four instructors there, including GM Sin and his brother, and others. I have seen practitioners, with rank, even teachers, that clearly wouldn't qualify for it under any accepted objective standard. I suspect that when I was promoted, the standards were much lesser than when my teachers obtained the same rank long before me. There was a time when 3d Black and up was very rare, I can remeber a time there were less than half a dozen third or above; now it is very commonplace. I would guess there are very few today who could meet the Temple standards even to get in, much less get through.
But I have also seen, and had the honor of training with, and being taught by, SD practictioners who would hold their own or better with any martial artist out there from any style. And I don't mean just in class, but in real world experience. Quite frankly, most of them keep to themselves and do not flaunt their skill, and some of the best are hardly known. But their example is worth emulating.
The point I think is, like with almost anything, what you are given is worth what you do with it. I have seen students taught material, and they enjoyed learning about it, but they clearly have little or no concept of what it is, and maybe never will. Others, in the same class, take the material to their heart, and train it and train it and study it from every angle they can. Those are not the examples you, Goju, talk about.
Its not much different than my daughter's high school softball team. Some of the girls -- a few only -- have been playing all their lives and live it and play like champions. Some don't really care and are just playing around. Some might wonder how some of them got on the team. They can have their fun and there's nothing wrong with that. One might visit the team, and have very negative opinions about their play as a whole, but for a few. But their level of effort and skill does not mean those who have worked long and hard and have achieved much, are worthless. And it doesn't mean softball is crap, in general.
Find me any style of martial art, or any school, that you can't somewhere, maybe even easily, find the same things you found in Colorado.
And as for uniforms: I've recently been researching video of Chinese masters, including archival footage collected of Yip Man. They never wore uniforms of any kind, but just put on whatever shirt and pants they find, and train. Uniforms are a manufactured skin, or a costume for theater or performances. Even the "uniforms" at the temple were nothing more than peasant clothing, other than the ceremonial religious dress. Am I wrong? The impressions of so-called "kung fu" uniforms are adoptions from movies, in my opinion. And the origin of wearing gi's in SD has been explained and debated here and elsewhere ad nauseum. Some of the SD schools have changed uniforms to avoid just the criticism you make, I think including in Colorado (?).
Someone recently told me a story about a trip to Japan, and a tour to museums and the like, and how it was told, even by the Japanese, of how much of the tradition of Japan originally came from China, from basic agriculture, to martial arts weapons considered "traditional" Japanese or Okinawan, acknowledged to have originated from China in very many instances. It was noted by the storyteller to me, that it wouldn't be surprising to someday find the same is true for the traditional gi, but that is just my speculation. Who cares?
If you are truly interested in the styles and forms and concepts of Chinese martial arts, from the SD perspective, I would encourage you to look beyond the outside, and to look deeper than one school, one teacher, or even one branch, and sample more than one school, maybe even several, before making up your mind. And not to generalize everyone because of one, or even because of many. Unless your mind is already made up, which sometimes seems to be the case.
Just my opinion, it might mean nothing.
Just One Student
"I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine
(I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by goju
.....no matter the school or style I have a problem swallowing that.....TROLL
