Originally Posted by
KC Elbows
As a buyer, I have only very rarely bought kung fu related magazines in the last five years, because, frankly, as much as we may make fun of the shenanigans of a forum, more useful info about many styles can be found here than in so-called scholalrly articles in the kung fu magazines.
99% of which amount to six pictures of some random technique, a whole lot of naming the style, naming its forms, and naming the people who did it, very broad statements about the style or subject of the article that require little to no expertise. Either stingy with info, or not expert.
The format, which pushes the dramatic well, fails to push anything else well, imo.
If your kung fu is a secret treasure to you, be logically self consistent by not publishing articles about it that provide nothing but the appearance of dealing with its fight techniques.
If you are writing a historical survey, do that, don't waste time trying to do a mediocre history(with questionable citations) and then lack space to deal with anything else.
If you're writing an article, one would assume you or the person providing the info has some expertise. People with expertise know you can't do a class on "The deadly mobility of Southern Mantis," it tends to take some classes, so dig in for several articles, in depth ones, and dig in to really think about what you're presenting, do not delude yourself with your own expertise, allow yourself to trouble shoot the material and your knowledge, because you likely won't have any other form of editorial on your ideas.
IF your article draws people by the amazing, and you fail to provide the many completely mundane things that make up the amazing, you're not providing background to your system, you're providing a fable, and people are going to think you don't know the real thing, even if you do, and it will be your fault and no one else's.
Kung fu teachers and writers need to support and join with others who have no concern with style over substance. The mainstream bookstores not only have far fewer kung fu magazines, but far fewer kung fu books that I can recall seeing in the past. Books with a form and maybe ten applications from that form are about ten applications away from being books of contemporary wushu to an extent. Claims that all was kept secret in the past are problematic, since books defining knowledge beyond form seem to have been more common in the times that we draw tradition from, yet now, kung fu books are filled with form, not usage, while custom has made it that articles too often depict finishing moves without the framework of moves that gain one such an advantage.
This is not a case of me saying I'm better than others, but a case of someone who lifelong has bought these magazines and books, and now not only does not, but would not have students waste their time with most of them either. A good article on history is fine, but as for real scholarly articles on specific fighting methods, the scholars disappoint with juvenile fare, and are losing the interest of students who have an honest interest in fighting methods, and gaining the interest of students whose only interest is knowing something cool, but have no real interest in fighting methods.
Showing me your form doesn't mean you understand it, nor does showing me one move you like. Other martial arts books and articles, eastern and western, are organized compendiums of techniques, bad kung fu books and articles are either mostly text, or mostly form, or random moves with no clear plan of presentation, no "these article will show the main strikes, next the main throws, next the main locks," instead its often just a random article out of the void on a random move or two that, the merits of those moves aside, could be done with the pictures alone.
Again, the old texts we see seem to also be compendiums of techniques, but now, technique has been relegated to use as flashy "applications" to impress in some teaching and in published works.
Point being, if I currently own a kung fu book or article, barring historical survey stuff, it is based in technique and usage in the majority of its text, just like all other books on fighting methods seem to for other eastern and western styles. Attacks, counters, throws, all in there somewhere, and, for articles, a focus allowing for useful technical info to be gleened.
Otherwise, the texts tend to be treating the style they discuss as an exotic curiosity, and exoticising something you want to learn is a good way to learn it poorly.
/rant
Reply With Quote
