BoxingFists
LFJ,
Do you mean that like they made Tai Chi 24 Yang style and 42 from the 103 original Yang style, so did they do with,
24 Xiao Hong from ( believe ) Main Xiao Hong Quan, and the Main Xiao Hong Quan from this Lao Jia Hong Quan.
In this, the name Xiao only is put because its a smaller version of Lao Jia ?
It gets all mysterius to me
Registered User
yes, basically.Originally Posted by Eugene
not exactly, the set sometimes called laojia (old frame) hongquan is the original xiaohongquan that is a matching set with a dahongquan that is missing.In this, the name Xiao only is put because its a smaller version of Lao Jia ?
It gets all mysterius to me
nowadays people call the simplified version of the set still xiaohongquan and mistakenly call the longer version dahongquan.
in fact, the longer version is the original xiaohongquan, and the original dahongquan has not been found yet.
Registered User
yes, and this opening section of laojia hongquan has a sequence that is repeated at the end of xiaomeihuaquan / ditang meihuaquan.
1. the point is you are forced to turn around at the end of xiaohongquan, which you need not do in laojia hongquan because you dont turn to face the audience with the earlier kick. you may find a more comfortable way to turn around, but from a left gongbu turning right 270 from the front foot is just awkward.
2. xiaohongquan/s i've learned have many more transitional moves than others. but still lack intermediate movements. xiaohongquan doesnt even have a single xubu in it. whereas laojia hongquan is much more dense in technique, beyond just transitional moves and stances. particularly in the ending sequences after the gongbu tuizhang section.
if you put the two sets side-by-side and compare from the start you can see where things are missing. xiaohongquan will stop moving and have to wait for laojia hongquan to get through all the different techniques before it ends up in the same posture, then move on.
3. in laojia hongquan its a different take on a very old rouquan sequence, these later forms just retained the rouquan way of doing it.
4. thats just personal preference.
5. its a simplified set.
regarding the technique before xiexing and panzhou, in laojia hongquan it depends on who does it. most people dont even do the second half of the set with panzhou. but the transition there both times is a more complex hand technique.
anyway, regarding its history, what do you have that puts xiaohongquan in the song dynasty, and by whom? whats your story with its development?
BoxingFists
@RenDaHai,
I am now very intrested in your unusual Xiao Hong Quan
Ive seen Shi Yong Wen do some moves of Xiao Hong Quan in a video where he also spins the dragons tail real fast.
Does your Xiao look a lil like the one that Shi Guo Song performes ?
羅王宗
@ Eugene
My version is not from Yong Wen. And no it is nothing like guosong. Really there is nowhere on line you can see a version even close to as detailed as my masters version.
@LFJ
1. I agree, that version is a little awkward. Try turning of the rear foot of gong bu and moving back towards the center, turning hands a little like in da hong quan after dan bian. You need it this way because this way the Panzhou/ xie xing sections face opposite directions and balance.
2. Xiao Hong quan has MANY xu bu's..... They are also transitional, and dependant on personal body structure. The first move after yun ding is a turn to xu bu, then into tui zhang. It can be done in many different ways depending on intended application, but this is the way it starts in my version. Qixing is a continuous push and can stop in gong bu, or it can move through ding bu and into XU BU, it can even continue into the next gong bu. In some versions of Da hong quan since it is considered larger frame, qixing is done as xu bu (left foor foreward, right hand foreward). YOu will notice it is referred to as 'da qixing' in the lyrics instead of 'xiao qi xing' in XHQ. This is the meaning. Plus may others.
3. Yes XHQ should contain rou quan like shenfa and bu fa in places.
4. Tui Zhang is an interesting thing. Notice how the first TuiZhang is done from a high stance, with the hand prepared high (yun ding), the second TuiZhang is done from ShouRen, the lowest, smallest stance. Beautiful structure. These techniques cannot possibly be done the same way, one is from low, one from high. They are the same technique, yet done in a different frame, a different move in my form. As are later ones. The beauty of Tui zhang is somewhat spoiled in Laojia. The hook hand moving through is a specific technique. The more important aspect of tuizhang is not thinking of it as just a palm strike, but as placing the palm in the centerline of the body, as the standard guarding hand. The meanings of tui zhang are too many, but the hand guarding the centre is paramount. This is not so clear in laojia.
Regarding complexity and transitional stances; If we really split it up the sequence between the two xie xing stances; This is normally done as 3 stances, after xie xing its shou ren, kick, xie xing, right? In my version there are 9 stances in between the end of xie xing and the formation of the second xie xing. Of course it can be smoothed out, but if you don't know the transitional elements you a losing the better part of the form.
The complexity is added depending on the person doing the form, and how well they understand the technique. On the outset Laojia is no more or less complex, it is almost the same, but with a couple of extra moves at the beginning (which i think spoils the symmetry). The laojia form is certainly less profound. And contains more unusual versions of techniques and stances suggesting it is from a certain family style rather than Zhenchuan.
Regarding History;
My chinese is good on some domains, and less accurate in others. Historical terms is not a strong point. I have heard the history of Xiaohong from several older masters now, all put it in song di. My current master has given me the best story (especially regarding its formation) i have heard yet, but there will be holes in my translation and i don't want to misrepresent it. So until i can get a good translation of exactly what he said i hesitate to repeat it. Never the less they all say it dates back to song. Yuan is right after song though right?
BoxingFists
@RenDaHai,
Do you follow the lyrics of the Main Xiao Hong Quan, I believe the 54 postures ?
You also say that there are alot of Xubu`s in there, ( these are empty stances right )http://www.kungfufever.com/shaolin/s..._statue_04.jpg
Just wondering because i think i havent seen a xubu in xiao hong so far, maybe i overlooked some videos i am not sure. But If a form is based on one technique, i guess you can put everything in it in a way
Bad the Fukc Ass
this is the same for me.
For whoso comes amongst many shall one day find that no one man is by so far the mightiest of all.
BoxingFists
here is a old thread where Mr. Sal shows a rear Xiao Hong lyric,
I really have to make some progress on my chinese haha
http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/...Xiao+Hong+Quan
Bad the Fukc Ass
gene also has a link in that thread to a xiaohong lyric thread
For whoso comes amongst many shall one day find that no one man is by so far the mightiest of all.
羅王宗
Yeah, these lyrics are good,
However you need to understand that for example 'shang bu tui zhang' step foreward push palm, is ambiguous in the lyrics.
Simply stepping foreward has too many applications to be mentioned, and can contain a great deal of intermediate stances to teach these lessons.
Xu bu is sometimes a solid stance but also sometimes an intermediate step.
And as i say, you could do seven stars in xu bu and it would still be absolutely correct.
No, most videos don't show this, as usually they do all tui zhangs the same with the same intermediate, often lifting the knee. Again a great technique, but there are many more variations.
Registered User
i was actually talking about solid xubu in the set. it appears in laojia hongquan as not just a transitional step, but not in xiaohongquan.
yes, a lot happened during the overlap between song and yuan dynasties.
did the history of the set not have anything to do with li sou creating the matching da and xiao hongquan sets at least? was it something different altogether?
the history stories are what i'm interested in here, because something being more profound and symmetrical is somewhat a matter of preference and doesnt indicate a time frame for development.
anyway, we discussed various hongquan in detail elsewhere on the boards here. this is what sal canzonieri had to say regarding laojia hongquan:
by the way, rendahai, may i ask who is your current master? and your nine stance transition between the two xiexing sounds interesting. is it possible to explain?
Last edited by LFJ; 03-16-2010 at 06:45 PM.
BoxingFists
@RenDaHai,
Would the old masters pay more time to internal kung fu then external kung fu ?
Registered User
rendahai,
we're talking about the history of li sou's da/xiaohongquan, as currently held by shaolin, and specifically the laojia hongquan set.
no one said there wasnt a lot practiced in shaolin all throughout the last century. thats obvious. anyway, we're talking specifically about the history of laojia hongquan vs xiaohongquan.
awaiting your new history story.
okay
羅王宗
Yeah,
Sorry for the rant guys, and being mysterious, my bad!
Its kind of in theme with the thread though you see, lots of people think there was this void during the cultural revolution where no kung fu was practiced, so they say stuff like only xiao/da hong quan were practiced. I want to dispel this rumor as it leads people to judge current shaolin. Guess i don't need to lay it out for people on this forum though.
I'll get the history as I can; HOwever it will still not solve the Laojia problem... specifically it doesn't list the exact moves of xiaohong quan so...
The only way we can ascertain which is the older version is by analysing the form itself.
This can be done;
If we take any move, such as shu shen: This one move is an entire form of footwork in itself which apears in many shaolin forms. However it is an absolutely neccessary part of this footwork that one leg is left 'free', 'weightless'. In the classic xiao hong quan this is the case, in laojia both legs bear the weight together and clumsily. It is my opinion that this is from some specific family style rather than the correct lineage. Same goes for the hands in this form, spreading the wings as in laojia is a more specific use. The hands closing the body is more general, and can also be referreded to as shrinking the body, even when done in gong bu. Some versions of laojia use the correct hand posture, but wit different emphasis.
I can go into detail on why the leg needs to be free, or the hand positioning, but i think it is uneccessary... A similar analysis can be performed on every move in the form and comparison to other sets to show that the classic xiaohong quan is more likely to be the older.
Knowing the history won't help us choose..... More to come on it soon though.
P.s @eugene, Yes the older masters would have spent the vast majority of their training on internal aspects.
Last edited by RenDaHai; 03-17-2010 at 06:30 PM.
Registered User
i was just giving you a hard time.Sorry for the rant guys, and being mysterious, my bad!
it is also possible that the similarity comes from xiaohongquan taking the place of laojia hongquan, and following that, other sets conformed to the methods of xiaohongquan as being the standard and mother of other sets.A similar analysis can be performed on every move in the form and comparison to other sets to show that the classic xiaohong quan is more likely to be the older.
xiaohongquan is so played with now. you see it done slowly like rouquan. you see it done in the very low frame. you see it done in small frame as ven. shi dejian, wu nanfang, and others do it now.
i dont think this comes from years of development, but simply from people trying it with different elements, because its such an open form. most masters dont care if you change newer sets, because they are not very old anyway.
anyway, if laojia hongquan is not the matching set (dahongquan) but a later expansion of xiaohongquan, where did it come from? why does it have an entire first section before the xiaohongquan routine starts?
i have noticed portions of that first section also appear in other older shaolin sets, such as meihuaquan, which was developed around the same time (song dynasty) and abbreviated into xiaomeihuaquan in the yuan dynasty- same time that these xiao/dahongquan sets come from. but now, the section only exists in the old frame, laojia hongquan.
not only the history is important, but that in conjunction with tracking where it is and has been practiced, by whom, and what else they have in their training.Knowing the history won't help us choose..... More to come on it soon though.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote