Who Locked The Door?

[couch]

Upon reading a previous post about the transmission of Wing Chun from person to person - it eventually gained two weapons forms. Even the pole was adapted to the Wing Chun theory.

So, may I ask, who closed the door on research and development?

Why must we adhere to these 'rigorous' patterns and forms, while the previous Wing Chun practitioners of old were able to add, discard and tinker with the system?

In this day and age of current evolution and forward thinking, what has caused us to cease our own evolution?

Best,
CTK

[SAAMAG]

The dogmatic idea of retaining the "purity" of the said art is a flawed one in my opinion. From what I understand its something that only existed in this last century give or take.

Perhaps it has something to do with a change in mindset as it spread around the world? The teachers wanted to make sure that what had been given to them retains its integrity thus its value? Perhaps that idea was misconstrued and took on the form of never evolving? Like I was saying in another thread...the underlying principles to combat never change...doesn't matter the style or technique or what have you. The type of fight, the techniques, the locations, the environments, and etc will change.

You have to improve and adapt to be able to overcome a changing details. It happens in all facets of life. Most evidently in business...if a firm isn't moving forward...its inevitably bringing on its own demise.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=couch;969767]Upon reading a previous post about the transmission of Wing Chun from person to person - it eventually gained two weapons forms. Even the pole was adapted to the Wing Chun theory.

((How many have had good training in the use of the pole and the bot jam do-wing chun style))

((Nothing wrong with building- but good knowledge stacks upon good knowledge rather than throwing out what is good.. Besides the greats of the past were few and far between- but today with "democratization" (WE??))and the internet- everyone is an "expert".(??)))


((Evolution ?No problem BUT what if major development paths are missed by some in the first place??))Best, joy chaudhuri

[HumbleWCGuy]

I think that lack of innovation happened because

1. It was the best thing going in its sphere (China) for a long time. Why mess up a good thing?
2. Some lineages were more interested in preserving the art as taught to them rather than keep up with the times. Even an antiquated version of WC is usually pretty good for basic self defense.
3. Innovation requires someone who is intelligent and has his/her head screwed on straight. It is hard to find people who are smart and have a keen eye towards effectiveness.
4. Innovation requires the right person to promote it. I am sure that a lot of people have some great ideas about WC but if they can't pass it on to students or share it with others well...


Bruce Lee was a guy who had a number of the characteristics of an innovator smart, good communication skills, broad knowledge of other martial arts, committed to effectiveness, and some things that I probably missed.

[Lindley]

No one has locked the door. One must realize that Ving Tsun is a system and, being so, one should make the distinction as to whether Wing Chun "needs" anything more or does the individual need more? The weapons have very deep natures to them, very unapparent to even those reputed as "Grandmasters". The weapons training, even on a basic level, is one that most would avoid. Not because it has no value, but because it is very very intense and physically challenging when done correctly. Also, often people do not ascend to that level. They work too long on trying to perfect the forms or play (standard) Chi Sao.

Wing Chun's purpose should be to lay down your foundation, as it should be with most Martial Arts styles. Martial arts knowledge is to be "extracted", not copied. If you are teaching someone Wing Chun and you find some "method" to enhance their learning of a concept, then you should not feel anything wrong with that. That is YOUR way. Like the alphabet, people come up with new words not new letters.

It is very important to realize that your journey through martial arts should be in the path toward freedom. That the very system that you started with must not become the very ball and chain on your pursuit of this.

Good luck with your Kung Fu!

[HumbleWCGuy]

Semantic debates about anthropomorphism aside, I think that WC (along with other traditional arts) will have to change to continue to be viable in the future. If someone is looking for a way to get their kid trained in the martial arts, they will want bang for their time and buck. People want MMA, if your school can't give that to them on some level, they will look elsewhere. This is one thing that I like about HFY, although some have accused the lineage of a certain amount of hucksterism.

[punchdrunk]

that's a great question... can you apply principles such as the centerline, straight line, and efficiency (in distance and energy or time spent) to things outside of the "typical" Wing Chun curriculum? My answer is yes, should you add them to a curriculum and teach them to others?? That's personal and subjective, most honest people are too concerned that they may screw the system up, and most who do change the system only do so for money reasons.. examples would be fake versions for the public and supposed authentic versions for higher paying private classes or disciples. Or people with little to no ground fighting experience adding it to teach at their schools as MMA! Or my favorite, special chi gung classes geared to those afraid of physical training!!
Truth is the system changes with each person and no 2 schools are the same, just follow the principles and test them with non co-operating partners from other schools to keep you honest (ghosts of T.N.!!!)

[Lee Chiang Po]

We can only speculate, but I think some of the weapons were likely individual inovations rather than being part of a particular system. Some might have even developed entire fighting systems around a particular weapon. And being that the powers that be at the times did not allow their citizens to own or carry weapons, they had to come up with the use of common items or tools as a substitute. As for the pole, the monks often traveled and they had to deal with bandits as well as large wild animals. A pole would be a good weapon in such cases, especially if the monk had some sort of fighting form with it. Just poking at something might work, but it works better if you have some poking skills.
As for Wing Chun, I think that it had a great deal with who the practitioners were and what they had on hand. If you lived on a junk and a long pole was your tool for helping move it about, then it would only seem logical to learn other skills with it. After all, they had likely seen the poles used elsewhere. And the knives? I can imagine that they evolved as weapons because they were available as well. The acrobats did lots of dance and stage play stuff, and butterfly knives were commonly used in these productions, so why not learn to fight fancy with them? It all comes about through need or oppertunity. When Wing Chun came out of China it brought it, traditional forms and weapons. However, just watching people from different lineages do the SLT you can see that there is a great deal difference from one to the next. At the time WC was being taught and used in daily life, it probably did undergo lots of change time and again, especially as it went from one person to the next, but they were probably not so fixed on traditional as it is today. Probably more concerned with making what they had work for them under the current circumstances. Westerners go to great extent to try keeping things as traditional as possible, even to the extent of learning the language. You hear all the time people saying things like, that isn't WC, or it don't look like WC, or WC don't have that. Well, as long as you can follow the basic concepts it is WC.

LCP

[JPinAZ]

If someone is looking for a way to get their kid trained in the martial arts, they will want bang for their time and buck. People want MMA, if your school can't give that to them on some level, they will look elsewhere. This is one thing that I like about HFY, although some have accused the lineage of a certain amount of hucksterism.

Curious what you mean here?

As far as I know, there are no certified instructors that teach HFY as an MMA-type training format. HFY is a system stands on it's own, with it's own training methods and shouldn't be marketed as MMA (I guess that goes for WC in general too).
If someone is looking for MMA, they should probably go to an MMA gym - WC is WC, MMA is MMA. As for kids learning WC, yeah, that's a little different story - you should teach kids MA's differently than you do adults.

Oh, and not taking any offence by what you said, just looking to see if I can help clarify any misconceptions.

[Xiao3 Meng4]

Well, I'm sure someone will eventually systematize the Wing Chun of throwing weapons and the Wing Chun of guns, if they haven't already. Then there's the Wing Chun of commuting, the Wing Chun of communicating, the Wing Chun of construction... the list goes on. It's whether or not someone wants to systematize and include the Wing Chun of "whatever" in their curriculum.

If Wing Chun is perceived as "that which is simple, direct and efficient in a given situation" or "that which is optimal in a given situation," then anything can be Wing Chun, either by destiny or by design.

[chusauli]

No door is locked!

Who said it was?

WCK is still developing...try applying knife applications with a single stick, dagger, espada y daga and you have a lot to go.

WCK stance makes an excellent isoscoles shooting platform.

WCK still great for as an entry for grappling, joint locks and throws...

[Paul T England]

Each person should develop so no door is locked.

If you don't make wing chun your own it will never work.

I think the big problem is that you should not change things until you are sure they should be changed. So you either have to have lots of skill and training or found out the hard way.

For the future of wing chun we should make it stronger, not weaker, keep reducing the requirments while improving the functionality. Mininmum effort, maximum results.

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

[Sihing73]

Hello,

No one has locked the door; some have just shut it and closed their minds.

Wing Chun is conceptual, ones understanding of those concepts is what allows one to expand knowledge, or show a lack of it.

I tend to agree with Joy, nothing wrong with evolution per se, just a problem with change for changes sake alone.

My Sifu has made changes to the sequence of some of the forms as well as the sequence of some of the stance and footwork. He has also opted to include concepts from BJJ into his approach to Wing Chun.

Wing Chun, as many have said, is personal, as are all arts. The system should be adapted to ones own needs, not ones self adapted to the system.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Curious what you mean here?

As far as I know, there are no certified instructors that teach HFY as an MMA-type training format. HFY is a system stands on it's own, with it's own training methods and shouldn't be marketed as MMA (I guess that goes for WC in general too).
If someone is looking for MMA, they should probably go to an MMA gym - WC is WC, MMA is MMA. As for kids learning WC, yeah, that's a little different story - you should teach kids MA's differently than you do adults.

Oh, and not taking any offence by what you said, just looking to see if I can help clarify any misconceptions.

I got it from a reliable source that the Benny Meng contingent of HFY taught reasonably sophisticated ground grappling with their Wing Chun. In my mind that would qualify as MMA style training. Was I misinformed by a misinformed source?

Also, I should say that the Benny Meng contingent of HFY is what people are suspicious of. I have never heard a single negative comment about Garrett Gee.

[Phil Redmond]

Things that don't evolve become extinct.