Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 117

Thread: Chen style Taijiquan

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Worthington, OH, USA
    Posts
    1,808
    There are quiet a few people that reject Chen as "real" Taiji.


    OTOH, he himself admits to only teaching the PRC forms and not the traditional family styes.


    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We teach Yang–style Taijiquan, as standardized by the Chinese National Sports Committee.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    One reason for this I think is due to the meeting of a few Masters that decided to call their art "Internal Arts" and because there were no Chen stylists there.

    In the end I think it is feeble attempt to make their style and what they do look better by saying "theirs is not the true xyz".
    1.His form has Chen style very obviously incorperated into it.
    2.None of the forms he says he emphasises in his Yang style curriculum is Yang style, or was intended to be Yang style.

    So you can't really take what this guy says in regards to labeling styles seriously. If he doesn't know the make up of his own forms, how would he know what something he doesn't practice is or isn't?

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    3,055
    Blog Entries
    1
    Taijiquan is the creation of Yang Luchan (1799–1872) who learned something at Chen village and then from it created Taijiquan. Yang Luchan had three sons, two of whom lived to be adults. Both were expert at Taijiquan. One of these sons himself had three sons, one being Yang Chengfu (1883–1936). It was Yang Chengfu who is responsible for the transmission and popularity of Taijiquan. Taijiquan is the martial system of the Yang family. From the Yang-family Taijiquan developed— directly and indirectly— the other three styles of Taijiquan: Wu, Wu (Hao), and Sun. The martial art of Chen village is a form of Shaolin quanfa.
    Chen Taiji is a form of Shaolin Quanfa?

    Where is he getting this from?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Right here!
    Posts
    555
    Originally posted by Fu-Pow


    Chen Taiji is a form of Shaolin Quanfa?

    Where is he getting this from?
    I think he is refering to some Shaolin Forms that were practiced at the Chen Village among other Arts.
    Those, AFAIK, were Sets of Red Fist (Hong Quan) and Cannon pounding.

    It is true that some Chen Family members studied at the Shaolin Temple for some time, not surprising considering the distance between the two.

    It is not the first time that I heard those arguments that Chen is Shaolin and not Taijiquan, have heard it from quiet a few sites and sources.

    FYI, I have attached a link:
    The martials Arts practide in the Chen Village

    Many will already know this site.
    Last edited by T'ai Ji Monkey; 10-30-2003 at 06:37 PM.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    166
    Dunno Lawrence but what he says about the Yang lineage is true. There are only two teachers in the US that come from the genuine Yang lineage- Chu Gin Soon, and his son Vincent. They teach in Boston. The ONLY other school that I am aware of is the John Ding Academy of Tai Chi in London, England. John ding is the "official" 6th generation Lineage holder of the Yang style. One of his students, named Richard Dunn, also teaches in England, and runs one of those Yahoo discussion groups. I have taken some quotes from Richard relevant to this subject and pass them along to you all... Here's the link to his group, just know that you have to be "approved" to join it.

    groups.yahoo.com/groups/energeticsart

    (that's why i'm passing this stuff on here, to make it easier for you guys...) BTW- the "CMC" acronym means Cheng Man Ching, YLC-Yang Lu Chan, YCF-Yang Cheng Fu.

    --------------------------
    "TAI-CHI CHUAN

    According to what I have heard both the Chen family and the Yang family
    considered themselves to be Buddhist and the name for our art was nothing to
    do with them. It was applied by (royal?) persons unknown in Beijing after
    YLC started teaching there in order to deify it. The full Yin/Yang link was
    only applied then as well as before that there was only a tenuous
    connection. Also (this is a surmise from what I have been told) YLC was
    taught the full art by Chen? (I have forgotten which) as he felt none of
    that generation of Chen students were good enough and he was afraid the full
    art would be lost, which happened over the next couple of generations. Also
    YLC added more of the soft and internal side to the art in Beijing as the
    Manchu had a fascination for Cheng San Feng and it was politically
    appropriate to link to him and YLC discovered the soft side to be very
    powerful. This process was extended by YBH/YCH and subsequently YCF.

    Chen style had more in common with Shaolin than what we consider now to
    be Tai Chi in the early days and there was little distinction placed between
    soft and hard, external and internal, as we do now, especially as Shaolin
    was considered in its day to understand the Yin side in its advanced
    training. The process of Tai Chi 'ifying Chen came about when Chen FaKe went
    to Beijing in the early part of the last century and had to adopt the name
    Tai Ch Chuan for his family art in order for it to be accepted (even so
    there was a lot of contention about it) and took his art more to the Yin
    side accordingly.

    For me the process of our arts development is a cyclic process
    through birth growth corruption then decay and rebirth and this process has
    happened throughout time and the Chen knowledge probably came from a source
    that decayed, then went through its own decay and rebirth and perhaps we are
    at the stage now where the Yang style will have to do the same, where as
    Chen is at the moment having a resurgence.

    Also you cannot consider Tai Chi in isolation from what is happening in the
    world generally and the publics changed expectations have to be exploited
    and satisfied and "dumbed down" Tai Chi wet noodle, started by CMC? will
    grow whether we like it or not, but we must never lose the original art, as
    we still have it, and we must retain as many variations of it as possible in
    order to keep the genetic pool alive and viable, be that Chen Yang Wu Sun
    and their many and infinite variations.

    What we now call Tai Chi Chuan has always changed and adapted to its time
    and will continue to do so as long as we don't forget the principles, but
    also don't set the interpretation of them in stone as then you don't see
    around the trees and your interpretation will change with your sensitivity
    to it.."

    --------------------
    "Taijiquan Gets Its Name

    When Yang Lu Chan first taught the art in Yung Nien, his art was referred to
    as 'Mien Quan' or (Cotton Fist) or 'Hua Quan' (Neutralising Fist), it was
    not yet called Taijiquan. Whilst teaching at the Imperial Court, Yang met
    many challenges, some friendly some not. But he invariably won and in so
    convincingly using his soft techniques that he gained a great reputation.

    Many who frequented the imperial households would come to view his matches.
    At one such gatherings at which Yang had won against several reputable
    opponents. The scholar Ong Tong He was present and was so impressed by the
    way Yang moved and executed his techniques and felt that his movements and
    techniques expressed the physical manifestation of the principles of Taiji
    (the philosophy) wrote for him a matching verse:

    'Hands Holding Taiji shakes the whole world,
    a chest containing ultimate skill defeats a gathering of heroes.'

    Thereafter, his art was referred to as Taijiquan and the styles that sprang
    from his teaching and by association with him was called Taijiquan."

    -------------------------
    "The
    major problem is if you insist on seeing Tai-Chi Chuan as just its surface,
    its physical nature, then I suppose Chen is Tai-Chi, BUT Tai-Chi is NOT Real
    Tai-Chi until you have been able to internalise (turn the physical to
    energetic) the art, which from what I have seen of the modern forms is next
    to nobody, so they DO NOT DO TAI-CHI CHUAN, they do something else and I
    wish they would stop using the name. Tai-Chi Chuan is a specific set of
    skills and principles laid down in the classic principles and concepts
    spoken and written of by Yang family members and disciples. The Chen family
    and the PRC have hi-jacked the name for their own purposes, the PRC with the
    simplified and competition forms, and Chen with a more real Shaolin type art
    than the nonsense being currently pushed as Shaolin. Note for a lot of
    people they would see this as a compliment, it makes Chen family art a very
    effective external martial art that has many of the softer elements in it
    that have been lost from the Shaolin now being taught."
    Last edited by QuaiJohnCain; 10-30-2003 at 06:56 PM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Right here!
    Posts
    555
    OTOH. it is interesting to note that the
    following site http://www.yangfamilytaichi.com/ has a Chen article about Silk reeling on it.

    http://www.yangfamilytaichi.com/rep/...lk_reeling.htm

    Silk reeling is a subject rarely talked about in Yang family taiji. Though you don't hear much discussion of the topic under this name, actually Yang style also does contain most of the same elements elaborated as silk reeling in other styles (though the shape of the hands in Yang Chengfu style - fingers slightly curved, palms slightly extended - is different from that shown in figure 1 below).

    - Jerry

    IME, most people don't really care if Chen is TJQ or not, it still is a good system to learn.
    Last edited by T'ai Ji Monkey; 10-30-2003 at 07:15 PM.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    3,055
    Blog Entries
    1
    "The
    major problem is if you insist on seeing Tai-Chi Chuan as just its surface,
    its physical nature, then I suppose Chen is Tai-Chi, BUT Tai-Chi is NOT Real
    Tai-Chi until you have been able to internalise (turn the physical to
    energetic) the art, which from what I have seen of the modern forms is next
    to nobody, so they DO NOT DO TAI-CHI CHUAN, they do something else and I
    wish they would stop using the name. Tai-Chi Chuan is a specific set of
    skills and principles laid down in the classic principles and concepts
    spoken and written of by Yang family members and disciples. The Chen family
    and the PRC have hi-jacked the name for their own purposes, the PRC with the
    simplified and competition forms, and Chen with a more real Shaolin type art
    than the nonsense being currently pushed as Shaolin. Note for a lot of
    people they would see this as a compliment, it makes Chen family art a very
    effective external martial art that has many of the softer elements in it
    that have been lost from the Shaolin now being taught."


    What the hell? The whole basis of Chen Taiji is Peng, Lu, Ji and An. That's not soft?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    166
    Originally posted by Fu-Pow


    What the hell? The whole basis of Chen Taiji is Peng, Lu, Ji and An. That's not soft?
    I don't think Richard was criticising "soft", but what is, and what is not "energetic", versus what is physical. He's saying Taiji ain't Taiji unless it has "energetics", which he says Chen style is devoid of. (here comes the sh*t storm)

    .

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Right here!
    Posts
    555
    Originally posted by QuaiJohnCain

    I don't think Richard was criticising "soft", but what is, and what is not "energetic", versus what is physical. He's saying Taiji ain't Taiji unless it has "energetics", which he says Chen style is devoid of. (here comes the sh*t storm)
    I have read quiet a few posts by Richard on another forum(not his).

    My question is what experience does Richard Dunn have with Chen TJQ?

    How long and under whom did the study?

    Just would like to know on what he is basing his statements on.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Right here!
    Posts
    555
    Now I am confused.

    Just found this little bit of info:

    http://www.taichifinder.co.uk/taichistyles.html

    Doesn't sound like the guy I met online and quoted above and this guy are the same person despite sharing the name.


  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Houston, Tx. USA
    Posts
    1,358
    "Dunno Lawrence but what he says about the Yang lineage is true. There are only two teachers in the US that come from the genuine Yang lineage- Chu Gin Soon, and his son Vincent. They teach in Boston."

    Absolutely WRONG....

    Yang Chengfu had more than one son...he also had several students of note.

    Fu Zhongwen - argued by many to be closest to Yang Chengfu in form...had a number of students. There are at least 5 people in the USThat can trace to him.

    Dong yingjie - student of Yang Chengfu - His son and grandson teach in Hawaii and they have a number of students teaching in the Continental US.

    Then you get to Yang Chengfu's son - Yang Zhenduo - recently immigrated to the US along with his grandson and they have a school.

    There ARE others...Such as those that learned Yang and Chen such as Gu Luxin -- and he has a number of students in the US and some learned not only chen from him but also Yang style.

    They all do the same routine with much the same flavor.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    166
    Originally posted by T'ai Ji Monkey


    I have read quiet a few posts by Richard on another forum(not his).

    My question is what experience does Richard Dunn have with Chen TJQ?

    How long and under whom did the study?

    Just would like to know on what he is basing his statements on.
    He studied under John Ding (link below) for something like ten years, but it is my understanding that they had some kind of falling out. I remember him saying that he's been doing Taiji for 14 years and teaching for almost half that time.

    John Ding's website: http://www.taichiwl.demon.co.uk/

    As far as his experience with chen goes, I can't say for sure. I've been intending to contact him, but just haven't gotten around to it yet. I do know that his main criticism against Chen style is that it lacks "energetics" and thus should not be called Taijiquan. Here's another quote from him about this-

    "The advanced forms of both styles are probably just
    as difficult physically. The major difference is that Yang considers the
    energetic work to be high level and the physical work to be low level but
    both are important, in Chen the energetic work is either lost or hidden from
    non family members, in fact they try to deny it exists."


    Like I said, I haven't contact him yet, and as of yet I am drawing no judgement on anything he's saying. Just passing some information along here, so please excuse the selective editing.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    166
    Originally posted by GLW
    "Dunno Lawrence but what he says about the Yang lineage is true. There are only two teachers in the US that come from the genuine Yang lineage- Chu Gin Soon, and his son Vincent. They teach in Boston."

    Absolutely WRONG....

    Yang Chengfu had more than one son...he also had several students of note.

    Fu Zhongwen - argued by many to be closest to Yang Chengfu in form...had a number of students. There are at least 5 people in the USThat can trace to him.

    Dong yingjie - student of Yang Chengfu - His son and grandson teach in Hawaii and they have a number of students teaching in the Continental US.

    Then you get to Yang Chengfu's son - Yang Zhenduo - recently immigrated to the US along with his grandson and they have a school.

    There ARE others...Such as those that learned Yang and Chen such as Gu Luxin -- and he has a number of students in the US and some learned not only chen from him but also Yang style.

    They all do the same routine with much the same flavor.
    Thanks for the heads up... I wasn't aware. I've seen some good Yang Lineage flowcharts with some of these names on them, but did not know that there were more of them in the US. Again- thank you.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    166
    Originally posted by T'ai Ji Monkey
    Now I am confused.

    Just found this little bit of info:

    http://www.taichifinder.co.uk/taichistyles.html

    Doesn't sound like the guy I met online and quoted above and this guy are the same person despite sharing the name.

    That's him.

  14. #44
    The John Ding school stresses a lot of empty force work (hence Richard's "energetics").

    AFAIK JD has no experience of Chen style. Prior to tai chi he studied Shaolin and Praying Mantis kung fu.
    www.systemauk.com
    "Remember it's not a move, it's just a movement" Vasiliev

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    1,994
    Greetings..

    Although i do favor the individuality of Yang and Chen styles, i also see the numerous similarities... as one of my respected teachers says, "its not the form, its the principles that make good Taiji"... While we may argue the nuances of what history has concealed from us, we can also apply the principles to many aspects of our everyday life.. I tend to believe that Taiji emerges in whatever "form" we are doing when we express the principles.. the form may be Yang, Chen, Bagua, or washing the car.. as we can see, just from the posts in here, there are many differing opinions, theories and historical accounts.. too many to make an authoritative statement.. What we can see, though, is that almost every internal style is supported by good solid and common principles.. silk reeling, QiGong, frame alignment, DanTien rotation, relaxed power, breath control, etc..

    What i see, from time to time, is the good intentions of contributors to these forums being challenged according to someone's preference of beliefs.. beliefs founded on largely unverifiable historical accounts or their teacher's own beliefs.. in any case, i find myself being much more satisfied with experiencing as many "internal" teachers as possible and absorbing that which is clearly supported by principle.. I would be disappointed if i missed quality experiences due to a pre-supposed notion that this or that style wasn't "true Taiji".. Regardless of the style, when we see principles emerge in the performance it is obvious and transcends arbitrary preferences..

    Just another perspective.. Be well..
    TaiChiBob.. "the teacher that is not also a student is neither"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •