What Wing Chun techniques resemble Fujian White Crane techniques ? If Wing chun comes partially from Fujian white Crane what would be the techniques that come from it ?
What Wing Chun techniques resemble Fujian White Crane techniques ? If Wing chun comes partially from Fujian white Crane what would be the techniques that come from it ?
IMO, comparing various techniques or hand shapes demonstrated in forms or pictures is rather pointless. As has been pointed out on many occasions here, doing that one can draw a connection between any 2 arts if they look hard enough. But it doesn't prove a connection. Besides, WC system is principle based, it's not about the techniques or hand shapes - those are just a bi-product. To make a fair comparison, you have to look at the technologies and concepts behind the arts, not a few similar shapes seen in a form or a picture.
What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90
I agree that looking at techniques or shapes as a point of comparison to show some so called connection between the arts does not really prove anything.
I do not know what principle based means or can mean. What I see is that wing chun comes with techniques shapes tactics strategies concepts principles and so forth and that they ALL are part of the fabric that makes up wing chun with all the parts being important and necessary. A concept isn't useful for example without technique, technique isn't useful without tactics and so forth.
I don't see the big deal. It's very likely that all traditional southern Gong Fu is related.
This stuff wasn't created in a vacuum.
Why the violent opposition to stating that two arts are related?
Why the fetish of trying to prove the connection?
This is what I don't understand.
- Some WC guys may feel proud that his WC system might come from the white crane, snake, or the Emei system.
- Other WC guys may feel ashamed that his WC system might have any connection with those systems.
There is no way that one day, someone just crawled out of a secret hole in China and suddenly created the WC system.
http://johnswang.com
More opinion -> more argument
Less opinion -> less argument
No opinion -> no argument
True.
I, for one, am only against making unjustified claims. There's nothing wrong with saying what may be likely, but when you start making bold claims and declaring yourself the successor of the only original, complete Wing Chun system... I think most people would be opposed to that.Why the violent opposition to stating that two arts are related?
For recognition, name... ego mostly.Why the fetish of trying to prove the connection?
Exactly the point, IMO. In Sergio's video on his trip up Emei mountain, he says that Emei is one of the mother arts of WCK. He doesn't say it might be, he says it is - even though there is scant evidence to support this.
Yes, I think in Hendrik's case it is about recognition - wanting a little place in WCK history (he says it's never about him, but it really does seem to be). In Sergio's case it is about genuinely wanting to learn more and to improve, coupled with wanting to teach something that can't easily be found elsewhere (that is to say, to help differentiate and grow his WCK business). Sergio says that WCK shouldn't be about lineage - just about learning and preserving the art... then he goes on to say other lineages are doing things incorrectly (and so, of course, people should learn the 'correct' way from him).
Ving Tsun is White Crane for fighting
Everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die...