In July 2016, journalist Charles Russo published Striking Distance: Bruce Lee and the Dawn of Martial Arts in America with University of Nebraska Press. His work joins a growing number of martial arts books being published by academic presses. The vast majority of martial arts books are published through independent presses (and now, independent web publishers). These don’t hold their publications to such editorial standards as scholarly works.

 

We caught up with Russo to discuss his new contribution to the field.

 

GC: You are not a martial artist. What got you interested in this topic?

CR: I’m endlessly fascinated by the history of where I live – the San Francisco Bay Area. I think it’s one of the coolest places in the world, and its history is populated with an amazing cross-section of compelling cultural figures. But I had lived here for a decade before I realized Bruce Lee was born in San Francisco, and while I was excited to learn that…I was also puzzled as to why it wasn’t better known or celebrated locally. So as a journalist, I filed it in the back of my mind as a good story to look into.

GC: What surprised you most from your research?

CR: When I finally began investigating this topic, I was surprised to learn that it was a treasure trove of a forgotten history, not only of a little-known period of Bruce’s life, but of a trailblazing martial arts culture that existed on San Francisco Bay.

In terms of the region’s martial arts scene, the Bay Area was a packed landscape with a stunning array of talented practitioners: Lau Bun, TY Wong, James Lee, Wally Jay, Ralph Castro. The list is long and notable. It’s kind of like if you looked at the music scene of London in the mid-sixties: the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Cream, The Who, Pink Floyd, and then – young Jimi Hendrix shows up? Are you kidding? It was the same dynamic here with Bruce Lee rolling into town.

Now, with regards to Bruce’s history, my book is not a formal biography, but rather, it puts a couple early chapters of his life under the microscope. Yet as I worked on the book, I constantly came across parts of his biography that were either simply incorrect (the idea that he is of one-quarter German descent) or just set in the completely wrong context (his demonstration at Long Beach in ’64). And it was very surprising that someone with that caliber of global fame still hasn’t had a proper rendering of his biography.

GC: Were you aware of the controversy surrounding the Bruce Lee vs. Wong Jack Man duel?

CR: What really jumped out at me was how poorly documented it all was. Despite being a pivotal event in both of their lives, the entire fight seemed to exist in the realm of urban mythology. Now, part of that is understandable. People are still debating Muhammad Ali’s rematch with Sonny Liston, with the “Phantom Punch” in ‘65. And that fight occurred in front of two thousand spectators, and was aired on (closed circuit) television and radio with numerous sports journalists sitting ringside. By comparison, the Bruce Lee-Wong Jack Man fight occurred behind-closed-doors in front of just seven people. So the ambiguity and speculation is understandable.

However, you would also think that over the course of a half century, more of the dots would have gotten connected. Ask a Bruce Lee fan specifically who was in the room for the fight, and they won’t be able to accurately tell you. When did it happen? No one has an exact date. Why was Wong Jack Man the practitioner to step forward? There’s no consensus. So the lingering controversy surrounding the fight is a direct result of the lack of information available on it.

GC: What do you think is the biggest misconception about the Bruce Lee vs. Wong Jack Man duel?

CR: In my opinion, you can’t understand this fight unless you first have a sense for the martial arts culture of San Francisco’s Chinatown. This conflict was a result of tensions that built up over time, dating back to Bruce’s run-in with Lau Bun and his senior student at Hung Sing in the summer of ’59. It also has something to do in part with James Lee falling out with TY Wong at Kin Mon. Everyone has a copy of Chinese Gung Fu, but no one seems to be aware that Bruce and James are dissing TY Wong towards the end of the book (pg. 88 in recent editions). And that’s no small thing – a 22-year-old loud-mouthed out-of-towner publicly criticizing a very respected member of the community who had been teaching in the neighborhood for two decades.

HungSing: Lau Bun (top left) with senior students in his Hung Sing School of Choy Li Fut in San Francisco's Chinatown. In the summer of 1959, 18-year-old Bruce Lee would have a little-known run-in with this group. (Photo courtesy of UC Berkeley)

 

So to understand the fight, you have to be aware of those persisting tensions. It’s not by accident that TY Wong deemed Bruce to be “a dissident with bad manners,” which makes a lot of sense when you consider Bruce’s contentious demonstrations in 1964, most notably at the Long Beach International, and then a few weeks later at the Sun Sing Theater. There is also the issue of Bruce insulting Mah Sek, the old and very well-respected Qigong master. With all this in mind, I think it was inevitable that someone was bound to step forward and challenge Bruce sooner or later. After all, that had already happened in Seattle a couple years earlier with Yoichi Nakachi on far less provocation. That fight was also predicated on the content of Bruce’s demonstrations. So it’s really not surprising that 1964 culminated for Bruce with a heated showdown. The million-dollar question, really, is, 'Why Wong Jack Man?'

GC: Beyond your new book, there’s a new movie and a new comic out on the Bruce Lee vs. Wong Jack Man duel. Why do you think this duel has held such fascination for so many years?

CR: It’s just an epic matchup. You have two highly talented 23-year-old martial arts prodigies who both learned from notable masters in Hong Kong. One fighter is quiet and reserved, the other loud and charismatic. Southern style versus northern, compact and economical versus expansive and acrobatic. The UFC could only wish for that kind of main event.

All that said, I feel that some of these recent renderings are pulling us further away from understanding the fight, rather than finally explaining it to us. We have already seen one absurd Hollywood version of this event, with Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story. We really don’t need a new one. Because, in my opinion, the factual story is so much more fascinating than these exaggerated ones. Obviously, I haven’t seen the new film yet, but it sounds like a real missed opportunity as far as finally doing something intelligent on the topic.

GC: Wong Jack Man has avoided press in the past. Were you ever able to reach him directly or just his students?

CR: As a journalist I feel that no source is too big or too out of reach that you don’t inquire for an interview. You have to ask until they formally say no. Not just for you, but also for them. It is important that you make them aware of your work, and offer them the right to chime in.

So back in early 2011, I showed up to Fort Mason before the start of the Jing Mo Athletic Association’s evening class and…well...I just asked after Wong Jack Man. That’s an awkward thing to do – show up and explain in front of that class that you’re there to ask about “The Fight.” But everyone was really cool. Rick Wing and Arthur Chin are great guys with a genuine sense of pride for their school and loyalty for their teacher. I put a request in to interview WJM via Rick, and it got turned down…which was expected, but like I said, you have to ask.

GC: The martial arts community has a lot of obscure customs and etiquette. Did you encounter any issues in this regard being an outsider looking in or did you feel welcomed by your interview subjects?

CR: It’s interesting, the field of journalism doesn’t have a term like “bedside manner,” but it needs one. Because it’s a major factor in getting good interviews and therefore good information. (Veteran journalist Gay Talese calls it “the fine art of hanging out.”) I tried to approach everyone slowly and respectfully, but with a great deal of interest and enthusiasm. And I’d say that 95% of the people I inquired with participated.

In terms of a being an outsider looking in, I think it actually worked in my favor. I came to my sources unaffiliated of any school or any style, of any past controversies or feuds. So it’s the idea of a neutral observer just calling it as he sees it – balls and strikes. And it is also a set of fresh eyes, which I’d say is very overdue with regards to Bruce Lee.

A rare photo of Bruce Lee performing at Ed Parker's inaugural Long Beach International in 1964 (with Taky Kimura, left). The prevailing storyline of Bruce's career-changing demonstration at Long Beach in 1964 is often sanitized in most biographical accounts. For years, the popular account has asserted that Bruce had performed some nifty stunts and was so charismatic that the entire audience fell in love with him. In truth, Bruce had given a scathing lecture criticizing many of the prevailing practices in the martial arts (such as the horse stance) and quickly polarized the room. As Clarence Lee (a judge at the tournament earlier in the day) attested: “Guys were practically lining up to fight Bruce Lee after his performance at Long Beach.” (Photo courtesy of Barney Scollan).

GC: Have you had any readers from the martial arts community comment on your book since it has been published?

CR: Yes, I’ve been getting very positive feedback. It’s been particularly nice hearing back from sources that are featured in the book. Leo Fong, Allen Joe, Bernice Jay, Gary Cagaanan, Barney Scollan, Darlene Parker, have all given me enthusiastic responses. Also, I’m happy to say that the initial word out of the Bruce Lee Estate has been very good, as well.

GC: Why do you think Bruce Lee has such iconic longevity?

CR: Bruce Lee’s iconic identity was multi-faceted in nature.

James Dean had a great screen presence, right? Well, that was merely one aspect of what Bruce brought to the equation. He was also a philosopher, a genuinely dynamic athlete, a visionary in his field, and a catalyst for evolved social perceptions. And Bruce still inspires people along those lines. He is not only still highly relevant, but relevant in a variety of capacities.

So that’s why Bruce’s iconic identity has had such an amazing staying power in today’s world, whereas other 20th century cultural icons, such as James Dean, are mostly forgotten by a younger generation.

GC: Despite being published by University of Nebraska Press, you say your book is more journalistic than academic. Can you clarify this distinction for our readers?

CR: The immediate answer is method – the book is based more on reporting than research. The idea was to speak directly with as many participants of this history as possible, and to ask them new questions that would expand upon the information that is already out there. Research is great, but ultimately, you can’t ask follow-up questions to a book.

On top of that, I feel that journalists are just better story tellers, because they make the content more accessible. Newspapers aren’t expensive, so traditionally journalists have had to write towards everyone’s comprehension. That’s not the case in the academic world, which I think (whether intentional or not) can be very elitist. And that elitism also tends to make interesting material very boring. People love history, but academia has a habit of making it tedious. So I tried to distill this history into an engaging book for readers, particularly martial artists, because the history in question is inherently fascinating.

GC: Most martial arts research is based on subjective anecdotes. How did you validate your sources?

CR: Specifically, I tried to corroborate everything through multiple sources. Trust me, the book would be a lot more exciting if I ran with every hyped-up story that came my way, but again, I think the factual history is ultimately far more interesting than the mythology.

The Wong Jack Man fight is an obvious example. There were nine people in the room; three of those people are still alive: Linda Lee, David Chin and WJM. So, I get to speak with 2 of the 3. And the account Linda gave me essentially matches what David told me, and they were on opposite sides of the room and opposite sides of the conflict. On top of that, there are second-hand accounts of how other witnesses related the story – James Lee, Ronald Wu, Chan Keung – and those match as well. It’s the stories from people who weren’t in the room who always ascribe hyperbolic detail to it. So, it’s kind of a simple process actually.

What was frustrating was being unable to nail down things that I suspect are out there. For instance, I’m certain that Bruce had a contentious incident with TY Wong in the summer of 1959, but I just couldn’t qualify it. And that’s a potentially big piece to the puzzle regarding Bruce, James, and Chinatown.

GC: Do you plan to do more research in the martial arts?

CR: I have a Kung Fu-oriented graphic novel in the works. Does that count?