by Andy_S on Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:28 pm
Chris:
While I disagree with a lot of Scott's more far-out theories, anyone who has lived in Asia will know that much of what he says is blatantly bloody obvious: We are all familiar with the mystical-martial underpinings of the Boxers of 1900, and even today, there ARE mystical and performance traditions associated with Asian MA.
In Chinese communities, opera and cinema have strong CMA components. Then there is modern wushu, for God's sake, which was, for decades ALL about performance and nothing about fighting. (Many may beleive performance MA is a purely modern concept - far from it.) Here in Korea, MA are taught in some temples, and itinerant medicine men/fakirs (an interesting but dying breed) often perform MA and martial tricks. In Malaysia, silat is widely known not just as an MA, but also as a trance-dance; there are silat traditions that have been suppressed by the authorities for the mysticism they teach and for the charismatic leaders who leverage this to (potentially at least) cause trouble. I can't speak with much authority of Japan, but I undestand that a number of MA there are also closely connected with traditional theater, Shintoism, etc, etc, etc.
Now, IMHO, much of the mysticism is pure bollocks, but many Asians do not see it like that: I have heard the whackiest, most ridiculous stories about silat black magic in Malaysia. However, the people who told me these tales certainly believed it.
And certainly, there is an element of trickery in all this. But that does not mean that this was (and is) not an important part of MA performances: Even today, we see the tired old break-bricks-on-the-chest' "qigong" tricks performed at 'serous" MA demos.
The broad point is this: If people in the West see MA purely as combat arts...well...all I can say is that is a very Western perspective and lacks a broad understanding of Asian culture and social development.
What I would be inteerested in hearing from Scott are what ramifications the above have for CMA as we practice them, ie How much of modern curricula can be tossed out if practitioners seek purely combat efficacy?
IMHO, a lot of forms and qigong type training are, IMHO, rooted in performance or spiritual practices, but have have minimal martial relevence. It is no coincidence, to my mind, that the modern combative CMA - sanda - is based heavily in western sport fighting practices, rather than TCMA practices.
). My admiration for Schipper notwithstanding, I still disagree with his definition of gongfu as "meritorious action" as a broad, general one. In the context of Daoist ritual performance? Sure. In the context of martial arts practiced within a temple group that assists in Daoist ritual performances? OK. In a traditional opera school? Maybe. In a military training camp? Doubtful.
, it seems your reference was to a myth section in a book review, not much concrete, or is my skim-fu weak today?