wayne hansen wrote:Yes I admit a lot of good teachers have trained other arts
That does not mean it was a necessity
It's just that most young men seek out the flashy arts when young
Even though a number of my teachers had done other arts they always emphasised that it was not a prerequisite
As one teacher would say to those who came from other arts
Tai chi will help your other art ,it won't help tai chi
Many of the famous styles of taiji came from teachers who had backgrounds in other arts. They were already
proficient in what they did who after learning from the yangs would later found their own taiji systems unique to them.
The big problem is a lot of people don't have faith in the tai chi method
Which has yet to show it works in any venue
They either won't give up past ideas or they look for other arts to bolster inadequate tai chi teaching
I don't care what people train but don't call it tai chi if it diverges from the path
Due to the fact that it has yet to be shown to work as advertised, this contrast to past masters of the
art who actively went out and engaged people.
What "path" who gets to define it....
Don't sell tai chi short if it is your shortcomings
I look at all the so called masters using weak trickery and culpable students to fool the gullible
It may be more of those looking at what is shown as in this thread do not understand what is being trained or why.
I note you didn't comment on the OP clip instead you refer to "taiji" masters.. What about this teacher Roy Goldberg and the clip shown
There may be no good teachers and the art might die with this generation but don't be the one to put the last nail in the coffin
A nail driven by the weak of spirit
Disagree, people find what they look for but may not understand why they are looking for or what they have found.
" You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometime you find
You get what you need"
I know many people who've practiced other styles to include my self that after coming into contact with a taiji teacher
who's art was functional stayed.
Some have talked about mixing other things into the taiji or what ever seemingly not understanding that "taiji" a concept
came to be exemplified by certain, styles, methods, masters who went out to prove it worked. How true it is to the concept
depends on what one is looking for...ie :
historical method,
understanding of internal
unique method of fighting that aligns with
historical accounts of past deeds by founding masters of the methods later codified into styles.
I dont call my own work "taiji"
all that I met do.
