Quigga wrote:I should add that authenticity is a claim closely bound to pride... Not meaning to insult anyone, yet due to current circumstances no way around saying that: some authentic recipes are shit... Authentic then implies clean transmission back to the original originator of X idea. Having a clear track to follow is an awesome thing in many areas, yet the X on the map can sometimes yield no treasure at all.
Sea.Wolf.Forge wrote:Quigga wrote:I'd rather give my mom a hug
You're a braver man than me Quigga, her breath could stop a Mack truck and I'll tell that to anyone who'll listen.
Doc Stier wrote:Dammit! You kids better start getting along here, or else you can march straight to your rooms until you decide to stay on topic. LOL
Sea.Wolf.Forge wrote:Doc Stier wrote:Dammit! You kids better start getting along here, or else you can march straight to your rooms until you decide to stay on topic. LOL
Linesman stepping in with that "Who wants to hurt their team more boys? Cause I'm only taking one of ya... I'm only takin one of ya."
"Authentic" is the strange part to me, what makes a fighting art objectively authentic? Is it authentic because of it's direct lineage? Appearance? Applicability?
If I learned a technique concept from youtube but can apply it more consistently and effectively than another instructor of the same art - is his authentic or is mine? Was his authenticity determined by lineage or mine authentic determined by its adherence to function?
This is a thought experiment - If I have a form that was taught to me but not the traditional application, but I use my other skills to reverse engineer applications for those movements and they are effective if different than what may have been the original usage - how is that distinction drawn? especially if the traditional application is no longer demonstrable by the supposed true lineage holders?
When Yin Fu did his Bagua different from Dong hai chuan - was it wrong, inauthentic, contemporary or counter to tradition?
origami_itto wrote:Sea.Wolf.Forge wrote:When Yin Fu did his Bagua different from Dong hai chuan - was it wrong, inauthentic, contemporary or counter to tradition?
Authenticity, to me, speaks to the method itself. If you look at the accounts if the Yang family greats they all had subtly different expressions of the art.
But the art encompasses both civil and martial accomplishment, so to me authentic Taijiquan must at the very least demonstrably cultivate both.
Going further there are infinite variations in combat, so for an art of civil and martial cultivation to be rightly called authentic Taijiquan then at least the combat strategies and tactics should follow the principles outlined in the classics, overcoming hardness with softness, etc.
So I guess when I say I study authentic Taijiquan what I'm really saying is Try Jesus.
Appledog wrote:origami_itto wrote:Sea.Wolf.Forge wrote:When Yin Fu did his Bagua different from Dong hai chuan - was it wrong, inauthentic, contemporary or counter to tradition?
Authenticity, to me, speaks to the method itself. If you look at the accounts if the Yang family greats they all had subtly different expressions of the art.
But the art encompasses both civil and martial accomplishment, so to me authentic Taijiquan must at the very least demonstrably cultivate both.
Going further there are infinite variations in combat, so for an art of civil and martial cultivation to be rightly called authentic Taijiquan then at least the combat strategies and tactics should follow the principles outlined in the classics, overcoming hardness with softness, etc.
So I guess when I say I study authentic Taijiquan what I'm really saying is Try Jesus.
Authenticity is not about choosing a style, it is about choosing a teacher. The teacher then can impart to you the authentic methods, your expression of which will be very different.
The idea of a different expression is actually central to the teaching method of tai chi, as I have found it.
As for other aspects of authenticity, I would posit you (origami) almost certainly do not practice "authentic" taijiquan. You're more like the guy in the video -- if something about what's written doesn't sit right with you, then you throw it out (and take something else in). Well, there's nothing wrong with that. Authenticity, having 'lineage' and all that, can be a terrible burden, with some positives but probably more negatives. From what Doc has written I think he understands something of it in a way none of you do. If you fail at your goals it is only ever the result of your own pathetic laziness. Never the method. The method, and usually the teachers, are far beyond your reach. It is like university versus gradeschool. Maybe even worse than that. Honestly I don't think anyone here can understand. Sometimes the pressure comes from nowhere but yourself, because you know how important things really are even if you are told differently. It is suffocating. I don't see that in your writings, but that might be because it's just pixels on a screen.
Cho Chikun said that he hated to play go, that it was an excruciating exercise in concentration and suffering, that his parents forced him to do. But he also said that as a result he is happy he could win the million dollars. Wu Qingyuan said he loved to play go and committed himself to a mental institution when he was 20 so he could study go like a monk. Choose a teacher, not a style.
I'm sorry that some teachers try to lie and cheat their students.
Giles wrote:But as always, there's no substitute for: show me what you do, let me feel it.
Appledog wrote:
But you have done things wrong, although it's not your fault.
Sea.Wolf.Forge wrote:it is very easy to claim many TMA do not share that efficacy for the time spent. Is this because they are more complex and difficult to apply or because they are not being taught to be effective?
johnwang wrote:Sea.Wolf.Forge wrote:it is very easy to claim many TMA do not share that efficacy for the time spent. Is this because they are more complex and difficult to apply or because they are not being taught to be effective?
I will say most TMA instructors don't know the proper teaching method. For example, if you teach Taiji "cloud hand", you can ask your student to use
- right clockwise circle to deflect his opponent's left punch.
- left counter-clockwise circle to deflect and wrap his opponent's right punching arm.
- right arm to lock his opponent's head, use right leg block to take his opponent down.
If you ask your student to drill this 10,000 times on his resisted training partner, your student may be able to develop some "door guarding" skill within 3 to 5 years.
The problem is, how many TMA teachers who teaches this way in today's environment?
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 119 guests