Thursday, November 23, 2006

Same But Different ?



I am interested in the wooden dummy for this blog but this is a general issue of Wing Chun that goes beyond the dummy. It's the disputes within Wing Chun over how one way is 'the' way and everything else is modified.

I had a good replay to a question on the AWCAOnline blog that you should be looking at - if your not already. I asked Phil Bradley its proprietor why footwork is an issue in dividing Wing Chun schools.

see here :

http://awcaonline.com/blog/?p=69#comments

His reply reminded me of the issue of relativism in the philosophy of Science and Thomas Kuhn's issue of Paradigms. This was derived from astronomy, but the point here is how different interpretations can be seen to be true, relative to the 'framework' they are applied with.
Phil made the point that different moves 'work' within different frameworks of footwork, [paradigms if you like]. The moves are 'true' relative to the way they are trained in the specific location / school that spawned them. Outside of this they may not be 'true', given a different 'paradigm'. IE a different school cannot utilizes their moves as their foundation is different and not optimized for those moves.

An issue here is they are same Wing Chun family but a slight difference in a variable yields new consequences. The impact this has on the 'scientific' street fighting is a cultural one - politics occurs around the 'truth'.

I am including 2 pictures here of 2 airplanes. They belong the same family of planes but they differ structurally but were capable of performing a 'fighting' function:




Here is a conventional design.


Spitfire:

















This is the Blohm and Voss 141. It was a viable plane design:



So what's the point. They both 'work' but are different too. (Check the link on youtube if you dont believe the above plane flew: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JAH6CiOu0w) .

Which is the 'true' plane ? Which disobeys the laws of flight ?

Friday, November 17, 2006

Bruce Lee and the Dummy

Here is an article from kungfiMagazine.com


I include this because it enlightens us to alternative uses of the dummy and some innovative ways to use it and train. This is thinking outside the box stuff and if you're not used to this the nit will cause discomfort or fascination.


  • The dummy 'form' is split up into 'sets' of moves 1 to 12,  that can be juggled
  • The juggling of the 'sets' allows for more free-play of the moves vs application in a linear way. E.g. start at set 7 and then move to 2, rather than work from set 1 to 7.
  • The dummy can be used like a punch bag to practice angles, leverage, movement, accuracy


I would love to have seen a film of Bruce Lee on the Dummy it would be really enlightening indeed.
There are some videos - very rare - of the Bruce Lee Jun Fan sets - 10 sets of movements that look like modified Wing Chun. And then another 10 Jeet Kune Do sets that have moved away from Wing Chun-style and are more dynamic (by this I mean less upright structure and use of space to zone in and out and around the dummy is more varied).

I wonder why Inosanto hasn't published material on these sets and their use or a video on them ?

(I will review the tapes I have on these in another post- the are by a Spanish practitioner)

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=92

Worth reading.

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

research ...

MMMmmm. In relation to the 1st link on youtube below I emailed an instructor on a Wing chun web site who is skilled in distance learning. I did this to see what he would say about the 116 movements and how he interpreted it.

He didnt agree with the way the criticisms were formed but there were some grains of truth he felt.
I re-looked myself and yes its not perfect: he does seem to lean in for the butterfuly hands - but I see instructional DVDs 'masters' doing that too - he he isnt alone. He thought too there should be power in the strikes. (I thought the sharp clacks = power ?!). Also power on the dummy may not always be the aim *IF* the user is biasing positional skill - I think - for what thats worth. (This is all open to interpretation).

I re-looked at his feet and he may be on his toes for pivoting.

The point of this isn't the practitioners skill - its the use of the internet to share and understand and provoke *useful* criticism. Between the Martial Artist putting up the digitised video, the comments of the youtube 'community, my questioning and reply, posting to another blog to another head instructor and re-watching a circuit of knowledge is reinforced for me.

In other words some new understanding was given to me. I could try and contact the original martial artist and quiz him - that would too give more learning. Don't know how he'd respond though. maybe he would say - yes - I have modified my approach. Thanks very much. Or he could say we are taught to pivot this way because ... let me show you why in this technique ...

I will say it now I am not that good myself on the dummy. I would get slated if I put a video of myself up on youtube - probably rightfully so in some phases of the moves I do. But its worth noting if you look carefully on instructional tapes etc. you do see inconsistencies by 'masters' in their own forms - ie it can be asymmetric sometimes; some moves omitted on one side not another, ad hoc moves inserted. I don't find this a big deal BUT for those who really want to pick hairs be aware of this there is no such thing as perfection in use of the dummy even when doing prescribed forms.

Sunday, November 12, 2006

An example of the 116 movements

Here is a link to someone performing the 116 movements the 4th form of Wing Chun (usually).

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XX_QTqF1GFQ

When I first heard of Wing Chun in the late 80s and looked through MA magazines, I used to wonder in awe what this would look like and how advanced one must be to reach the dizzy heights of accessing this form. Videos to see it cost about £33 and were above my pocket.

Now, in the next century the digital revolution and growing market for Wing Chun has made this form more accessible to see - and learn. YouTube is a great place. The whole idea of this and the 80s situation I describe are approximating the idea of a 'gift society'.

I liked what this practitioner has done here in his video. Nice clacking noises signify power into the dummy. I believe he has body unity and knows the form. Some of the negative comments he gets shows the bad side of free-speech. he gets slated and there are no comments showing him how else he should do the form specifically if he has got it soooo wrong. (He hasn't and the comments are attention seeking snipes).

The dummy can be interpreted differently within WIng Chun schools as well as between them ! Personal style is relevant too.

Here is Yip Man doing the form:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1m9cOBOhsS4

He is doing two forms here, Chium Kiu, where the practitioner learns to pivot and learns some kicks (plus other things). These shapes are then also planted onto the Wooden dummy along with moves from the 1st and 3rd forms.
It is said that Yip Man simplified the form from 140 moves to 116 moves - but if this is so why are mainland Chinese forms also adhering to the 116 moves format and not 140 ?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXA5snEYa8

This is William Chung's contribution to the wooden dummy. He has nice chops to the dummy very fast and smooth. His footwork is staggered at points and marks out his schools difference to Wing Chun over some others.