Louis,
I looked up the Peng Bird.
I now know why it travels to the south and what significance it has.
Thanks for the translation. Now that I know what it means to Tu Nan, it all makes a great deal more sense to me.
What a great name to choose for oneself!
Bob
Some Wu Tunan
-
JerryKarin
- Posts: 1067
- Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 7:01 am
- Contact:
-
Kalamondin
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 7:01 am
-
Kalamondin
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 7:01 am
-
Bob Ashmore
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:01 am
- Location: Frankfort, KY, USA
Jerry,
I dunno. I assumed it was eitehr a short form he picked up or invented or a piece of a long form he was doing for demonstration, but I cannot place its origin either.
I'll have to watch it again.
I do remember it struck me immediately as a small frame form. Maybe it was something Wu Chien Chuan was working on...?
Bob
I dunno. I assumed it was eitehr a short form he picked up or invented or a piece of a long form he was doing for demonstration, but I cannot place its origin either.
I'll have to watch it again.
I do remember it struck me immediately as a small frame form. Maybe it was something Wu Chien Chuan was working on...?
Bob
Hi,
thanks Louis for your hard-work translating WTN.
Re: his form, though. It is just a shortened version of any orthodox Yang form. The first section is pretty much the orthodox/standard order up to cross hands. One problem is that the clip seems to begin while he's in the middle of Grasp Bird's Tail.
The other difficulty is that he has his own little emphases (or flourishes); for example, the way he holds his fingers while doing Single Whip, and maybe his segmented movement during that movement.
I think it might be easier to analyze his movements (i.e., his presentation of the 13 shi) separately. He might not be trying to demonstrate a specific form, per se. But, it wouldn't be hard to write out his choreography into a familiar pattern. (As in GBT to Single Whip to Raise Hands to..., etc.) They seem rather clear, imo.
Anyway, regarding his opinions on LKJ, unfortunately he cannot defend himself from charges that he didn't know what he was talking about. I.e., LKJ as it was known to the Beijing community of martial artists for at least 80 years.
As for his idiosyncratic "flourishes", they might be due to a hand condition; or they might be intentionally done to illustrate something. Either way, it's only a video.
regards,
Steve James
thanks Louis for your hard-work translating WTN.
Re: his form, though. It is just a shortened version of any orthodox Yang form. The first section is pretty much the orthodox/standard order up to cross hands. One problem is that the clip seems to begin while he's in the middle of Grasp Bird's Tail.
The other difficulty is that he has his own little emphases (or flourishes); for example, the way he holds his fingers while doing Single Whip, and maybe his segmented movement during that movement.
I think it might be easier to analyze his movements (i.e., his presentation of the 13 shi) separately. He might not be trying to demonstrate a specific form, per se. But, it wouldn't be hard to write out his choreography into a familiar pattern. (As in GBT to Single Whip to Raise Hands to..., etc.) They seem rather clear, imo.
Anyway, regarding his opinions on LKJ, unfortunately he cannot defend himself from charges that he didn't know what he was talking about. I.e., LKJ as it was known to the Beijing community of martial artists for at least 80 years.
As for his idiosyncratic "flourishes", they might be due to a hand condition; or they might be intentionally done to illustrate something. Either way, it's only a video.
regards,
Steve James
-
Bob Ashmore
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:01 am
- Location: Frankfort, KY, USA
Jerry,
OK, I've watched this again, closely and repeatedly.
My only thought is that this looks more than a little like some of the modern Wu style form, but with some different hand positions. The hook hand he makes when he moves into Single Whip looks close to what I see Wu stylists doing today, though he gets to it a bit more flamboyantly.
While there is no lean in this form that I can see the Single Whip motions are extremely similar to the Wu style Single Whip of today. The Fair Lady forms are also very similar to modern Wu style.
If I had to guess based only on what I know of the modern forms, I'd say this was at least a portion of Wu Chien Chuans form.
The video starts with him in the midst of doing this form, not at the beginning of it, and I can see he does what looks like Embrace Tiger Return to Mountain after a short time then he continues on to Fair Lady after a bit. From that I would guess the video starts near the end of this form.
Since he was a student of both Wu Chien Chuan and Yang Shahou, maybe this is something he cobbled together himself, or maybe it's an early version of the Wu style form created by Wu Chien Chuan.
It's very interesting, no matter what it is. There are a lot of recognizable elements of the more modern forms, but then some bits that seem to be unique to this form.
My opinion would be that this is a hint of a very early Wu style form.
Bob
OK, I've watched this again, closely and repeatedly.
My only thought is that this looks more than a little like some of the modern Wu style form, but with some different hand positions. The hook hand he makes when he moves into Single Whip looks close to what I see Wu stylists doing today, though he gets to it a bit more flamboyantly.
While there is no lean in this form that I can see the Single Whip motions are extremely similar to the Wu style Single Whip of today. The Fair Lady forms are also very similar to modern Wu style.
If I had to guess based only on what I know of the modern forms, I'd say this was at least a portion of Wu Chien Chuans form.
The video starts with him in the midst of doing this form, not at the beginning of it, and I can see he does what looks like Embrace Tiger Return to Mountain after a short time then he continues on to Fair Lady after a bit. From that I would guess the video starts near the end of this form.
Since he was a student of both Wu Chien Chuan and Yang Shahou, maybe this is something he cobbled together himself, or maybe it's an early version of the Wu style form created by Wu Chien Chuan.
It's very interesting, no matter what it is. There are a lot of recognizable elements of the more modern forms, but then some bits that seem to be unique to this form.
My opinion would be that this is a hint of a very early Wu style form.
Bob
The form Wu Tunan performed was the fast form or "yongjia" which means application form (for fighting) passed down from Yang Luchan to Yang Shaohou, and from YSH to WTN. Of course the video was shot when WTN was about a hundred years old, so he did not performed with the low stance. Whether WTN did perform the Yang style yongjia with strong influence from Wu Style taiji I can only guess, since I am not at that level yet (or ever).
Here's a link to a performance by his student. Quite different from WTN's yongjia, but I guessed all the principles are still in there.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=l3M98I5Te7Q
As to the "thumbs up", that's the tanzhi, which generally follows the single whip. Basically it's an attack using the thumb.
I think WTN's Mongolian name is Wulabu, the meaning of which I am afraid I do not know (since it's a translation from Mongolian).
There are a few publication on this yongjia (so far I have seen three), but they are all in Chinese. The authors are all WTN's disciples and student (Ma Youqing, Li Lian, and, the third name just slips my mind).
Hope that helps.
cheers,
twc
Here's a link to a performance by his student. Quite different from WTN's yongjia, but I guessed all the principles are still in there.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=l3M98I5Te7Q
As to the "thumbs up", that's the tanzhi, which generally follows the single whip. Basically it's an attack using the thumb.
I think WTN's Mongolian name is Wulabu, the meaning of which I am afraid I do not know (since it's a translation from Mongolian).
There are a few publication on this yongjia (so far I have seen three), but they are all in Chinese. The authors are all WTN's disciples and student (Ma Youqing, Li Lian, and, the third name just slips my mind).
Hope that helps.
cheers,
twc
-
Bob Ashmore
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:01 am
- Location: Frankfort, KY, USA
TWC,
Ah, that would explain the differences in tempo I thought I was seeing in WTN's form, but wasn't sure enough about to mention. Now that I see the younger student of WTN's doing the same form, I can see that he was doing a fast form, sort of slowly.
If he was, indeed, about 100 years old, that would certainly explain it.
And if this is the Yang small frame fighting form, then that would explain the similarities to the Wu forms, as that is what the Wu form was based on.
Bob
Ah, that would explain the differences in tempo I thought I was seeing in WTN's form, but wasn't sure enough about to mention. Now that I see the younger student of WTN's doing the same form, I can see that he was doing a fast form, sort of slowly.
If he was, indeed, about 100 years old, that would certainly explain it.
And if this is the Yang small frame fighting form, then that would explain the similarities to the Wu forms, as that is what the Wu form was based on.
Bob
Louis.
I am aware that Wu Tunan wanted to make the nation strong and he urged this through studying its beneficial effects. The superstitions elements are in my frame of reference are things like taiji causes homosexuality from some parts, others say you have to believe in qi to derive any benefit, others say qi is in the form so form itself is good, qi exists in taiji (taiqi) hence the chee, other believe you get the martial stuff by slow only without learning shan-fa, and other stuff to numerous to mention.
I am aware that Wu Tunan wanted to make the nation strong and he urged this through studying its beneficial effects. The superstitions elements are in my frame of reference are things like taiji causes homosexuality from some parts, others say you have to believe in qi to derive any benefit, others say qi is in the form so form itself is good, qi exists in taiji (taiqi) hence the chee, other believe you get the martial stuff by slow only without learning shan-fa, and other stuff to numerous to mention.
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by shugdenla:
<B>Louis.
I do not speak Mandarin nor do I write it but I say only my experience of what I hear and I have seen.The language of taijiquan is clear for all so there are no problems with understanding.I am sorry for insinuating an untruth.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Do you speak English?
--Louis
<B>Louis.
I do not speak Mandarin nor do I write it but I say only my experience of what I hear and I have seen.The language of taijiquan is clear for all so there are no problems with understanding.I am sorry for insinuating an untruth.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Do you speak English?
--Louis
Hi Louis,
I'm not sure what shugdenla meant, but I think it is true that TCC's vocabulary makes it possible for multiple interpretations. Otoh, the vocabulary also allows different, perhaps contradictory, elements to exist in the same art. There might even be an argument that this "flexibility" or "non-fixity" of the vocabulary is deliberate.
Of course, the problem is that there's no way to tell whether this was the intention of the writers/users, or a product of the near-supernatural nature of the art, or simply a product of the Chinese language and the concepts that informed it. That it's likely to be a combination of all three is probably one of the art's attractions to many people.
However, it does not lend itself to agreement or consensus.
cheers,
Steve J
I'm not sure what shugdenla meant, but I think it is true that TCC's vocabulary makes it possible for multiple interpretations. Otoh, the vocabulary also allows different, perhaps contradictory, elements to exist in the same art. There might even be an argument that this "flexibility" or "non-fixity" of the vocabulary is deliberate.
Of course, the problem is that there's no way to tell whether this was the intention of the writers/users, or a product of the near-supernatural nature of the art, or simply a product of the Chinese language and the concepts that informed it. That it's likely to be a combination of all three is probably one of the art's attractions to many people.
However, it does not lend itself to agreement or consensus.
cheers,
Steve J