Ahh but you touched on another point that will just make matters worst (Zirk). What was the founders intention in creating the art? We now live in time where these arts are obsolete in modern combat. Granted the tools are somewhat the same. Punch is a punch and always will be.
In CMA every substyle markets itself as a "combative style" or has a "combative makeup" w/alittle bit being cultured, disciplined or whatever positive attribute that they're trying to sell - these "positives" of training are only a by product of the whole system - that system being evolved around combat. Even the internal arts (Tai Chi, Chi Kung) states that "at a certain level you would be able to defend yourself". Discipline, fitness, improved mental focus and compacity will increase by default (from one's baseline) with training because the system demands a certain level of those proficiencies. No other sport or training that doesn't have a combative element demands so much from the body and mind.
I doubt that the founders of the those CMA at that time were thinking - well let me put this together so we can be more cultured people, or more fit or more intelligent. I think that if someone even back in that day wanted to achieve those things - they would have done so in other means and more direct means none the less.
But let's take a different look at it. Say that a founder did want to increase all those attributes through CMA and if the practioners wanted to go more heavily into combat they could but it wasn't the founders primary goal of combat. Unfortunately, no one will ever know. The people who carry on the lineage today are 10 generations or more from the founder. What do they know of the founders intention. Heck - play whisper down the lane and state a simple sentence and 10 people later you know its not the same sentence. It'll only get worst with people's interpretations as well as society mores and values. I don't know how it was back in those days but I know that in todays market.
Hypothetical situation: If I were to continue tradition from what my "Grandfather" put together back in his day via 1940's. His studied all these arts from Asia and designed his own system and passed it on with my father (who opened up a school) and passed it down to me (to keep the school going) and I was carrying the lineage. I would by default have to modify the system. I need new students to join in order to keep the school going and the revenue coming. How should I market the system? Health improvement (like Yoga, Taichi?) or more like (Cardio Kickboxing)? Should this be more MMA oriented for those who want to just duke it out? Or should market it as system with great roots from various arts combined into one and it will improve your childs overall health and you'll see your childs behavior and grades improve?
This situation again is only from today's pressures. I can only imagine what had happened in the past few decades and before.
Zirk - I agree that forms are definitely a text book of theories and applications but again - and a practioner should choose which of these fits best. Unfortunately, these are outdated techniques and applications because they deal with people that have fought a certain way in a certain period of time. Western boxers back in the 1920's don't box the way they do now. Hell even Muay Thai has evolved since its inception.
There's nothing wrong if people just want to do forms for the sake of forms. That's why they have wu shu and godforbid XMA (I hate them). I think people who promote and follow TMA's are similair to religous zealots (harsh i know) but they don't stop to critically think about the system as a whole. Maybe few will question a certain technique or even a form but there is stigmatism that questioning your master or sifu is a no no. That is very un Buddhist like - especially for CMA that have such religious roots.
__________________
I like to full-contact fight - do you?? If want a challenge - PM - we'll set something up! Seriously
|