Honest HFY Question-

[Jim Roselando]

Hello all,


Its good to see the same Zest in these discusions hahahaha.

I noticed this:


Alan you and Victor don't recognize the answer because you refuse to call a punch a punch and a kick a kick All WING CHUN COMES FROM THE SAME SOURCE
There are similarities that will always exist and if you throw in White Crane of course you will needlessly make things harder than need be and confusing. After 1850 there exist at least 2 branches of Wing Chun that of Wong Wa Bo/ Leung Yee Tai and that of Hung Gun Biu and the Boxer Society. This explains why some things may now look different.

***

My replies below:

Alan you and Victor don't recognize the answer because you refuse to call a punch a punch and a kick a kick All WING CHUN COMES FROM THE SAME SOURCE

In order to make this sort of statement you need more data to back it up. What is the Source (please dont repeat the shaolin mantra) that all sprung from and what happen in the mid 1800's that caused the paradigm shift? JR

After 1850 there exist at least 2 branches of Wing Chun that of Wong Wa Bo/ Leung Yee Tai and that of Hung Gun Biu and the Boxer Society. This explains why some things may now look different.

Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yee Tai are two "main" lines of Wing Chun that can be traced and are not to be lumped in to the same category. Both did different stuff. According to Lao Ba, Wong Wah Bo (a native of Kulo) taught the San Chin (facing) or Straight Body version of Wing Chun. This is the paradigm shift of 1850. Leung Yee Tai did the Yim/Leung family version.

So, your linking of WWB & LYT as one lineage is not accurate. The two main WC sects are the Males playing Males and Males playing Females. One had affiliation with the Lee Man Mao group and the other was more quiet. This is also why there is a sh*t load of cross contaminated stories between families. Also, you need to consider the fact that many people wore Red Turbans when involved with LMM. This does not mean they were the Secret Society preserving the original art as suggested. Pre-1850 system! It actually means they have more relation to WWB & LMM and their history has been intertwined. JR

*

There are similarities that will always exist and if you throw in White Crane of course you will needlessly make things harder than need be and confusing.

Throwing in White Crane does not make anything harder. It actually simplifies things big time! We can use it to trace our root but also our differences. You need to find the root (or parents) otherwise anyone can try to claim anything is anything. The Lee Man Mao group and the "softer" (snake style) Crane would never in a miliion years associate if they had no common background. The people were just two tribal back then. Crane being a common ground made for a long lasting friendship that has to this day been maintained. JR


So, the More Likely scenerio is!!!! On the Junk there was:

Males playing Females (Yim & Leung art) "pre-1850"

Males playing Males (WWB art) "after 1850"

Lee Man Mao's friends. "more crane than wing chun and does not have SLT root"


Just some thoughts for the fun discussion. In the end, WHO CARES! It would be beneficial if HFY would figure out what is the Military/Monk systems they were supposed to be born from? This makes for better technical discussions and can show where/why there was a paradigm shift etc...

After all the research, the difference between the two main lines of WC are very little IMO.

Gotta run!

[osprey3883]

Victor,
Thanks for the clarification, I am definitely not trying to stir anything up with TWC, I just didn't know.

Matt

[reneritchie]

Hey Jimbo:

that many people wore Red Turbans

Wore opera costumes (how cool must that have been?!) and red turbans. Here ya go:

http://www.w1ng.com/lee-man-mao-li-w...ed-boat-opera/

"[Li Wenmao] himself and the other general officers wore the opera clothes. Later as the insurrectionists increased radically, the opera clothes fell short. So they used the red kerchief instead of the helmets, hence they were called Red Kerchief Army."

http://www.w1ng.com/history-of-the-red-boat-opera/

"In 1854, Fenghuangyi Cantonese Opera performer Li Wenmao and Chen Kaihe, the leader of Guangdong Tiandi Assembly, rose up in Guangzhou, changing the members of several thousand red boats into soldiers, wearing opera costumes and red muffle, called “Red Muffle Army”. "

[Jim Roselando]

RR,


It's my understanding, according to the historical records (well documented), that the red turbans were worn by the people of Foshan who showed up to support Lee Man-Mao and the Red Junk troops (who reportedly marched in full costume -- how awesome would that have been to see?!).

So the opera performers weren't wearing them (they had the fancy hats), but because pretty much everyone supporting them were (the crowds), it became known as the Red Turban Rebellion.

The support of the common people was key to controlling Foshan, and when it was lost (after some unfortunate incidents), control of the city went back to the Qing.

***

Excellent!

Mucho Gusto!

See, all of this stuff can be checked out and reasonably traced from different sources. My point is the Red Turban people has more to do with LMM.

Thanks again! U Da Man!

[JPinAZ]

Hey Jimbo:

Wore opera costumes (how cool must that have been?!) and red turbans. Here ya go:

http://www.w1ng.com/lee-man-mao-li-w...ed-boat-opera/

http://www.w1ng.com/history-of-the-red-boat-opera/

Rene,

Curious, who wrote these articles? It just says 'historical source'. Where do these 'facts' come from? Not saying they are right/wrong, but to provide links to articles doesn't really prove a point one way or the other does it?

[reneritchie]

JRjr:

No worries, I edited in the links above...

BTW- I haven't seen anything hard on the Leung family being father/son/brother, vs. extended clan. Clans were big back then (internecine feuding and all...), and as close and tight as nuclear (nucular?) families, so the language never seemed clear to me.

But we can save that tangent for another thread...

[reneritchie]

@JPinAZ

No worries, I think it's important to cite and source as much as possible.

The first was by the government of Foshan, the second by the Foshan museum. (I mirrored them on my site because the Foshan servers seem to go down all the time -- Genuine Windows Advantage, no doubt...). The originating links are provided right above the quotes in the mirrored articles (the titles in red).

Wakeman has also covered this on his book, Strangers at the Gate, which is focused exclusively on the history of the Red Turban Rebellion.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . Several years ago while on a trip to Mexico while being served by a dark hair dark skin female waitress some small talk ensued and one of our guys asked her if she spoke Spanish. The waitress kind of caught off guard proclaimed rather forcefully she was not Mexican but Native American Indian.

A little history note: Were you in Vera Cruz or Oaxaca? There are Black/Afro-Mexicans there. Some of them deny their ethicity and claim to be Indians.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSdfBvSjyVY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-Mexican
http://www.afromexico.com/
http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/featu...ughnindex.html
http://www.fsa.ulaval.ca/personnel/V...k_mexicans.htm

[Ultimatewingchun]

How about some answers?

What exactly is Deui Ying Kiu Sau from the HFY perspective?

And if not Savi - what do you have to say about it, Levi? Osprey?

[anerlich]

Some users here mudsling MKF around here, including you.

I originally wrote a review of MKF which many thought was pretty fair. Run a poll should you want to dispute that. I got a fair bit of mud slung, I got plenty more of it left to return. Criticism's only a problem if you're pretending to be something you aren't.

I was just pointing out that the things the authors of MKF are being accused of, can be found in other areas if one chooses to really look into it.

I guess you could make a case that they're no worse than, say, William Cheung or Andrew Draheim when it comes to trash talking, so they shouldn't be singled out.

Leave it there, OK. But then we head off into the bizarrosphere.

The website passage you "point out" quoted a passage written by an HFY guy, leaving out one sentence. This you construe as either an attack or misrepresentation, but it's by your own guy.

I'll accept criticism, on behalf, for plagiarism, about which I've contacted Rene, but the rest of this "insight" is complete fruitloopery.

I'd get an ice pack for your head because the logic circuits in your brain must be overheating.

I think you are the one that needs to spend more time in front of a mirror, though having seen your photo in MKF, and imagining how that face would look with its foot in its mouth, I can understand your reluctance.

[Phil Redmond]

I have to start this off with a disclaimer because I know this could be a touchy subject. I'm asking out of curiousity.This is a forum for discussion so I've always wanted to know this so I'm going to ask.
I've never read MKF but I hear some people say that it's written as if HFY is the real kung fu and other WC systems aren't. I just would like to know what was said for people to think that. I hopr the HFY people don't take offense to my query.

[JPinAZ]

I have to start this off with a disclaimer because I know this could be a touchy subject. I'm asking out of curiousity.This is a forum for discussion so I've always wanted to know this so I'm going to ask.
I've never read MKF but I hear some people say that it's written as if HFY is the real kung fu and other WC systems aren't. I just would like to know what was said for people to think that. I hopr the HFY people don't take offense to my query.

Phil,

Since you post the question as something you've heard, and not your own opinion, I don't see why anyone would take offence. Even if the above statement was your opinion (right/wrong/or whatever), why should anyone take offence? I mean we are each allowed to have our own thoughts on things right?

Regardless, I am thinking instead of taking someone else's opinion on something (which is only based on their own experiences with which to draw conclusions), IMO your answer would best be answered by yourself after reading the book. If then you agree or disagree with them, it is at least your own opinion.

Also keep in mind, as I understand it, the book is 2 parts: one, the findings of the VTM's research into sources of WC, and two, an introduction to the HFY lineage. So opinions can vary greatly depending on what each person expects to get from the book, thier individual experiences, views, etc.

WHat I do find curious, if you are interested in what is said in the book, why not just read it?

BTW. do you have access to a copy?

[Alan Orr]

Phil,

Since you post the question as something you've heard, and not your own opinion, I don't see why anyone would take offence. Even if the above statement was your opinion (right/wrong/or whatever), why should anyone take offence? I mean we are each allowed to have our own thoughts on things right?

Regardless, I am thinking instead of taking someone else's opinion on something (which is only based on their own experiences with which to draw conclusions), IMO your answer would best be answered by yourself after reading the book. If then you agree or disagree with them, it is at least your own opinion.

Also keep in mind, as I understand it, the book is 2 parts: one, the findings of the VTM's research into sources of WC, and two, an introduction to the HFY lineage. So opinions can vary greatly depending on what each person expects to get from the book, thier individual experiences, views, etc.

WHat I do find curious, if you are interested in what is said in the book, why not just read it?

BTW. do you have access to a copy?

Interesting, as I have the book and it does not make clear that it is in two parts. It is in 9 chapters, all but the first chapter are on HFY. The only VTM page seems to be a VTM Mission statement with a picture of First Gen Yip Man students.

It does say in chapter one that ' ten years of research by the vtm staff and contributors yielded verifiable facts and conclusions'

Question- What are these verifiable facts? verifiable in what manner??

I keep hearing this from the HFY, that the VTM has confirm it's history. I asked the VTM and they said it was the opinon of the VTM. This is not then fact is it.

Opinon is fine to have, but not to put out as fact.

Maybe I have missed the documents on these facts. Please share.

[Nick Forrer]

Maybe I have missed the documents on these facts. Please share.

You obviously missed the computer generated pictures and the stills from the Hk film. There were some nice hand drawn pictures too. And (a personal favourite) a picture of a pot. Dont forget the pot.

[Nick Forrer]

Actually Alan if you want a book on wing chun its hard to beat fighting by Bob Breen. The wing chun on display in that im sure would meet with your approval.