Now here’s something you don’t see everyday:
To be honest, most of the classes that I have visited where applications are meant to be practiced have never gone beyond the talking stage. Applications may have been alluded to or maybe even described, but no actual physical practice has taken place. Any physical activity has still been limited to copious quantities of solo form practice and often unrelated qigong / ch’i kung exercises. And I can tell you now that actually hitting your partner during push-hands training is not generally welcomed. Sometimes the students seem to be more motivated by misguided notions of their own martial superiority rather than by any genuinely inquiring martial spirit. Wildly delusional notions of what is martially credible abound - pit them against a bunch of Karate students and they’d get eaten alive. Please someone, pit them against a bunch of Karate students.
That last line is a riot! Needless to say, she’s stiring up a lot of trouble over at Martial Art Planet. Here’s one thread with lots of fireworks.
I just stumbled across her stuff tonight so I haven’t read it all, but most everything that I’ve read so far is right on track. It’s really refreshing to read her stuff. But look at the backlash from the peace-loving, hippie, supposedly taoist crowd. You’d think someone broke their bongs or something. 
I applaud her efforts but I wouldn’t want to be in her shoes. The path she is taking is a rough one. This may be what it takes to get the real taiji out there I guess. But changing people’s perceptions is almost impossible.
I wish her luck.
26 responses so far ↓
1 Q // Dec 6, 2006 at 9:41 pm
I didn’t read the thing too thoroughly but it’s nothing new. The effect only depends on how hard you stir the pot. Tai chi for health is perfectly fine, as long as people don’t get delusional about it.
2 tim // Dec 7, 2006 at 3:56 am
I can’t read stuff like MAP. It’s full of idiots and children, martial arts fans. By “fans” I mean people who like reading comic books and playing video games, and bring that sensibility to their practice. “But, but, it’s not like the wuxia comic/manga/ps2 game where you touch them and they fly away!” That kind of sums up the vibe I get from there.
As a person of Chinese descent, I have to say I find the entire thing disgusting. Not to go off on an ethnic nationalist fury , but it is offensive to me that people have taken a strong and vital part of Chinese culture and turned it into a touchstone for a bunch of garbage theories that bear little relationship to the people who actually used the stuff to make a living. If people want to admit that they have repurposed taiji/kung fu from the old uses for new uses, and have converted it to a new-age touchstone, that’s fine.
However, when people tell me they’re “upholding tradition” when they are not actually interested in fighting, and have no real skills in that department, then please excuse me while I go throw up.
At it’s best, Northern kung fu was the art of warrior monks , or people defending their village (Chen taiji) in what was basically one of the most violent and anarchic places in the world in the 17th through the 20th Century. At it’s best, Southern kung fu was the art of resistance fighters and Chinese patriots. I don’t see any Esalen touchy feely hippie bullshit anywhere in the examples I just gave.
Chinese people have part of the blame for this, because of all the teachers that gave their non-Chinese students a line of BS. That is what allowed this garbage to take root in the first place. I think that’s changing though– I noticed that the Shaolin monks I met this summer all seemed to have some sanda background as well as doing the sets. Also , the sports universities seem to be turning out more kickboxing type fighters, and I’ve noticed an upsurge in CCTV shows that feature full contact fighting. It’s a turn for the better.
3 Observer // Dec 7, 2006 at 4:12 am
Her attitude is all very well, apart from 2 things.
i) As the first poster says, Tai Chi for health is perfectly fine, so long as you don’t think you’re doing a martial art.
ii) The videos of her doing her applications on her website look absolutely terrible. They’re terrible! I think most Tai Chi for health people could probably mop the floor with her anyway!
4 Thomas // Dec 7, 2006 at 5:12 am
Ms. Zorya is right, in a sense: many practitioners of taiji “quan” would not be able to use what they practice in self-defense. However, having perused what Ms. Zorya shows on DVDs of her Zheng Manqing taijiquan, Sun Lutang baguazhang and gawd-knows-from-whom xingyi piquan and zuanquan . . . I don’t think she could use what she shows in her own self-defense, either . . . against anyone but her girlfriend and demonstration partner.
I’m coming to a sadder, broader conclusion: many practitioners of any Chinese martial arts would not be able to use what they practice in self-defense. Please note that I say “many,” not most, because I don’t know most practitioners’ experience or skills. But I’ve encountered far more “quan” practitioners of low practical ability than seems right.
It’s the old point/argument/diversion about surface technique and form being all that’s practiced . . . about the quan not having any gong. And just as important, about the practitioner not having real fighting experience (even sparring) . . . you can’t know how well a blade will do until you cut with it . . . and it’s the same with the body/mind under pressure of combat.
Very few people have ever excelled with the higher-level fighting skills that the internal systems promise to develop. It’s hit-or-miss even with the most open of teachers and diligent of students.
Many people can fight instinctively. I can. But to fight with internal skill . . . to train internal skill so that it consistently comes out in sparring and is there when attacked “on the street” . . . is no easy task.
It starts with the gong, including neigong . . . then a few simple techniques . . . then hands-on partner work, increasing pressure up to sparring.
Long taolu can conceivably be part of the gong, provided they are trained the right way . . . but generally are going to be more of a distraction than a help to real skill. I just shake my head at the multiplicity of beautiful solo forms and the never-ending arguments about what move in a form came from which lineage. What a fookin’ waste o’time.
The clueless, preaching to the gongless. That’s how I see it.
5 chessman71 // Dec 7, 2006 at 7:26 am
Good comments guys. I guess I’m in the middle on this. I think fighting ability must be there if someone is going to teach but I don’t necessarily think it has to be the sole focus of class. Perhaps Ms. Zorya goes overboard.
The whole “taiji for fighting” thing seems as much a waste of time to me as does the “taiji and crystal power” trip that the hippies are on. IMO, we should be more focused on getting ALL the benefits out of taiji rather than focusing on one area — that usually means just being really serious about practice and correction. From my experience, if those two elements are there then most other things fall into place. If more people would take their practice seriously and more teachers would gain deeper knowledge (applications and fighting are part of that) then the problems would take care of themselves.
Thanks for the comment about her clips. I was wondering what she could actually do considering her stance. I’ll try to take a look at those tonight. Someone who is going to piss everyone off had better be able to back up there stuff.
6 Thomas // Dec 7, 2006 at 7:32 am
I’m in the middle with you, David. Training the internal skills well should produce a whole range of benefits . . . including using that internal skill in self-defense if need be. I think the internal body skills are the foundation on which usage is built . . . whether the usage is moving well in everyday activity or skillfully when attacked. Basically all I saw on Ms. Zorya’s DVDs is taolu and basic applications, empty of gong.
Nevertheless, she is a good teacher as far as what she shows . . . it is clearly presented.
7 Commentary to “Joanna Zorya: telling off the taiji hippies” « Taiji@Stagmont // Dec 7, 2006 at 10:08 am
[...] I must say a big thank you to Formosa Neijia for starting off my day with another good post entitled “Joanna Zorya: telling off the taiji hippies” (http://formosaneijia.com/2006/joanna-zorya-telling-off-the-taiji-hippies/). I also read some of the arguments over at martialartsplanet.com (just follow the link in the post). [...]
8 chessman71 // Dec 7, 2006 at 9:16 pm
Well, I saw the clips. My main comment is that we all have to work with what is available to us at the time. That is the only thing that we can refine and draw from. But her statements about “top quality instruction in martial arts” are over the top.
Thomas,
Good comments about gong training. I’m a BIG believer in gong training, so anything you have to say on that topic will always be welcome here. I concur that most everyone is missing gong training, even more than application/fight training IMO.
9 chessman71 // Dec 7, 2006 at 10:39 pm
Okay, I just finished reading the thread over at MAP. I have to say that the three people with thousands of posts to there names who are arguing with Ms. Zorya don’t have a single clue between them about IMA, period.
Statements like “silk reeling is only good for whipping energy” or “bagua and xingyi don’t have reeling silk” or my personal favorite “peng, lu, etc. do not use reeling silk” just go to show that readers should take what they read on Internet message boards with a grain of salt.
Again, the fact that these guys have THOUSANDS of posts each over there just shows how much utter rubbish has been posted on the boards.
10 chenquestion // Dec 7, 2006 at 11:51 pm
I’ve read Zorya’s articles in the past (the more instructional ones, which seemed pretty sound) and recently went back and read the “rants” which express a point of view (that is, opinion) calculated to stir controversy. I’m drawn to the “don’t take the quan out of the taiji” side of the argument, though interestly, I’m no fighter myself. I’m a little suspicious of the “let’s kick some ass!” schools of taiji except where they have sound fundamentals, and often they seem to offer a lot in that respect.
Joanna has also posted a “fake forum” which is a laff riot, well worth checking out.
For “taiji ought to be deadly” system, I like Erle Montaigue, who’s got his own ultra-complete system and lots of good insights into making progress in taiji. His teaching about fa-jin is powerful and I created a nice “emergency Parry & Punch” based his teachings.
Has anyone checked out http://www.kungfu4u.com? This American MA teacher has worked a lot with Chen Xiaowang and offers “fighting Chen style” instruction without the table-thumping of some of the British schools. (Not to knock the Brits.) One cool thing I read from Zorya was about a taijiquan “Masters’ Summit” planned for 2007 to address the future of TJQ. Some big names apparently scheduled to chair this - ? Anyone have some further info - ?
11 QuaiJohnCain (John Chittenden) // Dec 8, 2006 at 12:42 am
While I respect Mrs. Zorya, I think her attitude is driven by a need to lord over others. Repeating the fact that 99% of information on the internet is BS is like reminding everyone the sky is blue, yeah DUH!
I also think that if she’s going to push the martial stance so hard , that she’d better start training harder to get taken seriously. Does she realize that the average Karate student could also eat HER for lunch? She does present what she knows quite well, however, I’ll give her that…
Then again, I’m kind of “spoiled” on some of this, I was very fortunate to spend many years in a very serious school where the kinds of things Mrs. Zorya speaks about, and very serious fight training, was all taken for granted.
12 wujimon // Dec 8, 2006 at 7:10 am
Any links to the video?
13 wujimon // Dec 8, 2006 at 7:25 am
Here’s the link:
http://www.reelingsilk.co.uk/applications.htm
14 chessman71 // Dec 8, 2006 at 8:00 am
Wuji,
Thanks for the link. Readers can look and judge for themselves.
15 Julie // Dec 11, 2006 at 8:43 am
Hi guys,
Julie here (Joanna Zorya’s right hand lady!)
She’s got heaps of students and virtually all we do is apply stuff, so they’d soon know if she was no good (our big strong ex-karate guys know they couldn’t have her for lunch, but obviously I can’t prove that to you right here, right now - that’s the problem with forums.)
Oh and she can fight very well on the street - she has to be able to because she walks with two sticks due to advanced arthritis and couldn’t run away even if she wanted to (which I have to say would be somewhat out of character anyway). She defended me from an attacker a few years ago and I’m not the only person she’s defended in her time.
Joanna’s skill doesn’t lack anything. She wouldn’t get the reviews and positive comments she does if she wasn’t any good. I kind of think the people at Plum Publications and people like Glenn Hairston might know a little better than the average forum dweller. Have you read her reviews? http://www.reelingsilk.co.uk/dvds.htm
Now I know from experience that you can’t win on internet forums, no matter what you say, so I’ll say no more.
16 chessman71 // Dec 11, 2006 at 9:07 am
Julie,
Welcome to the blog. Thanks for your comments and sharing your personal experience with Ms. Zorya’s methods. I do well understand the limitations of discussing things on the web, that was one of the reasons that I started this blog in the first place. I wanted a space to discuss what I think is important. Of course, I get editorial control as well, so any viscious comments like the ones your teacher got over at MAP wouldn’t be tolerated.
While I think the rhetoric on your school’s website is a little over the top, I do greatly admire the direction that you guys are going and I wish you well.
Also, don’t be put off by the comments here. We are usually a healthily skeptical bunch of people.
Other than that, I hope you stick around and if you have the time, please feel free to comment on anything that catches your eye here. I’ll pop over to your site from time to time and highlight something if it catches my eye.
Take care.
17 QuaiJohnCain (John Chittenden) // Dec 12, 2006 at 3:44 am
Julie-
Don’t take a huge offense to my comment. I only said it based on what my eyes can see, and that is based on my own experiences with Hsing-I and Hsing-I fighters. As I said in my post, I’m a little spoiled, I’m used to watching and working with some of the best. I can see the difference between a seasoned fighter and a hard working practioner almost soley on shenfa. None of this is to say Joanna is bad, NOT AT ALL. Maybe I should have laid out some praise first… She is quite knowledgable, and more importantly, capable of communicating that knowledge to others. Her presentations beat out 90% of what I’ve seen, but her shenfa, does not. And considering the health problems she bears (quite gracefully I might add), this makes sense. We all get a little loud at times, and Joanna definitely talks the talk, and walks the walk, as well as her body limits her. But a serious tournament fighter from *any* style would likely present a less managable challenge to her, that is all I meant.
18 chessman71 // Dec 12, 2006 at 7:08 am
John,
I don’t think your comments crossed the line. As I said, we’re healthily skeptical here and I think in general that commenters have sympathy with Ms. Zorya.
Julie,
Of course anytime you write something on the web, you’ll be judged by what you write. Same with clips, you’ll be judged by what you post. I think we need to be understanding of that.
One of the good things about a blog is that when you post clips, you can post an explanation of what people are seeing. This cuts down on misunderstandings. Just food for thought.
19 Helaine // Jan 17, 2008 at 9:35 am
OK guys, I’ve taken karate and have been a student of kung fu and tai chi chuan for over 7 years and I think I can tell the difference between “smoke and mirrors” and the real deal. Joanna is real. I don’t agree with everything she has to say but her approach to tai chi chuan is solid. Really, what else would you use it for if not a martial art? My personal goal is for the tai chi chuan to work side-by-side with my kung fu to be a better martial artist. How can I lose?
20 cloudhandz // Jan 18, 2008 at 1:59 am
Tim said -
“I can’t read stuff like MAP. It’s full of idiots and children, martial arts fans. By “fans” I mean people who like reading comic books and playing video games, and bring that sensibility to their practice. “But, but, it’s not like the wuxia comic/manga/ps2 game where you touch them and they fly away!” That kind of sums up the vibe I get from there.”
People having been around a forum a while like to have fun. Sure maybe there the odd romantics around. But I’ll tell you something, I’ve been to 2 IMA meets arranged on MAP and your vibe is a misjudged stereotype basically. Which i don’t find particularly clever or admirable on your part, but whatever.
Chessman71 said
“Okay, I just finished reading the thread over at MAP. I have to say that the three people with thousands of posts to there names who are arguing with Ms. Zorya don’t have a single clue between them about IMA, period. ”
Again I think you’re wrong I’m the person who’s comments you’re quoting I think. I’ve also met the others there..
I’ve trained with Alex Kozma, Serge Augier, Hejinhan, Wudang UK, Rob Poynton and others in the UK and competed push hands and full contact san shou and been diong IMA for 5 and a half odd years. I am not clueless about practicing IMA or what I know about IMA and using it for fighting..
But I’ll give you one thing here. Sure I’m human and make mistakes. I’m no expert and I don’t think you are either. A lot of what I’ve said on the internet has been wrong sometime s or just an interpretation/ opinion that I wouldn’t expect all to agree with..
“Statements like “silk reeling is only good for whipping energy”
Tell me what else it is good for in a fight?
It is good training sure.. and you can apply rotational stuff to good effect in one step sparring and look good……….
or “bagua and xingyi don’t have reeling silk”
Yep this one I regret it isn’t all that accurate at face value. Mostly because you’ve misquoted a bit – I don’t believe I said that they had none or at least conceded as much just that it wasn’t the big focus like say chen style or jkz makes it in her styles, at least that’s what I would have like to have said. Of course they have it and it is pretty overt in bagua forms,so I put my hands up that was not a good comment if it came across to you in the overall thread and context of the debate. They have it in the training but I wouldn’t say it is fundamental or part of the basics – especially in hsingi. In pi quan for example – tell be about the silk reeling there. Is it in the neigong for piquan for example.? What about beng quan.?
I think as you go on in the systems, certainly silk reeling is a part like all good CMA training – in the forms sometimes subtle, sometimes overt. but not that big a part in what differentiates these systems and doesns’t really define these systems like jk liked to mak out. For me it’s more about the “power” on the method of pi, the method of “ji” etc – as per Alex Kozmas teachings. The powers in the 8 mother palms. The twist “power” in bagua is more fundemental and unique to bagua than chan si jin
“or my personal favorite “peng, lu, etc. do not use reeling silk” just go to show that readers should take what they read on Internet message boards with a grain of salt. ”
I’d say on the more external level it is certainly a part of lu. And a little in zhou of the secondaty methods. But I would like to hear you describe the others in terms of silk reeling please if you know so much - i don’t beleive it a big part if any of the other methods of tai chi. Jkz didn’t so maybe you can clear it up for me. To sum up it can be in exercises or forms of these systems some style subtle some overt, some people like to focus on that training some just have it as a regular part and don’t make a huge deal about it .
Again, the fact that these guys have THOUSANDS of posts each over there just shows how much utter rubbish has been posted on the boards.
Well I have to say I don’t always agree with what you post, but I’m not going around knocking you for it David.
If you can find any instance of me getting at others in that way I’ll hold my hands up – I only do so in direct discussion with them and over the points of discussion.
I always like to give as good as I get on principle and certainly jks stance on many things I feel warranted my points to her at the time and my attitude to her. Her “demonizing” was rather sad. And anyone who knows me, has trained with me knows I’m not an arm waving hippy of a taiji player.
And anyone is always more than welcome to find out I live in London and most welcome to contact of any kind.
To finnish overall I like your blog and appreciate its presents and your knowledge and insights, keep up the good work and thanks for taking the time to make this contribution to the internet world of IMA.
Cheers
George
21 Dave Chesser // Jan 18, 2008 at 8:41 am
George,
Well, things got more …..um……interesting with Ms. Zorya in my blog comment section in later topics. But no sweat.
Thanks for your comment.
22 Tim // Jan 18, 2008 at 11:03 am
Hi George,
Cool.
If you’re actively testing what you do against resistance, then my comment was not directed at you. I stand by what I said– I don’t like MAP, and I’ve been generally disappointed at the quality of the discourse. If you’ve had positive experiences with people from the board, then that’s fantastic and I’m glad to hear it.
I stand by what I said that I see mostly fans on the board. There are some pretty subtle and amazing interesting things that can come out of neigong practice. In the conversations I’ve seen on MAP it’s not immediately apparent to me that the posters understand that. If they’re actively training against resistance, then cool by me. There’s more to martial arts, but I figure that motivated people will figure that out anyway. The info is out in the open now, if people have the willingness to see.
I don’t move with a reeling silk motion. But I can recognize it a bit now. And I disagree, strongly , that it isn’t in the xingyi movements. Please don’t take my word for it because I still can’t demonstrate it worth a crap =)
23 cloudhandz // Jan 18, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Cool guys.
There have been some pretty knowledgable contributors over the years at MAP in those sections i would say. But everyone has there take and interpretation and sure theres many of us there (and everywhere finding there way. Trial and error. having ideas, picking up ideas - trial and error is a great way to learn what works for you..
I think it is in the hsingi movements, just not a lways at the heart of them. If you have good neigong thats great. I think it mostly “runs alongside”the heart of the methods.
Happy training everyone.
24 Rick Matz // Jan 18, 2008 at 8:57 pm
I see the ability to fight as a litmus test on whether you’ve trained correctly or not.
25 Joanna // Jan 23, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Hi cloudhandz / George,
As I learned them, reeling silk is indeed in piquan and beng quan and also in peng, lu and ji. I think that when these movements are taught, this is one aspect that often gets simplified or even omitted. Seriously, I have students of 4 years + who need reminding that all movements must reel silk, and here I mean no more than that all movements must contain constant rotation, right down to the hands. If you need convincing, try the movements both with and without - when your arm (for example) contacts another person, or they contacts yours, you should already be spinning with sticky rotating pressure so that they feel like they are being sucked into a vortex. Some teachers simplify the rotation and from what I’ve seen a lot of Tai Chi is simplified so that palms overturn and them move, or move and then overturn. I was taught that this is incorrect for Taiji, Xingyi or Bagua, all of which should observe reeling silk throughout. As Adam Hsu points out in the Sword Polisher’s Record ALL Kung Fu or Wushu movements should have this quality.
Here’s the reeling silk explained for the initial movements of our first “Bird’s Tail” sequence. We do another main version with all the reeling silk going the opposite way which has different applications and effects.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0tpVjFHFlMQ
26 Joanna // Jan 23, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Just some addendum.
Firstly, chan means to twist, whether it’s chan or chan si, so twisting should always be present. Regarding the power of the arts, well I’d say chansijin IS the most significant power in the arts. Finally, I consider it to be separate from the whipping / undulating quality. One can reel silk in quite a hard mechanical way, like a metal machine, or in a softer, whippier way, like a soft organic machine.
Leave a Comment