Formosa Neijia

This is a long comment by Darius in response to the Chen apps. and qinna post. I’m putting it here due to its length, and I don’t want people ruining their eyes with the small font in the comment. Darius has lots of good insights for us to discuss.

I enjoyed the clip a lot. However, I think that one thing very worthy of discussion when it comes to usage is how to deal with an opponent who does not slow down and wait for a technique to be applied. I realise that this is a demonstration, but I still think the question is worthy of more discussion. It’s a very different situation when you have an opponent who doesn’t just punch and wait, but who punches consecutively,kicks, moves fast around you and attacks from different angles without a break. It’s different in terms of what it requires of you technically, but also very different psychologically. Almost all taijiquan demonstrations rely on an opponent who immediately gives in when the technique is applied - this clip is no exception. For some techniques (such as the ones that involve grabbing the opponent’ head, not giving in would be dangerous, but for many other techniques, a scenario where a real opponent would immediately allow a technique to be applied is very rare.

I would like to see more taiji applications with an opponent who is:

a) uncooperative and doesn’t just stand there waiting for the technique to be applied (even if it’s just a fraction of a second, it enables the technique to ‘be applied’).
b) has fast, fluid footwork
c) is adaptive to the technique being applied to him/her and counter attacks.
d) has a fighting spirit

Su Dong-chen, in my mind, is impressive in this regard and I feel represents a very realistic approach to internal martial arts.

In xingyi and bagua we see more set-ups and I would argue that set-ups are essential to realistic application in taiji too. Yet, in taiji circles, we often see A and B square off, followed by A’s attack and B’s response. The above clip is better because there is an end that makes sense in many of the applications, but more frequently we see the infamous push away that does nothing except give you a breather before the opponent attacks again = hardly very useful. Things I’d like to discuss more:

- set up techniques that follow the principles of taiji (especially ‘bi3 bu4 dong4, wo3 bu4 dong4, bi3 dong4, wo3 xian1 dong4′). Can we stick to this principle and still be effective in subduing our opponent? If we follow this principle, in what way can we still maintain control and use set ups as the basis for applying other techniques. There are those who would argue that losing the initial set-up opportunity puts you at a distinct disadvantage.

- Footwork. In xingyi and bagua, good footwork is often seen when demonstrating applications, but in taiji application demonstrations there seems to be a general lack of active stepping (both in attack and defense). The opponnent attacks with a straight step in and straight attack to the head, chest or wherever.We seldom see the application of ‘pointing to the east, attacking the west’ or any other more complex attacks. It’s easy to apply techniques when it’s simple, one-sided, one-handed, straight forward step attack, but much more difficult when the opponent is skilled in their attacks. What are the best ways to train this more realistically?

- the differences between fighting and self-defense and whether both are needed in our training (i.e. free sparring vs. slightly more controlled step application based on more predictable ‘template’ circumstances). I think this is very important. If we are training to be good fighters, we need to train to be able to fight a wide variety of opponents with different skills and specialties. If we are training to defend ourselves against the average, non martial artist, and perhaps less skilled, attacker in a bar, or a mugger on the street (depends on what streets of course….), the skills required are slightly different. How do we approach these different objectives in a realistic way without abandoning basic taiji principles?

- The form is important and does contain the basis for taiji as a martial art. However, in my view the form is limited and often limiting for practical, free flowing application. Unless we train repetitively and deeply the underlying components of each movement (and these are limited in number), I believe that our applications will always lack flexibility and adaptibility. I see the form as a template that demonstrates key principles, power and samples of application. Sometimes we are able to use a full movement in free flowing application, but most of the time we use what comes natural to us based on the kind of training we’ve done. The more familiar we are with a technique/principle, the more likely we are to use it. We need body memory and structures that we automatically fall back on and use. If you only practice the form a few times per day, it’s hard, if not impossible, to develop that. Single, repetitive movements are one way of developing this kind of body memory, but how many people spend as much time on doing thousands of single movements as they do on the form? I suspect very few. So, how can we train in ways that balance the need (and fun) for the form with the need for training much deeper in individual components/basic movements? Is it possible, even, to develop whole body power and martial skills without daily high count repetitions of basics? In my view, the key to adaptive skill is to focus building body memory and power in the basic components of the form (peng, lu, ji, an, cai lie zhou kao are some of the basics, but there are others too) through very repetitive practice, including combining these with various stepping exercises. Once these are ‘built in’, the combinations available are not just infinite, but also realistic since they are part of your atuomatic default movement patterns and response.

Just a few thoughts that sprung to mind when I saw the video. Anybody want to discuss?

So we agree that what is generally lacking (and this applies more or less to most styles of taiji) is useful footwork, more emphasis on bridging, single movement practice, and then a realistic framework within which to apply everything. In other words, the very components that make it a martial art!

I agree with you about the over-emphasis on form, as well as how that is unlikely to change in the near future. But perhaps there is a way to extract much more from the form than what people generally do? I am always surprised when people have not noticed the number of foot hooks or stepping patterns in the form. When I demonstrate them at a fast pace, they look different from in the form, but they are actually the same. Learning to ’see’ what is in the form and then taking these components out of the form (stepping, fists, palms, kicks, shoulder/elbow strikes etc) and doing them first slowly to develop the proper mechanics, followed by full speed in both static stances and moving step, allows us to understand and makes use of the form from the ground up by giving us a better understanding of the building blocks of the form. Too many people see the form as something static and unchanging, yet that seems to cause a fixation on outcome rather than process. And, at least as I see it, the form is a template that teaches us how the principles CAN be applied , not necessarily how they SHOULD be applied and manifested in practice. This goes back to your point about medium or large frame, and whether Chen panling’s form as seen in his book should always be the model which everybody should try to mimic. It’s ironic how we have an art that is based on the principles of taiji (yinyang, bagua etc) which emphasises change, fluidity, open-endedness and creativity, yet the principles that surround the transmission of our art are so deeply antithetical to these ideas. This perhaps may be seen as a contradiction, on a very general level, between the ideas of confucianism and those of philosophical Daoism.

I think your points about push hands is also a step in the right direction, but I think it all needs to be taken a step further. As I see it, the ‘problem’ with push hands is that it starts with contact, thereby completely eliminating the critical bridging we agree is necessary to apply techniques that are focused, accurate and that don’t create other openings for the opponent. If you take the above single movements and use them individually and in combination as the basis for fighting practice, add basic bridging and setup technique, active stepping and repetition AND the principles of push hands, I think that is the basis for an effective martial art. Applying taiji principles when one is faced with an aggressive attack by a skilled attacker who does not easily ‘allow’ contact requires technique and skill that go beyond what is generally taught through push hands.

Must go. Hope more people contribute to this…