Martial applications – explicit and implied.
September 1, 2012 by Dante Gilmer
In the first part of the Cheng Man-Ching form aka the Yang short form, the martial applications are not explicit. The martial applications of the whole form may be ambiguous to the less experienced, but the first set of moves, called preparation, may be the most criptic part of the form, martially speaking.
If we look at a form, any form regardless of the art, we can analyze it better sometimes if we break it down into sectons or pieces. Sometimes a section may give a technique, a method of movement for interacting during a physical confrontation. If a technique is explicit i.e. block then punch, then we have a good starting point for analysis. If a technique is not explicit in section or piece of the form, we have to come up with a way of interpreting that piece. One possible way is to interpret form movements as if they are a message. For example the form may say ”draw your opponent in”or “control upper body and attack below”, or use this shape to neutralize an attack or the section may emphasze a principle or principles of your style through repetition of the same movement and so on.
But all forms do that all the time, right. Yes, but sometimes if we focus on blocks(althought Taiji doesn’t use the term block), kicks and punches, we may not hear the other parts of the message. I am not saying this is the best or only way of interpreting form, nor will it necessarily lead us to exactly what the masters of old were attempting to pass on. I’m saying it is one method of interpreting form, particularly where the martial function the form is not crystal clear.
So, if we look at the first part of the Cheng Man-Ching form as the video post #1 shows, we sink our weight onto one leg, then turn our waist. The feet wind up in a natural stance for our bodies and only then do we recruit our arms. We draw them in and then back and down, trying to keep the shoulders as relaxed as possible. Are the martial functions of those movements explicit. At first glance, they were not for me. But now the movements say to me, relax into your feet and establish a stable root or base, turn your waist to keep from letting an attack pile up on you, draw the opponent in and put him down. So now I can visualize the function of each part of the form, instead of having gaps in the martial flow of the form.
When I have an overview of possible martial functions of a previously vague section of the form, I can start to apply the other analytical tools used to break down martail arts forms. For example, put the movements in a context such as someone is shoving me or trying to grab me by the lapels. Is it a response to high attack or low attack? How do distance and timing change the use of the moves? Am I free to kick or is it only using the upper body? Does the movement have a range of responses form controlling to lethal? And so on.
Please check out application video #1 if you haven’t already. Please share you comments.
If we look at a form, any form regardless of the art, we can analyze it better sometimes if we break it down into sectons or pieces. Sometimes a section may give a technique, a method of movement for interacting during a physical confrontation. If a technique is explicit i.e. block then punch, then we have a good starting point for analysis. If a technique is not explicit in section or piece of the form, we have to come up with a way of interpreting that piece. One possible way is to interpret form movements as if they are a message. For example the form may say ”draw your opponent in”or “control upper body and attack below”, or use this shape to neutralize an attack or the section may emphasze a principle or principles of your style through repetition of the same movement and so on.
But all forms do that all the time, right. Yes, but sometimes if we focus on blocks(althought Taiji doesn’t use the term block), kicks and punches, we may not hear the other parts of the message. I am not saying this is the best or only way of interpreting form, nor will it necessarily lead us to exactly what the masters of old were attempting to pass on. I’m saying it is one method of interpreting form, particularly where the martial function the form is not crystal clear.
So, if we look at the first part of the Cheng Man-Ching form as the video post #1 shows, we sink our weight onto one leg, then turn our waist. The feet wind up in a natural stance for our bodies and only then do we recruit our arms. We draw them in and then back and down, trying to keep the shoulders as relaxed as possible. Are the martial functions of those movements explicit. At first glance, they were not for me. But now the movements say to me, relax into your feet and establish a stable root or base, turn your waist to keep from letting an attack pile up on you, draw the opponent in and put him down. So now I can visualize the function of each part of the form, instead of having gaps in the martial flow of the form.
When I have an overview of possible martial functions of a previously vague section of the form, I can start to apply the other analytical tools used to break down martail arts forms. For example, put the movements in a context such as someone is shoving me or trying to grab me by the lapels. Is it a response to high attack or low attack? How do distance and timing change the use of the moves? Am I free to kick or is it only using the upper body? Does the movement have a range of responses form controlling to lethal? And so on.
Please check out application video #1 if you haven’t already. Please share you comments.
