(Journal entry dated 18 May 2009)
I’m really beginning to understand the difference between the classical (Wing Chun) and non-classical (Gung Fu) approach to martial arts. The reference point in classical appear to be the forms. The non-classical approach however, suggests that the starting point should be an analysis and breakdown of the most fundamental components of a fight. It asks “what are the core components of a fight?” and, once established, the next step would be to construct a fighting method based around those findings.
Additionally, the classical approach necessitates an understanding of names and principles and adherence to that historic pattern of development of those names and patterns, for the sake of being consistent with the founders of the art. In Wing Chun, for example, it is an inescapable requirement that one become familiar with terms such as chi sao, tan, bong and concepts such as Lat Sao Jik Chung. In fact, battles of supremacy are often won during ‘forum-fu’ based on a persons skill at understanding the name, rather than understanding the technique!
The non-classical approach encourages a person to understand the shapes, feelings and patterns of the movement, into his or her own words so as to facilitate learning. A natural by-product of which, is the creation of each practitioners mini-system.
I now understand why I prefer the non-classical approach.
