Oh and I can’t believe you just started a weak ass lineage war in this thread. If it keeps going I’ll move it. I understand loyalty to your school, I understand skepticism, but you have just taken it to a ridiculous level.
Other arts have Tan Tui end of story. Should it be credited back to the Muslim styles? Don’t know Don’t Care. Is it JingWu Tan Tui? Don’t know Don’t care.
I’m not trying to be a dick but, this is WC shit. You were wrong end of story. I never said Xingyi created Tan Tui.
I said:
Then there is a Tan Tui set that was talked about on Cartmell’s website years ago.
Sorry, Unless you are older than Tim, practiced in China back with his teachers, can give me a certified letter from his teachers calling him a liar, I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Then some commented:
There are a shit ton of different Tan Tui versions out there.
Lam Kwong Wing - Tan Tui
The way I learned it was completely different from this and I am sure the Xing Yi version is different too. I can’t find a video of the version I learned, you got one?
Notice, he is right there are a shit ton of VERSIONS. HE didn’t say it was the original, he didn’t say who invented it, nor did he say it was exclusive.
Now, I respect what you write even when I disagree. Right now I’m of the opinion that you or your school has a problem with Lam Kwong Wing.
The reason is, you read a whole bunch of stuff not mentioned by either myself or the other poster and jumped to a conclusion.
I’m not a Jingwu guy. My practice is obviously influenced by that lineage, but I don’t belong to a Jingwu club. You are reading all kinds of shit into this.
Other arts have Tan Tui end of story. Should it be credited back to the Muslim styles? Don’t know Don’t Care. Is it JingWu Tan Tui? Don’t know Don’t care.
I think Tantui is important enough that it’s worth talking about, because it’s a very, very common set. I’m not trying to express prejudice about any other school, period.
I’m not trying to be a dick but, this is WC shit. You were wrong end of story. I never said Xingyi created Tan Tui.
You are being kind of dickish, though, by misreading my intentions. It’s not a fucking lineage war. It’s a discussion about the origins of the most commonly practiced set in CMA. Not only is it relevant in that Tantui is not typically known as a Xingyi set, it’s relevant in that Tantui is a part of a gajillion different styles.
I said: Sorry, Unless you are older than Tim, practiced in China back with his teachers, can give me a certified letter from his teachers calling him a liar, I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Notice, he is right there are a shit ton of VERSIONS. HE didn’t say it was the original, he didn’t say who invented it, nor did he say it was exclusive.
And notice that I’m sure as hell not saying it’s illegitimate to have it in Xingyi. If I was, as someone who practiced Tantui and Xingyi, I’d be a hypocrite.
Now would I like to know how Cartmell learned it as part of his Xingyi? Sure – maybe I’ll even write him about it. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall him saying that his Tantui was passed on separately or specifically devised ex nihilo for the Xingyi he learned, either.
Now, I respect what you write even when I disagree. Right now I’m of the opinion that you or your school has a problem with Lam Kwong Wing.
The reason is, you read a whole bunch of stuff not mentioned by either myself or the other poster and jumped to a conclusion.
The only reason I know who Kwong Wing Lam is is from reading these threads. My club is in rural Ontario. Hell, I don’t even know why anything I’m saying would have to do with him.
So to sum up. I’m not saying there is a “real” Tantui out there, or that yours/mine/anyone’s version sucks. I personally can’t visualize what a Xingyi-flavoured Tantui would look like but this is not code for “It’s a stupid idea.” I’m saying I honestly can’t see in my head what it might look like.
What I am saying is that the spread of it can in all likelihood be traced to a known event in CMA history, and I’m expressing a opinion that in all likelihood, most versions of Tantui practiced today come from it. Hell, even Bruce Lee learned it in school. This is not a statement thats prejudiced for or against anyone, unless they want to believe that their school’s stuff just appeared out of nowhere, by dint of their teacher or foreteacher’s genius.
Tantui is the name of one of the basic Jingwu forms. It’s the remnant of a now-extinct Islamic kung fu style. It is not a Xingyiquan form. I know it because I study Mizong through the Jingwu influence.
Or did you misread the intent of the posts?
That what it seems like right now and you don’t want to back off your position. It is a form in Che style Xingyi.
Tim says:
"Xing Yi Shi Er Lu Tan Tui was a set created by Che Yizhai for basic training. It is a combination of the standard Shaolin Tan Tui set modified around Xingyiquan principles.
Send away your email. When you post it to prove me wrong I’ll say hmmm I never said Tan Tui was created by anyone. I said Tan Tui is within many styles.
Oh and when you talk about DNA, skepticism, JingWu, dates, etc it is lineage.
It wasn’t dickish of me at all. I admit I was mistaken in assuming it was never ported into any Xingyi style. Unfortunately, the conversation spun away from that into the suggestion that all these arts developed Tantui separately, or grafted them on with no common historical impetus – and that’s really doubtful. I never had a chance to say I was mistaken directly. I’ll do so now.
Given that Cartmell’s is the only example I have ever heard of Tantui being grafted onto any of the three internals (and I think, probably the only example anyone here has heard of), it’s hardly something to get your back up about. And frankly, if a zillion other internal stylists claim to have Tantui, I’ll still do a double take.
Unfortunately, the conversation spun away from that into the suggestion that all these arts developed Tantui separately,
Uh no. That is all on you. No one said such a thing in either thread.
or grafted them on with no common historical impetus
Again that was you.
– and that’s really doubtful. I never had a chance to say I was mistaken directly. I’ll do so now.
Notice again I never said anything and still haven’t about grafting, sucking, creating, or who hgas the real Tan Tui. You have been arguing with yourself.
Before, you say but Errant said. No he initially said that Tan Tui existed through many arts ( notice this doesn’t imply self creation).
You decided to bring in the extinct styles, the date it was introduced into a curriculum, and who had it first. That is you spinning it away from a simple “it exists in other styles.”
Given that Cartmell’s is the only example I have ever heard of Tantui being grafted onto any of the three internals (and I think, probably the only example anyone here has heard of), it’s hardly something to get your back up about. And frankly, if a zillion other internal stylists claim to have Tantui, I’ll still do a double take.
My back up?
You are still arguing with yourself.
There is a xingyi form called Tan Tui. There are other Tan Tui forms in other styles. That is all I have said and all I have argued. That is it. That is all emmet said. Hell, I’ll include Errant because he asked what your point was because, it had nothing to do with Xingyi.
You were correcting something that didn’t need to be corrected.
You are the guy that spun a simple comment about a FORM in Xingyi into a huge debate about where it came from and the DNA of Tan Tui in other systems.
It’s about CMA history, which has (gasp) lineages. That’s not a “lineage war.”
It is when you are arguing a point that is non-existent.
Che Style Xingyi not Tim Cartmell’s Shanxi Style Xingyi. Please get it right. If you send of an email I don’t need a hassle because, you are misinterpreting my posts.
This is why I call it a lineage war.
Nowhere does he say all these style created Tan Tui. He said it “is found throughout several…”
See? This is you turning it towards “spontaneously incorporated…” no one said that anywhere else.
Adopting does not mean creating, here in America, that means you added it to your style.
The Jingwu curriculum was created in 1909 or 1910. If there were arts practicing it a significant time before then, you would be undoubtedly correct – but I have my doubts.
I mean had it before it was widely disseminated via a known historical event.
This is a lineage war because you are injecting this “spontaneous creation” argument that doesn’t exist into an original xingyi thread. No one has said it and until I re-read the posts I had no clue where it came from. I still don’t. I just know it originated with you.
Now this is hilarious:
Of course not. But I think many of the styles that have Tantui now adopted it when it became part of the basic phys ed program for many, many Chinese schools – and that happened after Jingwu, via the Nationalists. There was Tantui before Jingwu, but I doubt it was as widely disseminated.
Well, apparently adopted means the same thing in Canada.
You turned the thread towards who created what not myself, errant, or emmet.
Now, I’m done. If you want to continue arguing that is fine. At this point, after re-reading the posts, you have made an invisible argument.
You actually agree with Errant, about the “adopting” and you are the only one talking about styles “spontaneously incorporatiing” Tan Tui.
All I really have to say is that you need to calm the fuck down. You took a simple mistake I made and interpreted it as an epic libel against Tim Cartmell and for reasons I can’t fathom, Kwong Wing Lam. (Actually, as I have no idea where the fuck that came from, maybe you can come down from the mountain you’ve sanctimoniously straddled and explain why you made that particular accusation.)
Errant obviously had some sort of issue with my contention that Jingwu is almost definitely the root of a lot of the Tantuis floating around. I politely disagreed with him. As far as I was concerned, that was it, until you flew in on a mission to defend people who weren’t being attacked from an accusation that didn’t exist.
The circularity in all of this is a product of your own defensive bullshit – that’s why you needed two posts to even structure this into something you could get your panties in a twist over. For God’s sake, is all the discussion here going to be informed by people’s shellshock from lineage wars? It may amaze you, but it’s not all about malice.
Christ, the only thing that makes this not a symptom of the stupidity in Bullshido’s culture is the fact that other sites are so much worse.
Christ, the only thing that makes this not a symptom of the stupidity in Bullshido’s culture is the fact that other sites are so much worse.
Yes, I know and it is even funnier because people won’t admit their culpability. You have just joined that group. Welcome to the club.
I’m sorry, was that your explanation of why you thought I was trolling Kwong Whatever? Or does that omission merely make the above a hypocritilarious statement?