24.03.2013 Views

Martial Arts Of The World - Webs

Martial Arts Of The World - Webs

Martial Arts Of The World - Webs

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Not only the origins of the respective styles, but the veracity of this<br />

classification system itself have been questioned. <strong>The</strong> presence of softness,<br />

circularity, and even postures similar to those of taiji and the other “internal”<br />

soft styles has been noted for Shaolin styles. For example, the popular<br />

Southern Shaolin art of yongchun (wing chun) embodies relaxation, yielding,<br />

and clinging energy in its chi shou (chi sao; sticking hands) techniques,<br />

along with linear punches. By the same token, Chen-style taiji utilizes<br />

forceful stamping and explosive movement as well as rhythmic, wholebody<br />

motion. Xingyi is linear and forceful, its internal classification<br />

notwithstanding.<br />

In this vein, Stanley Henning has presented compelling historical arguments<br />

that the distinction between internal and external is spurious.<br />

Tracing the first reference to an Internal School (Wudang Boxing) as distinct<br />

from an External School (Shaolin Boxing) to the Qing dynasty (1644–<br />

1912) and to historian and Ming supporter Huang Zongxi (1610–1695),<br />

Henning puts forth the hypothesis that the split developed as a misinterpretation<br />

of work that was intended as an anti-Manchu parable alluding to<br />

the fall of the Ming to the Manchu Qin dynasty. He goes on to note that<br />

the principles of both soft/internal and hard/external are apparent in Chinese<br />

fighting arts in general, regardless of the labels imposed under the softhard<br />

dichotomy. Both the political motivations of the initial division of the<br />

arts during the Qing dynasty and the artificiality of an internal-external<br />

split are transmitted orally within Chinese Boxing, although a variety of<br />

hypotheses coexist.<br />

Nevertheless, the popular opinion holds that there is a meaningful distinction<br />

between the internal and external schools. Robert Smith, Chinese<br />

martial arts master and author of the first books in English on the arts of<br />

baguazhang, taijiquan, and xingyiquan, in a body of work spanning three<br />

decades, steadfastly maintains profound differences between the two categories<br />

on all levels. At least through the end of the twentieth century, the<br />

internal-external taxonomy prevails.<br />

Thomas A. Green<br />

See also Baguazhang (Pa Kua Ch’uan); Boxing, Chinese; Boxing, Chinese<br />

Shaolin Styles; Ki/Qi; Taijiquan (Tai Chi Ch’uan); Xingyiquan (Hsing I<br />

Ch’uan)<br />

References<br />

Draeger, Donn F., and Robert W. Smith. 1981. Comprehensive Asian<br />

Fighting <strong>Arts</strong>. Tokyo: Kodansha International.<br />

Henning, Stanley E. 1997. “Chinese Boxing: <strong>The</strong> Internal versus the<br />

External in the Light of History and <strong>The</strong>ory.” Journal of the Asian<br />

<strong>Martial</strong> <strong>Arts</strong> 6: 10–19.<br />

Reid, Howard, and Michael Croucher. 1983. <strong>The</strong> Way of the Warrior: <strong>The</strong><br />

Paradox of the <strong>Martial</strong> <strong>Arts</strong>. London: Eddison Sadd Editions.<br />

External vs. Internal Chinese <strong>Martial</strong> <strong>Arts</strong> 121

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!