From: twcaps@tennyson.lbl.gov (Terry Chan)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: Taiji question - long form versus short forms
Date: 6 Jan 1993 07:02:56 GMT
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department
Reply-To: TWChan@lbl.gov (Terry Chan)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.12.117

Quoting part of Stephen's longer query:

  +>	Given that you could get equivalent instruction, is the long
  +>form better for practice or would it be better to have a short form,
  +>so that you can concentrate on basics?

gkahn@anagld.analytics.com (Gary Kahn) writes:

  +In my opinion, either a long form or a short form is only a means
  +to the end of beginning to master the movements and principles.
  +Taiji does not end with the form, but BEGINS with the form.  The
  +length of the form, whether short or long, is not an impediment to
  +concentrating on the basics.  An hour of proper practice with proper
  +instruction can give the same benefit whether the form is short or
  +long.  Also, learning the short followed by the long, or the long
  +followed by the short form, is fairly easy.  A serious student often
  +ends up doing both at one point or another, but it's not necessary.
  +All in my opinion, of course, as a beginner who's been practicing
  +it for about 12 years.  The important thing is to do the form that
  +your current teacher does.

To some extent, I agree with Gary, but I feel that there are
downsides to just focusing on short forms.  Not wanting to
feel constrained by a poor memory or a lousy editor, I'll
comment in my own way :-).

I agree that the solo form is integral to the development
of the mastery of Taiji style movement and principles.  One
reason being the slowness and relaxedness (is that a word?) 
of the movement helps one and to both develop the "inner", 
relaxed type of power (or jing or ching, for Michael) and
the ability to cultivate and extend that power.  The 
development of such a body and the circulation of internal
energy  provides the commonly touted health benefits of
Taijiquan in a manner accessible to many, including the
old and infirmed as "they" always say  This body and the
power is also integral to the use of Taijiquan as a 
martial art.

In looking back at some of the reasons for the development
of short forms, I found the following:

  - Ch'eng Man-Ch'ing said he did so "[b]ecause the traditional
    form was too long, people lacking patience could not easily
    finish it and, therefore, did not continue practicing.  I
    simplified the form by deleting the repetitions; this made
    it easier for the practitioner to go from the easy to the
    difficult."  [From the _Thirteen Treatises_ (Wile version)].

  - Chen Xiaowang did so for the Chen style and "deleted too many
    repeated actions and simplified too difficult ones."  This 
    simplified form was thus "hailed as a blessing to all
    beginners of the Chen family Taiji."  [_Chen Style Taijiquan_]

  - Wang Peisheng did so for the Wu style because "[t]he idea
    of abridgement and rearrangement occured to the author early
    in 1953 when teaching the traditional complete sequence at the
    Peking Polytechnical Institute, the Railway Sanatorium and a
    number of other institutes.  Owing to the repetitiousness of
    the complete sequence, it takes too much time to learn or
    to practice." [_Wu Style Taijiquan_]

From these writings, and others like them, I have come to conclude
that simple forms are useful for:

  - Providing a means by which the greatest number of people can
    have an exercise for health for a great part of their lives,

  - Providing an excellent basis for introduction to the essentials
    of Taijiquan as a martial art.

Similar to the periodical discussion on what good are forms/kata,
I think that the traditional forms contain a more complete
syllabus of fighting techniques and means by which Taijiquan
movement may be applied (this is of course, amplified and
honed on in push-hands practice).  All simple forms are not
alike.  Most, in addition to eliminatng repetitions, also 
eliminate or simplify/bastardize whole  movements and applications.
I think this is for the worse.

Ch'eng Man-Ch'ing was noted (see for instance, Smith's _Chinese 
Boxing_) for focusing and stressing principle over a set form.
But I will note that he did learn the long form first :-).  I
suspect though, that more often than not, that people with a
more martial orientation tend to focus on the long forms and
certainly on the techniques in the long form.  I have often
wondered if this is why William Ch'en has a 60 movement form
as opposed to the 37 movement form that Ch'eng taught.  

I see an analogy to where fast kicks, complex movements, and
joint locks/ch'in na have been pushed back or eliminated from
the teaching entirely.

If you are serious about learning Taijiquan as a martial art, 
then in my mind, why putz around?  If you can put in the time
to make the short form work for you, it's not much bigger a
deal to work on the long form.   Further,the greater variety
of movement in the long form also exercises the Taiji method
of movement in more ways.   

In my experience, the short form is a way to help people 
master the long form and it works well that way.  But if your 
focus is on the health and body mechanics of Taijiquan and a
lesser (or no emphasis on the martial applications), then the
short forms are excellent for that and go in keeping with a 
tradition of simplifying Taijiquan for health purposes that
probably dates back to Yang Lu-Chan.

Terry Chan
--
Energy and Environment Division   | Internet:  TWChan@lbl.gov
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory      | 
Berkeley, California  USA  94720  | Yeah, right.