Talk:Chen-style tai chi

message: I know you guys want to keep main TaiJiQuan article in old romanization.
The Chen styles is relative new to the west, and most new literature is in PinYin. Unless you all wildly complain I will be using that to explain alot of things.
And allready alot of temrs in the article is in PinYin like Chenjiagou, henan etc.
I am going to expand this article greatly, and make more emphasis on the style and less on the persons who teach it and their lineage. It will be an too great task to find old romanization for all the chinese expressions. This should not be an article for curious Yang stylists(as I feel it is now) only, but a general article about the Chen martial art styles.
A human 04:28, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I started it a long time ago, hoping a Chen stylist would come along and fill it out a bit. I'm a Wu stylist, though, myself, so it would be great to get some first hand input. While technical info would be interesting, we have to remember what Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, and not get too much like an instruction manual. Biographies of famous Chen family teachers would be very welcome at the redlinks in the article, too. Cheers! --Fire Star 05:13, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old romanization and expansion 

message: There are 3 link now, they all go to association homepages.
Allthough those pages have some info on style and history they are plastered with commercials to buy courses, books and DVDs. And also to show how great their particular teachers are. I am going to remove them all and replace them with links to sites that write about the styles not the people who train them.
A human 05:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links that promote organizations 

message: I am initially going to add the list of variants to the main article, but I feel they should later be expanded and put in seperate articles.
A human 05:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: im pretty sure there are other forms in chen style taiji quan.  They are not as popular and historical as the main forms explained here, but perhaps we could list them here as just a generic list of other forms much as has been done with the weapons --Blckavnger 17:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: in particular i was thinking of the 38 section form supposdly created by Chen Xiaowang combining xin jia and lao jia movements.  Also there are competition forms that are standarized in some parts of the world.  However, since i do not know how much they are practiced im not sure if it should be included.  I am most familiar with lao jia and i know the 38 section.  i do not know if the 38 is practiced enough to be listed; i dont think there should be a description, just a mention along with competition forms (with a little note that they are not traditional).  --Blckavnger 17:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At this point, Hunyuan Taiji is a pretty distinct style, with higher stances and more emphasis on internal cultivation over weapons and martial application. I think is till deserves a section.Herbxue (talk) 05:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Variants 

message: I do realise that the Chenjiaguo people like Chen Bing, Ren Guangyi and Chen Xiaoxing are very visible in the US., has published many english language books and websites. But in China they are not considered anything special. So there is no reason to call Chen Xiaowang: "the standard-bearer for the Chen family's 19th generation" and similar propaganda. Repeating it a thousand times does not make it so. A human 15:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Chenjiaguo people 

message: We've got  a mention weapons....  But shouldn't we also say something like "[Chen style] places special emphasis on the silk reeling Chi-gung exercise set to strengthen the body"?  
Also, should we include something like "[Chen style] is the most external of the internal t'ai chi styles, with many martial applications of the forms obvious to complete beginners to a greater extent than other t'ai chi styles."?
Triponi 13:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of silk reeling 

message: So I guess I am yang stylist somewhat confused by the chen claim to be the original form, i always understood that the yang family practised a guarded internal style that was very effective and a servant learned by stealth and he was allowed to teach to the ROW? Correct me if i am wrong?
:The one thing most agree on is that Yang Luchan learned from Chen Changxing starting around 1820 or so. There are many legendary stories about that process, with actual surviving records of Yang's career dating from 1850 or so, when Yang began teaching the Manchu Imperial family and bannermen in Beijing. --Fire Star 火星 01:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yang and Chen  

message: wikipedia is not a link farm, and though many of those are interesting personally, I plan on scaling down the external links section. One or two examples of each form is sufficient. my criteris for which versions  to include will be video technical quality and compelteness as all are good examples of form. VanTucky 18:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: I created a new section discussing martial application. I tried to keep it down to why Chen tai chi focuses on self-defense and what general types of technique are used commonly. Feel free to expand it  of course, but I hope we can keep from getting into "how-to guide" territory in describing techniques . VanTucky 20:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  new section 

message: There seems to be some confusion in regards to "Old Frame" Form for with "New Frame" and "Cannon Fist" form.  From what I understand "New Frame" and "Cannon Fist" are NOT the same form.
The Video Example section on the unarmed forms has to be reorganized. Its simply mismatched and confusing.
-Bill
January 4, 2007
The organization is correct: The old and new traditions both have a second form nicknamed cannonfist.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.195.19.41 (talk) 20:37, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Form Confusion 

message: Hello everyone. There are a lot of mentions of anecdotal or legendary stories in the article, but few secondary (or even primary) sources. I've added a couple, but we need one for practically every legend if we want it to stay in the article. Cheers! --Bradeos Graphon (talk) 15:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: The following information is removed because it represent original research "Additional information has recently come to light regarding a possible connection to the brothers "Li" who were sworn brothers of a religious order along with Chen Wangting. They are all said to have learned various martial and health arts at the temple they attended. The three of them are credited in the Li family history with having created a practice system called, "Taiji Yang Sheng Gong", meaning "Taiji" (yin-yang flux) life energy cultivation practice approximately. They were said to have begun to tech this to students saying they could be come lions or tigers at their will; Probably meaning the road to martial art skill would be open to them. As with much of this type of regional Chinese history, nothing is absolutely certain, but the Li family even though not too far from Chen Jiagou does not retain any martial arts at this time."  I could not find any reference to this information.  Please add the appropiate information if you want to put this informaton back into the article. ottawakungfu (talk) 13:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of a Section of The Chen Family Origin Story  

message: While improving the readability of the second paragraph in "Other Origin Stories", I see that the point is made that Jiang Fa may or may not have been connected to Chen Changxing.  However, the closing sentence kills this argument by saying that there is no evidence that Jiang Fa and Chen Wangting were connected.  Wait a moment here: wasn't the text talking about Chen Changxing??  So I took the liberty to change Chen Wanting to Chen Changxing.
Can anybody confirm that this is a good change?
Bruno talk 20:16, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work but the relationship is between Jiang Fa and Chen Wanting.  I have corrected the paragraph and added the reference. Thnkx ottawakungfu (talk) 21:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, thanks.  The old narrative was really muddled.  The new one makes things explicit and clear.Bruno talk 20:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to Chen Changxing or Chen Wanting 

message: I'm working hard on improving the lineage trees for the main taijiquan page and for all the family style pages. Please comment on the this tree where you feel improvements can be made and help me by posting information on individuals that aught to be included in the tree and the reason for their significance so that a detailed Chen-style tree can be produced. All individuals to be added that are approved upon (via consensus of course) will be added, unless they threaten to make the tree excessively large whilst adding little value to the overall tree.
The tree on the main page is to focus on the gate keepers of the styles in order to show each family style's lineage without making it excessively large, while the trees on the family style pages are to be more focused on the particular styles, showing a more in depth view of it's development & connection to other family styles. I hope to hear from as many of you as possible & will continue making edits to the tree here as feedback comes in. Thanks. InferKNOX (talk) 22:36, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to the help of many individuals (outside of Wiki) and research on my part, I've hugely increased the size of the Chen-style tree. Please review it and comment on any errors, improvements or other amendments that should be made. Thanks. ~ InferKNOX (talk) 15:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: With assistance from shifu Chen Bing & shifu Chen Xiaoxing, I think this is ready, unless there is contestation here. ~ InferKNOX (talk) 14:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want, you can complete Tian Xiuchen's lineage with his disciples: Ding Dahong (1936), Tian Qiutian (1933), Tian Qiumao (1945) and Tian Qiuxin (1942). Tian Qiutian's lineage continues with [Wang Xiaojun] (1968), and Wang Xiaojun's lineage continues with Félix Castellanos (1965)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmanuelem (talk • contribs) 04:43, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving lineage trees 

message: I corrected the first reference which listed Stephen Berkwick (sic) and Jose Figueroa as co-authors of Ren Guang-Yi's book. The ISBN and flyleaf of the book grants Stephen Berwick and Jose Figueroa copyright, but does not list them as co-authors (though they may well have been translators?)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swandodger (talk • contribs) 08:53, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Please can someone review the validity of the recent edits made by User:Leon taichi, especially the added "Places to go" section. I've manually undone and corrected some of their edits. ~ InferKNOX (talk) 22:20, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits by [[Leon taichi]] 

message: My comments - 
I have removed this section -
"==== Big frame/small frame split ====
Around the time of the 14–15th generation, Chen Village practice is said by some to have differentiated into two related but distinct practice traditions, which are today known as big frame (sometimes called large frame) and small frame. The various practise routines embodied in big/small frame traditions modified and assimilated Chen Wangting's seven set corpus and the original practice routines are now said to have been lost. (Though recent claims are being made that Chen Wangting's 108 form has been rediscovered from two possible sources: senior Beijing disciples of Chen Zhaokui; Chen relatives back in Shanxi Province)
There are conflicting claims about which of these two traditions came first. Western theories and most of the famous masters from Chen Village (see Chen Zhenglei's English language book) tend to favor the view that big frame tradition came first (noting that "small frame" tradition was originally called "new frame"). There is a minority view from outside of Chen Village that tend to favor the reverse view.
There are also conflicting stories about the reason for the differentiation into these two traditions. Zhu Tian Cai comments that small frame tradition routines tended to be practiced by "retired" Chen villagers (and mimicked by younger children). It seems this was because the more demanding leaping, stomping, low frame, and intensive Fa jin of the advanced big frame tradition routines have been eliminated and the retained movements emphasize the training of the soft internal skills. Keep in mind that this is only a tendency and a master of the principles may use them to add fa jing, leaping, stomping, and low frame back to the small tradition at will. Just as a master of the large frame can perform the set small, large, smoothly, with fa jing in every movement, low, middle, or high. The traditions are only significantly different because the elder practitioners tend to focus on longevity and may develop injuries if they practice in the same manner as the younger practitioners.
Other authors, however, say that "big" does not simply mean large exaggerated outer movements and nor does "small" simply mean confined/close outer movements. They argue that in small frame both large and small motions are used—with the smaller motions considered to be more advanced. It is also useful to frame the discussion in terms of human physiology. The large and small frame traditions have similar training methods and are training the same tai chi principles (clear movement of qi, shifting the weight, relaxation, etc.) it is only the external presentation that confuses beginners.
In the book "Chen Style: The Source of Taijiquan" the explanation is given that both the large and small frames were developed at the same time, by two related masters, as distillations and simplifications of the existing routines.
Keep in mind throughout this discussion that no literature of Chen-style before 1932 appears to mention anything about New, old, big or small styles . As with so much of Tai Chi history complete comprehension and certainty is hard to find.
It is important to understand that currently what is called "small frame" or "large frame" are not necessarily accurate representations of past practices, nor past labels. What we have now are actually separations of style, whereas the ideology of "small" and "large" frame originally referred to the relative size and method of movement practice within one style. This is to say that the size and method of practice could vary but the style itself was the same. In today's versions of what is often called small and large, the major difference is that of style and method, which are radically different even down to the basics. Regardless of stylistic divergence or political factions, the original concept of large and small frame practice within any one stylistic method still exists in modern Chen Taijiquan methods."
- Cannot source or reference any of those statements
- most of the text is considered to me personal opinion.
- so I cannot incorporate this text without compromising the structure of the article.
ottawakungfu (talk) 00:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Chen-style t'ai chi ch'uan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110129061452/http://www.cstjq.com/ to http://www.cstjq.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:29, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Chen-style t'ai chi ch'uan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130222055604/http://www.tiancaitaiji.net/ to http://www.tiancaitaiji.net/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110125182331/http://www.silkreeler.com/drupal/node/21 to http://www.silkreeler.com/drupal/node/21
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110208002231/http://home.exetel.com.au/peterwutaichi/ to http://home.exetel.com.au/peterwutaichi/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:18, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Editors interested in this topic are politely asked to participate in the discussion here: Talk:Tai chi#Consistency among Tai chi-related articles. SilverStar54 (talk) 06:21, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential renaming under discussion