Over at Kung Fu Tea, there was an article about the usefulness of the old time Kung Fu villains. Below is an excerpt. The full post may be read here.
Introduction
Antagonists seem to be the critical ingredient that make the martial
arts possible. Yet to understand why that is the case we need to start
by unpacking a few things. An immense range of activities fall within
the category that we term “martial arts,” so much so that simply
defining the term is much more challenging than one might expect.
Still, all of these activities are essentially social pursuits.
The
martial arts are really more about the pedagogy and the discussion of
violence than its actual performance. Indeed, the quality of some
isolated hermit’s technique cannot make them a martial artist. At a
bare minimum they must be willing to pass that skill along, or perform
it for others, before the label really applies.
This raises a few obvious questions. Why should one desire to be a
in a community that practices or passes on these skills? What is the
ultimate utility or meaning of these techniques? Or to put the question
rather crassly, are the varied benefit of practicing a given martial
art worth the time, cost and effort necessary to do so?
It should surprise no one that all sorts of martial arts have
formulated their own answers to these types of questions. I sometimes
think that indoctrinating students into their unique world view is just
as important as the actual transmission of techniques. Indeed, it is an
open question in my mind as to whether the martial arts, as a social
and cultural construction, can even exist without some sort of world
defining narrative.
Psychologists have noted that telling stories is one of the most
basic ways in which humans understand, and attempt to interact, with our
world. In fact, narrative seems to be key to how we as a species
understand the process of causation in the world around us. Sadly,
there is less evidence that the physical world that we seek to
understand is structured in this way. Hence our theories and stories
about the world, while certainly useful, always reveal some aspect of
reality with one hand, as they hide certain things with the other. To
tell stories is human, but it may not be the best way to understand
quantum mechanics.
On the other hand, paying close attention to the stories that people
tell may be absolutely critical when our goal is understanding the
functions of the voluntary communities that individuals create.
This is
critical as not all groups, organizations or styles are attempting to
do the same thing. Not all fighting styles claim to do the same work,
or provide the same social and personal benefits.
Students of martial arts studies thus require a number of discursive
keys capable of opening the door to a more serious and sustained
comparative study of these functions. Sadly, the comparative method is
not commonly seen within martial arts studies. Yet such studies might
help us to understand why, at a given point in time, individuals are
drawn to one martial art versus another. Or why do some types of martial
practice thrive in a given social or economic setting, yet struggle in
another?
Nothing is More Useful than a Bad Guy
This sort of positivist research generally begins when researchers
sit down and begin to measure things. Typically, one will start with the
martial artists themselves. You might collect data on their age, race
or gender. Other socio-economic indicators can be gleaned through
formal surveys or participant observation. One might conduct
interviews, sample social media posts or examine their physical
performance in public demonstrations or fights. Anything that can be
observed can be quantified and fed into a statistical model of human
behavior.
That is all great. Indeed, my earlier research relied quite heavily
on data crunching and “large-N” analysis (granted, at the time I was
more interested in the behavior of political parties and nation states
than martial artists). Yet some of the things that are most useful for
adding nuance to comparative analysis might, at first, be a little less
obvious. For instance, when you walk into the average martial arts
school, it is highly unlikely that anyone will self-identify as the
resident villain.
Yet such a figure is critical to understanding how the
community functions.
This can often be seen in way that individuals discuss their styles. A
good Kung Fu story is mostly a normatively loaded narrative about
conflict which tends to identify one set of actors with positive social
traits (or traits that are understood to be “good” in this situation)
and another set of individuals or forces with negative ones. John
Christopher Hamm has done a wonderful job of exploring the way in which
the literary imaginings of these conflicts have evolved in the sorts of
Wuxia fiction produced in Southern China. Late 19thcentury
novels valorized the sorts of feuding between neighboring clans and
villages that characterized much of Southern Chinese life. In contrast,
Jin Yong’s much later novels reflected the larger scale struggle to
control the “central plains” in an era when many of his readers had
(like his protagonists) fled into exile.
Both folklore (the burning of the Shaolin temple by the Manchus) and
film (Bruce Lee’s perpetual struggle against the markers of racial
injustice and imperialism), offer a wide range of antagonists for our
consideration. Indeed, film studies scholars are correct in noting that
the sorts of villains that films present, from the fear of brainwashing
in the Cold War to the distrust of social and political institutions in
the wake of Vietnam, can tell us a good deal about a society’s values
and preoccupations.
Comparing the sorts of villains that appear in two different genera
of martial arts films (say, the current run of John Wick stories, and
Hong Kong Wuxia films of the 1960s) would doubtless be an informative,
rewarding and enjoyable exercise. A scaled down version of this might
even make a great blog post. Yet ultimately these films are meant to
appeal to a general audience. While they are certainly watched by some
martial artists, they are primarily reflective of larger social trends.
Again, what would be most interesting would be the comparative case
study. How do the smaller scale narratives produced within the martial
arts community, for its own exclusive consumption, reflect or contradict
these larger sets of social anxieties? Again, this is where we in
martial arts studies might leverage our villains to collect some
valuable insights about the varieties of social work performed by
different types of martial arts communities. After all, I am not sure
that there is any reason to expect that the stories told in an MMA gym
and the children’s Taekwondo gym across the street would share the same
sorts of oppositional figures.
" Why should one desire to be a in a community that practices or passes on these skills? What is the ultimate utility or meaning of these techniques? "
ReplyDeleteIn much of Asia, and particularly China and Japan, martials arts cannot be separated from politics. The aim of the community which practices them is therefore political. Not sporting, and not a "hobby" in the Western sense. Think Freemasonry with party political affiliations and paramilitary violence not far beneath the surface for a Western analogy.