Talk:Leopard Kung Fu
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page is part of the Wikipedia Martial Arts Project.
Please help ensure that it follows those guidelines as much as is reasonable; |
|
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. |
I might be treading on dangerous ground here since I admittedly don't know a lot of KF stuff. But I found this article a little out of place with the rest of the related pages for the following reasons:
- "Leopard is the most versatile style of the 5" seemed like an arrogant statement. I don't think it belongs here unless there is a consensus of the practitioners of the 5 elements styles which agrees with that statement. Can anyone provide any insight or support of this fact?
- Also, "In order to master the leopard, you must become the leopard" seems like it should be in a kung fu movie, not in an encylopedic article. If that concept is important, and needs to be conveyed, it should be phrased in more general terms, like "Mastery of this style is best accomplished by imitating the properties of the leopard as much as possible," however that is true for all animal styles.
- Since these articles mostly serve to differentiate the different styles from each other, certain parts of this page are redundant since they apply to all styles. Unless the hand and foot movements are made to be very fast explicity so they cannot be seen at night, mentioning that does not make this style any different. All foot and hand movements are hard to see at night, no matter what the name of your style. The goal of experienced practitioners of any kung fu style is always to perform strikes as fast as possible. Also the use of the adjective "blinding" in this phrase seems out of place.
- Related to the above point, the article mentions blocking and striking at the same time (with the same limb) as a unique element. I have seen this concept in play in many different martial arts and indeed in other styles of kung fu. While its valid to mention that this style makes good use of it, I don't think its valid to claim exlusivity of the technique.
- Personally, I don't see all that much wrong with this artiacal. I study martial arts, and I think this depicts the style rather well. Yes, some of the lines he used were a bit corny, and in many styles you can hurt your opponent while blocking, but that's not the same as striking and blocking at the same time. It is rather unique for a style to widely use this technique, though I'm not sure if it is used in other styles. However, that just shows that it's not an extremely common technique, so that could be an defining aspect of this particular style. However, though it is a very fast style, any style would be nearly invisible at night. So that should be removed. Also, the Tiger is a stronger animal than the leopard. Aside from that, I have no other issues with this article.
As is, the article seems like its was written in part by someone who was trying to advertise the style for some purpose. I would be curious to find out if there are any Leopard-Style kung fu schools that link directly to this page. --Vanchuck 05:55, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Also, "In order to master the leopard, you must become the leopard" seems like it should be in a kung fu movie, not in an encylopedic article. If that concept is important, and needs to be conveyed, it should be phrased in more general terms, like "Mastery of this style is best accomplished by imitating the properties of the leopard as much as possible," however that is true for all animal styles.
The author has answered his own question here, I would have to agree with the rest of his comments.
[edit] contradiction
in this page - i quote
"These five animals originally represented the five classical Chinese elements before developing into their own styles. Snake is usually Earth, Tiger is Metal, Crane is Wood, Dragon is Fire, Leopard is Water."
however in the related article about snake style there is a direct contradiction to this
"These five animals originally represented the five classical Chinese elements before developing into their own styles. Snake is usually Earth, Tiger is Fire, Crane is Metal (which also doubles as Air), Dragon is Water, and Leopard is Wood" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_Kung_Fu)
I'm not going to claim that I know which is correct, I'm just trying to alert people who might.
This article contradicts ITSELF: The other four animals being Crane (Bai He), Tiger (He), Snake (She), and Dragon (Lung). These five animals originally represented the five classical Chinese elements before developing into their own styles. -Snake is Earth-, -Tiger is Metal-, Crane is Wood, Dragon is Fire, -Leopard is Water-.
The proof behind this element/animal system is the contention that one animal "beats" another, and their appropriate corresponding elements also "overpower" one another. For instance, Tiger (Fire) is killed by -Snake (Water)-. And -Tiger (Fire)- beats -Leopard (Metal)-. Water puts out fire, whereas fire "melts" metal. Completely ridiculous...68.239.215.185 15:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
