Talk:Wuxia/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Unicode

Are these unicode characters not working for anyone else? Or do I need to download another font? --Koyaanis Qatsi

You do have to have Han fonts installed to see them, and most people don't (I certainly don't). The author seems to have gotten it right, though; I checked the Unicode specs and the characters shown are "Wu3" and "Shen1 Xia2", respectively, meaning roughly "military hero". There is an alternate character for "Xia2" (侠), but I don't know enough about Mandarin to know which is appropriate--I defer to the author on that. --LDC
The Xia I put in is Traditional version. The one you show here is Simplified version. Since there are often "many to one" mappings from traditional to simplified Chinese. It makes more sense to use the traditional version to reduce ambiguity (especially when it is in UNICODE). Imagine a "one to many" mapping in the opposite direction cannot resolve conflict if any.
If you are using MS Internet Explorer 5.0 or above, you can temporarily change the View/encoding to Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese. If your MSIE lacks the required font, IE will ask you if you want to download the text display support pack. If you answer yes and select the download location as "internet", your browser is capable to display the font within minutes. You can repeat the process for Arabic, Korean, Hewbrew, Thai etc. until your browser can show all Unicode characters from all over the world. If you are using Netscape, then you are limited to one font at a time per page. In this case, switch to Traditional Chinese encoding and Netscape will display both characters in this article provided a Chinese font is made available to Netscape.
Go to Unicode and HTML page to test if your browser can display multi lingual text on the same page.
- Anon


Thanks, that's very helpful. I can, I just don't have the Korean and Chinese fonts. --Koyaanis Qatsi

The move

I just moved the page fr. "Wu Xia" to "Wuxia". The former has 2000 Googles, the latter (now-title) has 129,000 Googles (not just once or twice more common, but 65.5 times more common). --Menchi 02:17 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I don't understand:

However, the same audience may have trouble accepting this type of fantasy because the heroes are supposed to be regular people that possess superpower.

This is "Western audience may have trouble accepting the Wuxia type of fantasy because the Western heroes...". Isn't it? -- Error

Yes, I think that's what it's supposed to mean, by the original writer.
But my sibling and I, as children growing up in Taiwan, never really liked it because we don't understand how men can fly can swinging their legs back & forth. But when we watched Crouching Tiger in Canada, it didn't seem the least bit odd to us. Although, thinking again, it may appear ridiculous, but Crouching didn't to us.
--Menchi 04:35 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
I didn't like that part in Crouching. The flying seemed very false. Now, in Zu Warriors or Superman it's more believable. Subjective, of course -- Error
First of all, the flying part is what tells the wuxia genre from the regular martial art genre. If you don't like the fantasy part, you are not ready for the genre. Wire work has improved tremendously in the past 4 decade of the wuxia history. If you watch some early works, you'd notice a lot of kicking during the "flying". Probably the actor was trying to struggle with his balance, or a still actor may look too much like a flying mannequin so the director just tell them to kick like mad man. You actually see the same kind of kicking and waving movement from almost all Hollywood stuntmen who jump from a bridge or building. The modern approach of using graceful slow motion movement or even a superman style fixed posture looks nicer to the eyes. The Matrix used the more graceful moves and they look really nice. If you have watched the 2004 Olympics opening ceremony, the god Eros who flew and 'walked' gracefully and slowly in the air was very pleasing too. If that actor kicked and waved like a typical Hollywood stuntman, it probably would have ruined the whole show. Kowloonese 22:14, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Zu Warriors

Is Zu Warriors wuxia? It seemed to me quite different to Crouching Dragon. More like a cross of Tolkien, Star Wars, Dragon Ball and Siggraph demos. There wasn't much of actual martial arts. -- Error


Zu Warriors should be classified as Xuan-huan not Wu-xia. --Geckothesidhe 04:05, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Splitting xia (philosophy) off of this article?

I note that this article has two very distinct halves, the first half focusing entirely on the concept of xia and only the second actually talking about xia in film. It seems to me that these two topics should be treated separately, with this article's intro having a link to the article about xia rather than explaining the entire content. Any major objections to me doing so? Bryan 02:01, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Go ahead. I've already split the philosophy part off as its own section. -- [[User:Ran|ran (talk)]] 20:26, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC) (loving wuxia)

Wrong Perception

you have all got the wrong perception, wuxia flying in these films are based on how, martial arts,breathing and being one with nature can boost your skills.The flying is just depicting how light oneself can be made , to flow with the wind using elegant movements (the circular motions of shaolin, or the elegancy of Tai Chi) user:wongdai 16:34 31 march 2007

What does wuxia really mean?

Having waited for the article to repair itself it seems it has got more bloated instead with questionable additions that I've got to add my two-cents' worth. First, the easy issues:

Is wuxia popular in Korea? I've never heard of anyone making or writing a wuxia fiction or film in Korea. I've always thought the phenonemon to be peculiar to Chinese culture, and remember, the genre is in literature and in films. Transporting wuxia into Kill Bill does not for instance make wuxia native in America.

Second off, I really take issue with wuxia being categorized as a fantasy genre. It's true some wuxia fiction contain fantasy elements but there are many which does not; does that make them any less wuxia than those that do? I'm afraid not. Wuxia does not equivalate with fantasy; it is specifically not characterized by its fantasy elements, and I won't want people getting the wrong ideas. It's not Tolkien or Harry Potter where you met improbable creatures, flying ponies and unicorns. Although admittedly the martial arts element is greatly exaggerated in most wuxia fiction, wuxia can be divided into more fantastical school and more realistic one. For instance Liang Yusheng's fiction is generally much more realistic and probable and is what one possibly closer to what one may encounter in real life; ditto some novels of Jinyong (eg. those set in the Qing dynasty). The other branch, the more fantastical offshoot, can be found in Huang Yi, Zen Warriors and other novels of Jinyong, but the article misleads one into thinking all wuxia is wildly made-up ("improbable accuracy", "circumvent gravity"). Neigong, qinggong and dianxue are all real aspects of Chinese martial arts (though greatly exaggerated in wuxia; don't believe me? Check out Shaolin's website). It's true some wuxia is more fantastic than others but wuxia has a very specific (and usually history-based) milieu and background to them. Those parts ought to be rewritten.

The structure of the article also leaves a lot to be desired. Some parts (like the plot section) seem to be rather superfluous and a little inaccurate. I'm also thinking about transporting Xia (philosophy) back to the main article. The thing about leaving off the Xia to another article, is that Xia is so central to the understanding of a wuxia genre that it is one of elements that ultimately distinguishes and defines the genre (much more than its fantasy element, which is exactly why it is called wuxia in the first place). I propose structuring the article thus:

Wuxia -- 1. Definition 1.1 Characteristics 1.2 Concept of Xia 1.3 Common themes and plot devices 2. Wuxia fiction and its evolution 3. Wuxia films.

Wuxia films are really the offshoot of the fiction counterpart so if you understand the fiction, understanding the filmic elements should come as a breeze. Maybe we can discuss our own understanding of the wuxia genre to improve the article.

Finally, why add the Cantonese transliterations of wuxia ("wo hap")? Google search turns up next to nothing for these.

Just taking time off Xmas to do this. Mandel 20:51, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

Chin Na vs Tui Na

Chin Na is kung fu. Tui Na is massage. How can these be mixed in the same sentence? Kowloonese 21:28, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

In fact even Chin Na is wrong. Chin Na means the art of grabbing an opponent attempting to escape. It has nothing to do with dianxue. Mandel 21:47, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)
They are related. Chin na is the realistic use of pressure points to incapacitate an opponent (at least in my school). Not just grabbing, but crushing points and breaking joints and bones are part of our "na" syllabus (my teachers don't use the word "chin" much). Dim Mak is mostly fairy tale stuff based on those real techniques. Very often in wuxia films you will see someone performing tui na on an opponent who has been "paralysed" by Dim Mak to release the block. They all three relate to the acupressure meridian system. Routinely, when we are taught martial chin na, we are also taught therapeutic tui na to repair such damage at the same time. Again, it may be different for other schools, but ours is very large and famous, hence noteworthy. Fire Star 22:22, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Yes, they're related, but they are not the same. Dianxue is pressurizing acupressure points to render a person immobile, paralyzed or making him or her faint. As for whether dianxue is fairy tale stuff, you can google for a real-life case about an old PRC man who has nabbed more than 100 robbers using dianxue technique. It is in Chinese though. He explicitly refuses to use Chin na techniques in those cases as he says, "they might break the thieves' limbs". In fact, the Shaolin official website has webpages on dianxue techniques, including mentioning some acupoints which can kill or permamently paralyzed a person. Note that "dianxue" and "chin na" are two different terms in Chinese, and can hardly be muddled up. Mandel 23:57, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)
They aren't the same, but they are related and all three have a bearing on the article. The article is about how wuxia exaggerates real life techniques for dramatic purposes. Therefore, perhaps we should mention the ambiguity potential for exaggerated martial movie techniques, and even the many made up techniques? We should include related styles that are sometimes shown as one thing even if they start as another in movies, or are likely to be shown in sequence of a scene together. I did say "mostly fairy tale" as I'm sure it exists, just not the same as in the movies. A lot of people and schools say they can do dianxue, but I don't think that many really have the skills that they claim (and if they do, few of them are talking). I've been in the martial art business for a long time, and people who watch martial art movies routinely confuse 點穴 techniques with 擒拿 techniques, and more besides. Most people who don't train martial arts don't know what to look for to identify specific (or even general) techniques or styles. Our 拿 grabs specific points to definitively and more effectively lock up or incapacitate an opponent; lethally, if need be. We also have our version of 點穴 strikes (instead of locks), that we call 打穴 or just 打. One of our specialty point striking systems is called 金針. In our school 點穴 is considered disreputable, even dishonourable. We are told the story that it is intended solely to permanently damage a person to victimise them, while our 拿 techniques are not just for breaking, but also for restraining without hurting. My teacher's father taught our lock restraints to the police on the Kowloon side (Mong Kok, 望角, I think, I'd have to look it up to be sure) for years for non-lethal use on suspects. So you see, our terminology is diametrically different (a not uncommon situation in the immense world of Chinese martial arts), and both martial usages should probably be reported. Towards that end, which martial arts style(s) do you train? Fire Star 02:27, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
IMHO, Chin Na is martial arts related to acupressure points, but Tui Na is massage related to acupressure points. So Chin Na is on topic with wuxia while the addition of Tui Na was unnecessary. Kowloonese 19:15, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Why the cleanup tag?

"looks like an unfinished merge". huh? me no comprendez? Niz 21:56, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

did a massive re-edit of the whole article, it now has a clean structure, and a logical flow, and clean english sentences. so i removed the cleanup and attention flags. looks good now. Niz 20:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
No it doesn't yet. You only did a cleanup, the attention tag I put back. Mandel 22:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
it wold help to explain what exactly is is need of attention on the talk page.... Niz 08:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
The history of wuxia is lacking, the rest is poorly done. It doesn't explain the genre well. Mandel 16:15, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Justice Dee

Near the bottom of the section titled "Earlier precedents", there is a link to "Justice Dee", the label and the linked article do not match. The article does not mention who Justice Dee is. Either the alias should be added to the article or the label of the link should be corrected. Kowloonese 20:26, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Justice Dee and Justice Bao are different men and are different stories. I do not understand why Justice Dee is linked to Bao Zheng. Because Justice Dee is the Tang dynasty judge and later chancellor, 狄仁傑. His story is best chronicled by Robert van Gulik in the so-called Judge Dee detective series.

Bias

I think that the second paragraph under 'Suspension of Disbelief' may be biased. I don't think that Western audiences find the exaggerated abilities of martial artists in Wu Xia to be any more unbelievable than the other fantasies mentioned. There is a growing audience for this genre in the U.S. (Commercial success of Crouching Tiger, House of Flying Daggers and especially Hero which was a box office #1 when it was released).

I bet the person who wrote that had an experience similar to my wife's. She tried to get some of her school friends -- big fans of things like Star Wars and FF7 -- interested in House of Flying Daggers, and was told that it was "boring", "unrealistic" and "why are they all flying?" This also happened to a friend of ours in New York with his girlfriend -- she thought the Matrix was all that, but she couldn't make head or tail out of Hero. He speculated that some of this was racial -- they didn't want to make the effort to understand it because it was "Chinese" and therefore perceived as being unredeemably foreign and incomprehensible. I'm the first person to agree that there is a growing audience for wuxia in the states, especially since Asian television has been showing some of the best modern productions. But overall, I think you're still going to have to overcome Western-centric bias. There needs to be a lot more Asian visibility in Western media. --Bluejay Young 20:58, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
I think this particular kind of bias stems from the way many people are completely unaware of how thoroughly they are steeped in their own culture's assumptions. We all tend to be a little blind to the existence of our own theatrical 'rules.' The fictional impossibilities in The Matrix are firmly within the bounds of common fantasy themes for Western viewers. There's a whole lexicon of assumptions for things someone with super-powers might be able to do in the middle of a fight: hit someone so hard they fly backwards through a building? No problem. Fly without wings? Sure. Turn invisible? Fine. Melt through a wall? Happens all the time. Become feather-light but not weightless and dance lightly up a bamboo stem? NO WAY!!! You can't do that, what kind of crazy thing is that? The Westerner's disbelief suffers a blow. When I saw Iron Monkey a while back I finally realized I was looking at a genre I didn't know the rules for, and further, that I'd seen those rules in play before, and had totally, totally missed it. I thought that "that semi-flying thing in Crouching Tiger" was some clever innovation, which turned up for a not-quite-so-well-done encore in House of Flying Daggers. "Biased" is semantically accurate, but a dismissive way to describe this. I greatly enjoyed all three of those movies, but I would have had a much richer experience if I'd been exposed to a few basics first. While I agree more Asian visibility in Western media offers a potential solution to the issue of not understanding the differences in assumptions in what a main character might be magically capable of (after all, it only took me three movies to get a clue), particularly on a nationwide scale, I also think a more direct approach is available to individuals. You can tell people what the assumptions are. You may first need to point out what the Western assumptions are, since many people are unaware that they even have these assumptions. After that, the kind of information to be found under the heading Martial arts in the article is a perfect place to begin. --Jusuwa 10:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
It seems less a matter to me of assumptions, more that where The Matrix explains the source of its characters' superhuman abilities, Crouching Tiger relies on either prior knowledge of Wudangquan or, indeed, suspension of disbelief. I keep hearing that westerners have an irrational need to have plot points explained. Does that count as an assumption? Caswin 17:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Japanese adaptation of wuxia concepts

This article talks about several common wuxia concepts e.g.:

  • use of nèilì (内力) or nèijìn (內勁)
  • ability to engage in diǎnxué (T: 點穴 S: 点穴)

These concepts can also be found in the popular Japanese manga/anime Naruto. The anime's explanation of chakra is identical to the Chinese nèilì. One of the characters, Hyuga Neji, uses a technique to hit certain target points on the opponent's body to block the flow of their chakra. Such technique is identical to diǎnxué.

-- Kowloonese 01:36, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

There has been a huge influence of Chinese literature on Japan. Apparently "Water Margin" actually started the fad for elaborate tattoos among the samurai, which is carried on by the modern yakuza. And, while the philosophical underpinnings are a little different (sparing a man's life wasn't usually an insult in China, but it was in Japan), wuxia have created the foundation for most Asian action stories, from samurai films to manga and anime to Korean gangster movies or period drama. The wuxia genre, with its paradigm of the wandering, not-entirely-law-abiding hero who's good at martial arts, is basically the paradigm of Zatoichi and other nagaremono films.
The chakra mentioned in Naruto is usually called ki in Japan, the Japanese reading of 氣 (qì). Naruto uses the Sanskrit term chakra probably because the author wanted to give it a slightly more "magical" feel, and also because historical ninja were Shingon-sect Buddhists, and might have used Sanskrit terms like chakra instead of Chinese words like qi. Modern ninja of the Togakure style use "ki", from what I can tell.
I don't know what the name of diǎnxué is in Japanese, but similar techniques are found in jujutsu, aikijutsu, and ninjutsu (specifically in taijutsu). Some of the techniques are borrowed directly from Chinese martial arts, while some might be indigenous; most were probably independently developed based on acupuncture learned from China. Nagakura shin8 11:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Eunuch = Plot Seeds?

Under Plot an editor added in bold text that the Plot seeds in Wuxia involves eunuch in East Chamber. This is rodomontade. This editor/user apparently reads limited Wuxia novels and can not understand the Plot refers to the whole spectrum of Wuxia i.e. the genre, rather than specific wuxia novels in the Ming/Qing dynasty. The texts involving 'eunuch' must be deleted to give the descriptions proper perspective. Alex 28Spet06

I agree, this section needs to be clarified to represent 'sample' or 'typical' wuxia plots. Otherwise, as is, readers may be under the false impression that "Plot refers to the whole spectrum of Wuxia i.e. the genre, rather than [any] specific wuxia novels [and/or films]." But I would add that the overthrow of the emperor/dynasty (and restoration of Han rule, in the case of the Qing Dynasty) is a very typical and regularly used plot/subplot within a great many wuxia (novels, films and TV serials). But certainly not all.
For example, as it applies to CTHD, neither the film nor the novels have anything to do with the overthrow of Manchu rule, while it is an important subplot of the Taiwanese TV series adaptation.
Again, as is (and though very well written), 'Plot' applies all samples listed to all of wuxia fiction, which of course is incorrect. It needs to be cleaned up and/or clarified. Dialwon 22:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Jiang Hu = Martial Arts World?

No. The martial arts world is called 武林 'wu3 lin2'; it is only a sub-set of the Jiang Hu.


There's an amusing scene at the start of a Xu Ke film where a Chinese official tries to explain to a Portuguese soldier the difference between Jianghu and Wulin, or even what they are, and completely fails - so mistaking them is perhaps understandable.

I read the description of Jianghu here and on the separate (very short) page. To say anything meaningful about Wuxia as a genre this section needs to be expanded a lot. Jianghu is a much more complex concept than is made out in this article - in fact recently CCTV had a week-long documentary series just discussing this - and it's a central concept to this genre. Moreover different writers'/directors' characterization of it are very different - for instance Jin Yong emphasizes the role of understood codes of conduct between people, whereas Gu Long and Xu Ke portray it more as a lawless, chaotic/arbitrary existence. However overall it denotes a state of existance rather than a society of any kind, and is not necessarily limited to or defined by the martial arts. Wulin usually describes the society of martial artists within Zhongyuan - even in Jin Yong there is not always a Wulin Mengzhu, the importance of Wulin as a society varies over time, and anything outside the central plain is typically viewed as external to their society (even though it may play an important role in the story - for example, Qidan in TLBB).

Generally this page seems to be a description of how a subset of the Wuxia genre, mostly film-based, is perceived by Western audiences. It doesn't cover a very wide scope of the genre either, and the introduction seems to interpret it with a slight Japanese slant (although that may be my misreading of it). If that's the objective of the page, that's fine, but it needs a lot more work to be a fair description of Wuxia as a genre.

rename Wǔxiá to Wuxia

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move back as previously move was undiscussed and Wuxia follows naming conventions. JPG-GR (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

Wǔxiá → Wuxia — Move article from Wǔxiá back to Wuxia, because it is the name used in English language press, when talking about movies, etc. —70.55.85.177 (talk) 06:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Support move - as per WP policy we don't include pinyin tone marks in article titles (though they should appear in the lead). Badagnani (talk) 06:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Support move. No reason to add the tone marks. Andrewa (talk) 09:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Support move. On the grounds that the earlier move was a major change that was accomplished without discussion and as others here have commented, it would not have had support. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC).

Discussion

Any additional comments:
User:Sesshomaru moved it from Wuxia a few days ago without discussion. I support it having the same format as other Chinese place names. kwami (talk) 06:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
I feel the change is valid because without the tone marks, a person would not be able to find the page. The tones can be included in the lead. If no one changes it briefly, I will make the change myself. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 17:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't do that. Instead, include both spellings in the lead, and then they can easily find the article through the existing redirect at Wǔxiá. Andrewa (talk) 23:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Giang hu?

What is the relationship between wuxia and giang hu? Can anyone point to any reliable sources that compare these? --Beefyt (talk) 02:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

  • If you mean jiang hu, the simplest answer is that jiang hu is the setting common to the Wuxia genre. Another important term, wulin, references a sub-set of that setting representing the characters who occupy the setting. It should be noted that wulin are a fundamental component of jiang hu.Simonm223 (talk) 16:11, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Common Man (平平凡凡)?

In the Books section; who is this? A quick search of the character string given after his name (pingping fanfan; calm-calm-ordinary-ordinary?) in the Chinese Wikipedia doesn't even turn up an article at all, so I find it hard to believe that he is the greatest Wuxia writer. And the other authors are all given either Chinese names or westernisations, not (what appears to be) a translation of a nickname or pen name, which makes it seem all the more dubious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.179.22.79 (talk) 11:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that really looks like someone's little joke. The contributor had plenty of time to respond to the "citation needed" tag but never did. I've removed it. Bertport (talk) 13:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Update films section...?

Jet Li's latest movie is no longer Fearless, it's Forbidden Kingdom (who knows, he may even be working on newer stuff?). There really shouldn't be references to "latest" unless one know for sure none more will ever be made. Otherwise, one's simply putting in material that will be quickly outdated, rather than facts that stand the test of time. Mgmirkin (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Definition

The page doesn't really state clearly what Wuxia is. If anyone could produce a good definition in the page's introduction that would be satisfactory- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.228.201.236 (talk) 12:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

tone marks

I'm objecting to the use of tone marks on every mention of the word (wuxia) in the page. This is inconsistent with other Chinese-related pages and actually displeasing to look at when reading the article. Unless anyone can come up with a good reason for the tone marks being included anywhere but the lead, I will remove them.Headbeater (talk) 03:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Pre-Wuxia source for Dianxue?

We have been overhauling Dim Mak and hit a bit of a wall on textual sources for the history of the concept. The earliest references I have been able to find are Jin Yong and Liang Yusheng... does anybody have access to the textual sources these authors derived this practice from? Is there any evidence that Dim Mak predates the 20th century iteration of the Wuxia genre? It's certainly not mentioned in the classics and even the Qing dinasty Wuxia stories I've read don't mention it. Most martial arts relied heavily on an oral tradition and as such we don't have clear pre-20th century historical records for practices in most... A few notable exceptions aside... and those notable exceptions don't mention Dianxue. We would appreciate any information on textual sources you guys can provide.

PS: I am presently operating under the assumption that Dim Mak was invented by Wuxia authors. As such I've changed the skills entry accordingly. I am very willing to admit I'm wrong if somebody can point to earlier textual references.Simonm223 (talk) 17:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

As a Hong Konger, I will have to say by certain WP:OR, these techniques should be base on the Chinese Acupuncture method of medication. MythSearchertalk 03:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
See the thing is that anyone familliar with TCM can certainly confirm that there is a link between the TCM theory and Dianxue. However the non-fiction references never include the ability to paralyze, silence, wound or kill through use of accupressure meridians. On the Chinese language version of wikipedia there is reference to a Qing dynasty account of Shaolin Temple which says that Zhang Sanfeng created a form of gongfu based around accupressure meridians but all that source provides is the supposed name of the form and an attribution to a culture hero so it's almost useless as a source for the actual origins. What interests me is when did martial artists begin to develop the idea that they could use TCM principles to wound Qi? I, myself, have also been straying dangerously close to WP:OR on this and so I'm a bit concerned.Simonm223 (talk) 14:09, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I myself always view the method as fictional, maybe except a few exceptions around the head, elbow and knees.(the funny bone, reaction joint and weakest spot on the head on the side.) I have never heard of real-life martial artist using these techniques in a sense out of the usual scientific explanation. MythSearchertalk 02:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
What I find particularly odd is the number of references that say "legends say" but don't then mention which legend. Chinese folklore is special in the extent to which it was documented. A 3000 year old written record will do that. So this discrepancy has always struck me as odd.Simonm223 (talk) 17:41, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't think I know of any source useful to this. The Jin Yong influence might be too great to modern Wuxia writtings and human mind, it so how became a norm and following fictions use them extensively(to my knowledge, some Japanese Manga and Korean manhwa uses these idea as well.) and this in part influenced TV shows of traditional stories, and changes future the mind of the ordiences to think that the idea comes in very early in the history. MythSearchertalk 02:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I would suggest that we need to clearly distinguish the term dian mai/xue from the concept of attacking pressure points. There are a number of separate question:

  • what is the earliest known occurrence of the term 點脈 / 點穴 in Chinese literature? Is it in Wuxia? This is a purely philological question independent of the evolution of the concept of pressure points
  • when did this first appear in western (US) literature? Likely with Keehan's "Dim Mak" around 1967, but the possibility remains that there were earlier instances, after all, Keehan must have picked it up somewhere.
  • what is the first attestation of the Japanese term kyusho, and when was this first made into a jutsu of martial arts? We have some online sources suggesting the 17th century, but we need better references.
  • what is the earliest evidence of "pressure point attacks" in Chinese martial arts? zh-wiki appears to suggest "Qing dynasty", which may also amount to the 17th century, but again we need better sources for this

of course this is all tied to the much older notions of qi and acupuncture, but the question is when exactly does it become tangible in martial arts, and when is it first called dianmai / dianxue / kyushojutsu.

These questions would be a tall order even for a sinologist, and I am not capable of researching them myself.

An interesting twist is that "Dim Mak" seems to have become an actual style within Tai chi chuan and/or karate, but this is a development of the 1990s, as taught by Dillman/Montaigue (see Dim Mak). I cannot judge whether this is in any way respectable or effective, but of course new styles form all the time, and most martial arts are not in fact measured by their effectiveness (tai chi certainly doesn't focus on effectivity, and neither does karate. people train these styles for fun, mental health and physical fitness, not to be badass fighters, so the question is really beside the point). --dab (𒁳) 09:15, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wuxia/Archive_1&oldid=1068922725"