I have heard some people say that silat is just an Indonesian version of Chinese martial arts (kung fu). Is that correct ?
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26466 There is a discussion on the links between Chinese arts and silat there ^
Some people say it. It's not true. The Malay world has been influenced by many cultures including India, China, Arab and Europe. This influence extended to the indigenous fighting arts of which there are hundreds if not thousands of very diverse systems and styles. The Indonesian martial arts are syncretic, but in the end they are their own thing historically and technically.
They are simular, just as TKD and Karate are simular. Silat actually makes a good complement to Kung fu, or so I've heard.
Mmm, nope. TKD is a direct derivative of Shotokan. Some Silat styles have strong influences from various Chinese martial arts. Some are derived from them. Others very definitely aren't. "Kung Fu" encompasses thousands of systems and styles from a huge, ancient culture - everything from hey diddle diddle straight up the middle punching styles to mounted archery to wrestling. Silat isn't quite so all over the place, but there's still a whole slew of things called "Silat". There are Sumatran stylists who only fight from the ground, Dayaks whole specialize in the sword, shield and blowgun, long-range stand up systems and so on. It just doesn't pay to generalize like that.
Lol did you read my post mate? I wrote so i heard, which means I was just adding it as an after thought. Easy jumping on people mate.
Yep! Kung Fu is a broad term for Chinese Martial Arts as you know so I guess you can say that Silat can be used to describe the indiginous fighting methods of Indonesia.
I was planning to visit Indonesia this year, until the Tsunami struck. I could of had a first hand look at the creators of Silat. :cry:
There's been a couple people making some pretty arrogant (and ignorant) claims about that on MA forums in the past while. I've probably gotten a little sensitive on the subject. Beg your pardon.
...But that being said, I still stand by the statement. The TKD/Shotokan comparison really is a poor one. And while there are certain CMA and IMA which certainly make nice complements it's probably not true in general. The "Not quite Silat..." thread which Silat Pupil refers to will give some background on the, err, frank and productive exchange of views.
Does Kung fu look like this? I guess the answer is, "yes" it's like kungfu... if kungfu looks like this... http://homepage.mac.com/robertstover/Silat/iMovieTheater42.html
There is alot of similarities between Shotokan and TKD, you have to admit that. I do TKD and I hate it when people say that my art is exactly the same as Karate, though I do believe there is some similarities.
There was an excellent scholarly article in JAMA a few years ago about the historical connection between the two.
It's been a while, but from what I remember... 1) None of the "leaders of the kwans" mentioned any sort of indigenous Korean martial arts experience. 2) They all had Shotokan rankings. Through the public school system if memory serves. 3) The early TKD forms were all Shotokan forms. 4) During the 1960s TKD began to diverge from Shotokan. That's about the time they changed the forms and began to emphasize high and long range kicking.
Mention that where I live and you will find yourself in a ditch on the side of the road missing your penis. My area is very Korean. :Angel:
