Jean Chandler wrote:For a madman like Edelson the sharp is the only realistic training tool.... and if you can't juggle at least 5 of them, you have no business claiming to study fencing.
Kevin Murakoshi wrote:It's also worth pointing out that all those Victorian masters said you should start with foil. Yanno sport fencing....
Jean Chandler wrote:I think most of the Victorians were full of 'crap', to be honest. I'd be more blunt but I'm not sure of the mod policies on HEMAA. With a few partial exceptions like Sir Richard Burton. But generally speaking most of the more benighted historical errors which were the foundation of the obscuring of the real Western Martial tradition arose in the 19th Century. So I often disagree with them on this and many other subjects.
Jean Chandler wrote: I despair of the avalanche of warped, stupid, bigoted, nationalistic, twisted propaganda that dominated mainstream and academic thought in that era, particularly as it relates to fencing and Martial Arts.
Michael Edelson wrote:Though stick-play[their stick is our modern plastic waster or steel blunt] is invaluable as an aid to work with the sword, it may be remarked that there are two reasons, and those important ones, why the single-stick should not be first placed in the hands of the beginner, and why it should never altogether usurp the place of the more lethal weapon[note the word lethal, implying real sword]. The reasons are—
(a.) The stick is very light, and short smart hits can be made, which are impossible with a sword. [Hmmm...who has been saying that since he learned how to type on the internets?? Hmmm?]
(b.) The hit with the stick is really a hit, and there need be no draw, which, as already explained, is so important in sword-play. [You mean hitting with a stick is not the same as cutting with a sword?? Who would have thunk it!]
To these may be added a third reason. With the stick there is always the temptation not to cut with the true edge, and it is very hard to detect faults in this direction—faults which are hard to cure, and which may quite spoil good swordsmanship.
This is a grave objection to the game, when the game is regarded as representing real business; but for all that, the lessons learnt with the stick are invaluable to the swordsman. The true way to meet the difficulty would be to supplement stick-play by a course with broad-swords, such as are in use in different London gymnasiums, with blunt edges and rounded points.
DavidCoblentz wrote:Yeah, but that's not much different than a lot of the historical fencing texts that we have
Any author from any time period is going to have a bias, and if you read them coming from a different background, you will probably have some serious problems with it.
Jean Chandler wrote: / I despair of the avalanche of warped, stupid, bigoted, nationalistic, twisted propaganda that dominated mainstream and academic thought in that era
Author: R. G. Allanson-Winn