From: alaric@sti.com (Alaric Tekiahyn)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: A few questions and observations
Date: 16 Dec 1992 21:14:54 GMT
Organization: Software Transformation, Inc.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: smurf.sti.com

In article <1992Dec14.223552.7882@rtsg.mot.com>, svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda) writes:
] In article <1g6a9aINNkm8@smurf.sti.com> alaric@sti.com (Alaric Tekiahyn) writes:
] |
] |At the risk of giving offence to purist sport fencers [no offence intended],
] |I venture to suggest that in the real world, if your opponent hits you
] |before you complete your attack, any discussion of right-of-way is probably
] |moot.
] 
] Well, only mild offense taken.  :-)  Seriously, though, I think you would find
] a more receptive audience among many fencers if you changed your view of sport
] fencing just a tad.  See, sport fencing IS the "real world", even moreso than
] the game that is played by those who pretend to fight wars.  If you contend
] that SCA, or paintball, or BattleTech, or any of the other simulated war
] games is "real world", well, I respectfully suggest that your world veiw is
] not in accordance with most of your neighbors.
]
] When I fence, I do not make believe that I'm doing anything but fencing.  I 
] submit that those who do make believe are fairly rare.  Modern fencing is in
] large part a sport, far from any imitation of war arts.  It is in the same 
] sense as an olympic javelin thrower is far from a wartime spear-thrower, and 
] the tool is different.

Well...  I suspect what we have here is not really a clash of viewpoint on
sport fencing, it's more an inadequacy of terminology.
Let me try to clarify what I meant.

For starters, I don't pretend that SCA, paintball, or BattleTech represent
the real world.  Paintball and BattleTech are mere games; SCA fighting is
almost as formalized as competitive fencing, albeit in different ways.

Now your comments lead me to strongly doubt you'd deny that the modern
fencing salle is an artificial environment.  It is, as you say, a sport.
It is bound by strict rules, both for reasons of safety and for reasons
of making it possible to score it, and thus determine who has won a bout
without the necessity to draw blood.  These are factors which are not
affected in the least by whether the participants choose to make believe
they are the Three Musketeers.

Now, for just one example of what I meant:
For the purpose of the sport of fencing, it is possible to score a point
by the 'foil whipping' or 'flicking' technique.  However, if you were
carrying your fencing gear back to your car, and someone chose to try to
mug you, would you consider 'flicking' to be a viable defense?  I think
not.

Similarly, in the example of the sabre attack, if you defended yourself
with a technically perfect saber attack as described in the post I first
replied to, but your assailant unfortunately managed to insert his
switchblade into your left eye a half-second before your blow landed,
you would probably immediately forget all about your sabre and your
uncompleted attack.

That's the 'real world' I was referring to.  The 'real world' I meant
is that one in which you aren't wearing a fencing mask or lame, there
are no rules, no-one is keeping score, and losing means a whole lot
more than dropping a rung in the ladder.

I have no illusions as to whether fencing represents this 'real world'.
In fact, I contend that in its present form, it doesn't represent it
enough.  The degree of abstraction has become too high, if you understand
what I mean, for it to fully retain its relevance.

Of course, I would be among the first to agree that, in our present
society, fencing in any form has comparatively little 'real-world'
relevance anyway.  As you point out...

] In fact, if I wanted to kill someone, I would
] not be likely to use a sword.  An AK-47 is considerable more direct and
] to the point.  (Pun intended. :-)

Similarly, these days, your mugger or carjacker is likely to be carrying
a gun, not a switchblade.  Maybe even an Uzi.  You never know.

Nevertheless, the principle is unchanged.  As the old proverb says:

	"Blessed is he whose cause is just,
	 But thrice blessed is he who gets his blow in fust. [sic]"


-- 
      "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom."  --  Thomas Jefferson
    ......................................................................
    Phil Stracchino : phils@sti.com : alaric@sti.com : The Renaissance Man
      PGP 2.0 - Freeware public-key data encryption.  Get it and use it!
           Finger alaric@sti.com for PGP 2.0 info and my public key