From: jane@soave.swdc.stratus.com (Jane Beckman)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.fencing
Subject: Re: A few questions and observations
Date: 23 Dec 92 01:05:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc., San Jose, CA

>If someone has a three-musketeers headgame going on
>when he is fencing, he will never become a really good fencer.  

An oriental swordmaster might argue that any swordsman who
thinks of anything except himself, his blade, and his own
small pocket of the world, relative to the bout and the
moment, will not excell.  I believe this is true, whether you
are a fencer, a *real* (whatever that means---pick your
favorite meaning---mine is "intending to kill your opponent")
swordsman, or SCA fighting.  (I know that I was never as good
as a war archer when I allowed the scenario and the fight
around me to interfere with the zen of that one perfect
shot...  That is why, in the samurai codes, one must regard
oneself as "already dead" so that fear of death does not
intrude on one's fighting technique.)
>
>No.  My fencing gear is not a weapon in the sense of defense against
>criminals.  

On the other hand, my martial arts sensei says that if you
truly know the *technique*, any object can be applied to real
life defense.  I cited the time I used a fencing parry with an
umbrella to deflect a cane someone was shaking at me.  He said
"exactly."
>
>If I wanted to defend against a mugger, a really viable weapon might be
>a billyclub, or the cop's version, a five cell maglite.  
Ah, yes, SCA heavy weapons technique.  (Yes, I carry a
maglight in my car.)
>
>BTW, if a mugger attacks you while you carry a claymore, don't even think
>of hitting him with it.  We live in litiginous times, and there is ample
If a mugger attacks you while you are carrying a claymore,
which is usually slung across your back for ease in carrying,
you probably won't have time to DRAW it.  You definitely won't
have space to swing it, or the time, even if you have it
drawn.  But then, as my sensei would say, it's the "reach" of
a weapon that determines what works.  A claymore is, by no
one's definitions, a "city" weapon or a personal defense
weapon.  Trust me on this.  (According to my sensei, a pencil
is better defense against a switchblade, than, say, a sword.
It's how close you have to defend, that "reach" thing.)

>precedent for you to lose everything you have if you use a sword to 
>actually hurt someone, even in "self defense".  A sword is just not a
>viable weapon in today's world.

On the other hand, the scimectar (sp?) a friend of mine kept
by the bed sure scared the crap out of the guy who had broken
in and was coming at her.  He left in a BIG hurry, about the
time she raised it over her head and yelled.  But then, she
was a broke college student with nothing to lose (except her
virtue).
>
>Fencing is relevent on it's own terms.  It does not need the approval of 
>those who would lay claim to historical perspective.  
>
Yes, and I can say the same thing about cooking.  But it makes
it a lot more meaningful to me to know something about its
historical background, and the ways that, say, canning, or the
invention of wood stoves, changed its application.  I believe
it is wrong to forget the historical perspective of ANY art,
if you truly wish to embrace it.  Yes, you can cook or fence
without knowing these things, but your viewpoint changes when
you keep the background in mind.  My personal focus is that I
don't believe you can truly "master" anything without knowing
its background (and yes, I think if you truly want to be a
master mechanic, you should know how to fix the engine of a Model T!)
But it should not interfere with your personal focus. 

--
  Jilara   [jane@swdc.stratus.com]

"The field of pseudo-science hasn't progressed much in ten
years, except to gain access to the net." --from ca.earthquakes