...Don't know anything about a "catastrophic reaction" and its relationship to
the "Enlightenment", but if we simply define valid Fencing as "using swords in a
manner as if they were sharps", or perhaps define valid hits as "to touch
without being touched", this just could go a long way toward reconciling the
differences between the two camps in the world of Fencing. Right-of-way
(priority) then, would have to reflect what happens in a real
encounter....Fencing for whatever purpose notwithstanding.

No matter how you "cut it" (pun intended), a sword is still a valid weapon,
and its use whether for martial art or sport needs to reflect some reality...it
appears to me that this is the part of the equation that's been missing for
quite a while now.

Regards,
Warren Cabral



"Brian D. Schenck" <bdschenck@...> wrote:
--- flanconade@... wrote:
> good fencing until the mid-20th century's catastrophic reaction to the
> Enlightenment
>
I only have a problem with the tone of this section, especially the use of the
word "catastrophic". While it is true that there is a distinct break between
what we see as "classical fencing" versus "sport fencing", suggesting a
"catastrophic reaction" occured adds a somewhat "political" tone to the break
between the two, casting one in a positive light and the other in a negative.
Which, as part of the definition for "classical fencing", I believe does it a
grave disservice.

Furthermore, I do not believe that this is grounded in fact, but rather
opinion, as there are many reasons for the changes between what is "classical
fencing" and "sport fencing" that have nothing to do with the Enlightment
itself; anywhere from the introduction of electric equipment and changes in the
concept of right-of-way (which has been defined differently for a good number
of years), to the removal of the concept of training for actual dueling. These
were not considered a "catastrophic reaction", but rather viewed as
improvements over failings in fencing prior to their introduction (simple human
failing to see touches, bias in the judges, as well as the fascination with
technology).

The difference between "classical fencing" and "sport fencing" can be presented
more neutrally, without the "overtones" and still emphasis the difference. In
fact, simply mentioning the distinct break the occured once technology was
introduced to fencing (with the electrification of the weapons), the subsequent
change in the rules and the de-emphasis for practical martial application more
than serves this purpose. Without drawing judgments on one style of fencing or
the other.


-Brian


----------------------------------------------------------------------
The CFML is sponsored in part by Purpleheart Armoury, now carrying rapier blunts
and leather gorgets. http://www.woodenswords.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------




SPONSORED LINKS
Cfml Sports

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "classicalfencing" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
classicalfencing-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]