Inflamed sense of superiority

[Zilverzmurfen]

Originally Posted by LUDICROUS

You do like to quite vocally voice your opposition to things, don't you?

Sometimes. But as you may have noticed I also 'voice' my approval of things.

There are many great men on this board. However, in my opinion, RL is not one of them. Feel free to disagree, Ludicrous!

[Grasshopper]

struggle took place in the Kojimachi ward,

Wow, that is exactly where I am working right now. Better keep my scabbard in check.

[ReverseLunge]

Originally Posted by Zilverzmurfen

Sometimes. But as you may have noticed I also 'voice' my approval of things.

There are many great men on this board. However, in my opinion, RL is not one of them. Feel free to disagree, Ludicrous!

I agree. Great men whor.e for rep points. Real men speak their mind and speak the truth.


I don't watch many movies because I dislike the entire idea of giving away one's time to entertainment, but recently I went out with some friends to see the movie Gladiator. Apparently the movie was billed as a gore adventure film, which is probably good marketing because from what I could tell few people in the theater were able to understand the real message of the movie, which is especially amusing given the underlying metaphor it employs.

The core of the story revolves around the idea of living with honor and the belief in value. Value here, as in all places, has to do with purpose and meaning, not material valuations or concern for what the mob rates highly or poorly. Though mob tastes tend to dominate when they are asserted, they are empty victories because they mean nothing and contribute nothing, never doing more than blocking meaning from being expressed, shared, and known.

The plot consists of a dying emperor who wishes, as the continuation of his will, to wash away the corruption that has overtaken Rome. To do so he needs an innocent and noble man who can uphold this vision. But as we have all seen, the corrupt take shortcuts, and here too a corrupt man steps in to cut off the efforts of the noble to restore society to its once proud and meaningful state. After seizing power, the corrupt emperor strives to entertain the mob with the method of bread and circuses, meaning that the mob's interests are focused primarily on food and entertainment. With awareness of this, the new emperor attempts to gain the mob's favor by giving them 150 days of entertainment. In one of the spectator events, the beginning ceremony even includes loaves of bread being literally thrown into the frenzied audience.

Though most people thought they were watching an action film about gladiators, the entire movie stood as a metaphor for the meaningless of modern society as a result of the attack on noble values. This in turn leaves society in the hands of the masses where mob values dominate. Today there are no longer noble aspirations or the desire for value; most people even prefer that which has no value so that they can avoid what they consider the burden of meaning. Government has failed us, most adults have given up on life and value, and people's fear keeps them generally either hiding who they are or acting out in an endless chain of reactivity and subjugation to the norms they have been trained to obey that prevents their true personality from emerging.

Throughout the film there were allusions to the actors in our cultural death. The man who "owned" the gladiators was asked about his beliefs and values only to answer cynically that he was an entertainer. You will get similar response from adults who work meaningless jobs to justify their need to "earn a living" as an excuse for being corporate w.hores who trade their energy and time for material reward and the assurance of dissatisfaction. Justifications are almost exclusively lies; when someone justifies they try to hang their disbelief in value upon the hook of social expectations and mercy, but we need not be fooled.

Instead of 150 days of bread and circuses, today we have junk food and television all year long to pacify people and take their mind off the issue of life that matter. During the day, most people work silly jobs creating capital but little or no positive social or spiritual value, and then they come home seeking entertainment whether from television or other people. Just as the movie portrayed the concern of the cultural fabric coming apart, the same happened in western society over the last 50 years as the ideas of goal and direction have been completely forgotten and replaced with the desire for pleasant distraction.

As the emperor discovered, the mob is fickle and its base tastes revolve around not honor but on who can best entertain it. Though the mob has great size, its lack of ideology and honor also means that it lacks value and the ability to achieve anything substantial. It is surely large, but remains powerless in all meaningful ways. That idea is contrasted in the movie by an army of men who believe in their leader because of his honor and vision. Though their numbers are far smaller than the mass, their unified values are able to achieve a positive result. No one in the mob cares for anything and none would risk their life or anything at all because they desire only the safe path of nothingness. Aspiration is not in them - only the noble dream and seek to make dreams come true, for dreams and value are every time worth risking the whole of one's existence. If one is victorious, he has won great value, or if he has lost, he at least has the respect of those who understand that the pursuit of value was worth dying for.

Life without honor and value, as symbolized by the mob and their approach, is meaningless. Valiant struggle to preserve the value of nobility will always be glorious because it continues to keep alive the possibility of meaning in this world, against all of those who would so quickly forsake it.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by sabreur

One version: http://home.att.net/~hofhine/Samurai.html

Another couple of examples: http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/bloody.shtml

The second set of examples hardly seem to indicate a predeliction for "fair" practices. More like pure bloody mindedness.

MR

Yeah, one of my favorite historical duels took place in Hyde Park, between Duke Hamilton and a Lord Mohun. The firsthand accounts vary about the specifics, but they all agree that they met, ran at each and just started stabbing. No feints, no crossing of the swords, just stabbing. One died on the spot, and the other took a few days to die.

Then again, whenever duelling comes up in conversation, I tend to agree with Jonathon Swift's thought which summed up is, no one really loses when two idiots kill themselves while trying to defend their honor...

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Yes. And if one absolutely HAD to defend oneself with a sharp sword, I suspect there'd be a lot of grappling, kicking and throwing of objects having nothing to do with the nice formalities of classical fencing. We no longer have the social imperatives which formerly forced people to restrict themselves to "fair" practices even if it cost them their lives; the sun has long since set on the culture of honor above all else...

I suspect you have been watching too many movies or reading too many books. That seems to be a rather anachronistic ideal. Let's also consider that honor only applied to interactions between gentlemen which basically means that the other 95% of the population was considered rubbish and was treated as such. "I had to whip my slave the other night, but I lashed him with honor!"

[Bokken]

Originally Posted by ReverseLunge

I agree. Great men whor.e for rep points. Real men speak their mind and speak the truth.
>>snip<< blah blah blah >>/snip<<

Another fine example of the "originality" of RL, a legend in his/her/its own mind. Rant, of course, courtesy of datejesus.

[CheekyCanuck]

First let me say that my club does teach classical fencing.

I haven't been fencing long so and I did find that I was not prepared for competitive fencing.
I still have very vivid memories of my first competition.
The one thing that I noticed is: things happen fast, VERY fast.

It is a matter of thought process. Some people can handle the fast pace with fast problem solving, but others need time to process each incoming attack or need to think about how they themselves wish to attack.

To a casual observer a sport fencer appears to just be wiggling her blade or flicking or charging at her opponent. But actually there are minute movements of blade by fingers (when done properly) and calculations of strategy all happening at speeds that would put a super computer to shame.

There is one coach at our club (unfortunately he only comes once in a while) that has pointed out the difference between a perfectly metered classical fencing move and a competitive fencing move. When fencing competitively each action should flow into the other without pause, in a sense becoming one movement. To an eye that is incapable of following such a movement this may look sloppy.

In a sense I think that classical fencers are trying to attack what they cannot comprehend. I mean no disrespect to them, the skill that they have or their mental prowess, but I think that only a certain type of mind and personality is suited to competitive fencing. Me, I can’t get enough competitive fencing. I love the sport, though I will never forget the lessons that I learned from the classical style.

As a side thought this reminds me of the movie “Searching for Bobby Fisher” (I think that’s the title). It’s about a boy that is a chess prodigy. The boy’s mentor tells him not to play chess in the park because those people play as quickly as possible and doing such fast actions will ruin the boy’s game (like I said, it takes a certain type of mind and personality).

As far as fencing in a duel, I would put my money on a competitive fencer over a classical fencer any day. Competitive fencers just seem more able and classical fencers seem to be mired in trying to make things perfect.

[cfaustus]

Un-diplomatic fencers of all ilk: *sigh*

RL - vive la revolution!

Can't we just get along?

[Schiavona]

I really think it all depends on mindset.

For myself, I've stopped using the terms "sport" and "classical" when talking about fencing. After watching "classical" fencers in my area, I started using hard and soft to describe fencing. I've fenced and known fencers who were as classically trained as anybody today, who fenced as if they were trying to kill you. By that, I mean as hard as possible. I've also seen fencers who fenced like a frightened kitten. The difference was the "fencing not to be hit" idea on that website.

Can you imagine what a boxing match would be like if all the boxers tried to do was not get hit?

Soft fencers fence not to get hit, hard fencers fence to hit.

[Spike327]

Originally Posted by Schiavona

Soft fencers fence not to get hit, hard fencers fence to hit.

So, classical fencers are quite soft... flaccid, even? Limp as a wet noodle? I'm starting to see why they are so defensive...

[cfaustus]

*sigh*

Ok, I am going to go out on a limb and say something which will probably get me a lot of flack form both sides, but I always feel that shedding light on a problem is the first step toward removing ignorance and fixing the problem.

So, here goes:

I think that a lot of the emphasis placed by some CF groups on classifying SF in a degrading manner comes largely from either jealousy or at best, frustration.

As several posters here have characterized CF, it is more focused on personal development in the manner that other Martial Arts do. It also strives to teach the martial truths of fighting and defencing oneself with a weapon. When one thinks about it, it is perhaps easier to understand why competition to get more hits than the other person scores upon you seems a bit unsatisfying to one with a more martial mindset. As such, it is hard to see so much focus on 'what fencing is' and attention being given to another group of people who do a form of fencing based upon pure competition. Add to this the slights and misperceptions that abound due to the SCA and charlatan CFers, and it is understandable that one might get a tad frustrated and tend to distinguish oneself using more negative distinctions.

Ok, so there is the basis for the jealousy which, for some CF groups, may fuel the negative distinctions drawn of SF.

However, I think this is just a waste of time. Let one's fencing speak for itself. Those drawn to a purely competative forum will be attracted to one and those interested in developing other aspects of their humanity will be attracted to the other. True fencing is one and indivisible. If we of the Cf community believe what we are studying to be The Way of fencing, then we should not worry about any other fencing. We should focus on the people who are naturally drawn to our art and not attempt to lure others who may not truely wish to practice fencing as we do or who may not be ready to. Of course we may advertise and promote ourselves, but there are many other ways to promote CF and CF salles which do not require the degradation or vilification of our SF cousins. One may feel the need to distinguish, in order to educate others who are mostly only acquainted with SF, however, as with Salle Green and many other CF groups, this distinction can be made dispassionately and sans ad hominem attacks.

If this is not enough to persuade my CF brothers, then let me appeal to one thing which I do not believe to yet be dead among us: honor. Let us take the high road and not lower ourselves by petty mud slinging. Let us teach, let us dispell ignorance, let us fence. In the end, fencing is one. As fencing is supremely an art of reason, not passion, then let reason be our guide!

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by cfaustus

Those drawn to a purely competative forum will be attracted to one and those interested in developing other aspects of their humanity will be attracted to the other.

What a douche...

[cfaustus]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

What a douche...

I beg your pardon?

[Katman]

Originally Posted by cfaustus

I beg your pardon?

He called you a douche because, ya know, he's Mr. Epee and all.

Who cares, who cares, who cares? Let the classical fencers do their things and the sport fencers do theirs. It's nice to have discussion and all but this thread can't seem to control itself.

[ReverseLunge]

Originally Posted by cfaustus

I beg your pardon?

I don't understand the question.

[cfaustus]

Originally Posted by ReverseLunge

I don't understand the question.

I beg your pardon? = Excuse me? = I can't believe you said that. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

[ReverseLunge]

Originally Posted by cfaustus

I beg your pardon? = Excuse me? = I can't believe you said that. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

Are you John Rhys-Davies?

[swordsen]

Well a long well reasoned commnet on the topic followed by a short quick insult. You know, there are those who would say that in and of itself defines the diference between the two flavors of fencing. A long in depth, well prepared adn thouth out barrage from the classical fencer and a quick hard stab by the sport fencer.

(I wouldn't agree, but the arguement could be made...)

[ReverseLunge]

Classical Fencing is something that does not exist nor has it ever. Only Modern Fencing has ever existed. Aramis, Athos, D'Artagnan and Porthos also do not exist but when they did they were fencing the modern style of their time. If they were reborn today they would be Sport Fencers. Sport Fencing is what is real. Classical Fencing is for the Dungeons and Dragons players.

[RebelFencer]

Originally Posted by ReverseLunge

Classical Fencing is something that does not exist nor has it ever. Only Modern Fencing has ever existed. Aramis, Athos, D'Artagnan and Porthos also do not exist but when they did they were fencing the modern style of their time. If they were reborn today they would be Sport Fencers. Sport Fencing is what is real Classical Fencing is for the Dungeons and Dragons players.

I really hate to say this, especially after my last post...but I somewhat agree. Damn.