Bill Leckie said:

> Most actions seem to be executed with the hand position 4 (or in 4
> in 3!). That is not confined--or wasn't, rather--to classical fencing
> today. Gaugler's text confirms this. But maybe we should make careful
> distinctions? It's a habit evolved more than likely from the abandonment
> of the long training of the "Old School"

This may well be true.

We have not abandoned it here.

> If you come out of or are reacting to a "culture" using the pistol grip,
> in which the old lines and hand positions have lost their meaning,
> the full repertory is is lost to most.

No doubt.

But are most classical fencers coming from sport fencing?

Again, not here. We rarely have students who have had previous sport
fencing experience. In the past several years, I can only think of five
out of hundreds of beginners. Three of them are still fencing with us.
Two were in a University PE class and quit the class before the end of the
semester.

> What I mean is, things have drifted toward simplification. To put
> it another way: How many students, having been introduced to to
> simple lateral parries in the high line, really are taken beyond that?

Here? All of them are introduced to at least the low line parries.

> . Good grief! I even begin my folks only with laterals in 4 and 6,
> and pray I have the retention to introduce more! If I have 6 or 8
> who persist after this semester from a quasi-Old School curriculum I
> will count myself very fortunate; next spring they will get the
> pronated hand.

We begin with the supinated parries. But by the time a student is bouting,
they will have been introduced to the pronated parries and will be
competent with the supinated parries in both the high and low lines.





> I suspect it's possible to name those teachers who do so (and
> impressively; I've benefitted from seeing them in action) without
> much hesitation, but as for the rest?

I honestly don't know what people teach in other places. I'd love to know.

> In most places I know of, beginners are introduced to a repertory of
> basic actions from first position to the lunge, hand position in 4 or
> a rough facsimile thereof, kinda-sorta in 4 in 3.. They bout early, or
> find foil "boring" and pick up epee or worse yet sabre because they're
> more fun,

You must be talking about sport fencing. I'm not terribly interested in
what sport fencers are doing.


> and since seldom will any match go past second intention, about the
> only times you see pronated hands is when they wind up in those awful
> binds, which occur for exactly the same reasons they occur in sport
> fencing bouts!

Oh my. Perhaps you are not. In that case, I'd say what you are describing
does not sound like classical fencing to me.

In classical fencing, there is no - or should be no- "kinda-sorta"
anything. And there should not be early bouting.

> How often do we see bouts involving more than simple engagements in
> the high line that don't deteriorate?

How often do you see them, how often do other people on this list see them,
or how often do I see them? I see them nearly every day.

> How consistent are we in demanding proper grip anyhow, as the inquiry
> about pommels only suggests--and with no disrespect meant to the
> inquirer at all.

We are absolutely consistent in requiring- not demanding- a correct grip.
Without it, a student will not progress to being invited to bout. It's
that simple.

If people in other places are not being consistent about this, I believe
they are doing their students a great disservice.


> I mean, how can you go past See Dick fence Jane if you show up with
> foil, epee, smallsword, singlestick, and lumber about with a rapier,
> too? How consistently do teachers make disciplined use of intermediates
> so that all students receive the attention they need? And in doing so,
> how often are the rationales for techniques clearly explained? How
> consistently do we involve everyone during a session while the teacher
> gives individual lessons?

I find this disturbing.

I only know how my Fencing Master teaches, and how I am being trained to
teach. I have seen a very limited amount of other people teaching, and
more than enough of sport fencing.

I believe fencing is in a state of crisis due to a lack of qualified
teachers. I don't see the situation improving much, but I have hope. Or
at least I try to.

> Anyhow, I'd argue in "strong form" that the prevalence of
> supination today lacks a technical or ethical rationale

I agree.

And I'd argue that much of what is being done today that is called
"classical" is in fact not. I believe- and this is my personal opinion-
that classical fencing requires classical TEACHING and that is something
most people do not have access to. I am sad that it is so, but it is.
There are undoubtedly many people out there with the best intentions, and
great interest in fencing classically, who simply do not have classical
teachers available.


Linda




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUI...LSAA/VRUolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/classicalfencing/

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

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/