By the Sword, the book by Richard Cohen

["Fence like a Cat"]

pg. xix. on fencing, "a superior kind of pasttime, combining mental excitement and bodily exercise--the excitement of a game of skill not entirely independent of chance, together with the delight--innate in all healthy organizations--of strife and destruction--and an exercise necessitating the utmost nervous and muscular tension while it affords the refined pleasures of rhythmical action" - Egerton Castle

Cohen's book is a great read so far. If you haven't picked one up you are missing something special.

Marty

[Inquartata]

Well, but he forgot the most important one of all: the thought of an Olympic medal!!!!! It's clealy the only one which makes fencing possible...

Question: were the modern Olympics taking place when Castle wrote that? And if not, how did fencing exist for him to write about?

[Peach]

Originally posted by "Fence like a Cat"


Cohen's book is a great read so far. If you haven't picked one up you are missing something special.

Marty

I bought it for myself while I was out Christmas shopping and am really enjoying it. I know that those who know their history in detail have already pointed out some errors, but it's tremendous fun. My coach also really recommended it for the second half.

[damianip]

I just finished it and, indeed, the best half is the second half. Cohen has first hand experience of the international fencing world in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, and it shows.

The insights into the seamier side of fencing and the personalities involved makes for great reading.

Recommended.

Paolo

[Inquartata]

It's supposed to be quite strong for the modern fencing history; less so for the earlier history of the sword and its use.

Is it as Anglocentric as, say, "Martini A-Z Fencing"?

[damianip]

Originally posted by Inquartata
It's supposed to be quite strong for the modern fencing history; less so for the earlier history of the sword and its use.

Is it as Anglocentric as, say, "Martini A-Z Fencing"?

Actually, no.

There are chapters on Jerzy Pawlowski, Arnd Schmitt (and his problems with Emil Beck), the Italian family fencing dynasties (Greco, Nadi, Mangiarotti), the Hungarian sabre programs and the re-emergence of French domination in foil with D'Oriola.

Interesting stuff. It's nice to have a different point of view.

Paolo

[Jason]

Originally posted by damianip
Actually, no.

There are chapters on Jerzy Pawlowski, Arnd Schmitt (and his problems with Emil Beck), the Italian family fencing dynasties (Greco, Nadi, Mangiarotti), the Hungarian sabre programs and the re-emergence of French domination in foil with D'Oriola.

Interesting stuff. It's nice to have a different point of view.

Paolo

Though in a lot of the modern parts (though, not exclusively--this happens throughout the book), Cohen seems to try to add a little ego-centric flair by connecting everything to himself; e.g.: the story about the time he beat Pawlowski, the story about his own Hungarian coach (who, unlike the other Hungarian coaches mentioned, was an international nobody).

Also, the details about a lot of the modern history is questionable.
I know a few Poles who would dispute a lot of the Kevey info.
I've also heard a few arguments against the Bela Bay story.

It seems to me that the main goal of the book is to create sensationalism, rather than record history.

Though, I should add that, as a sensationalist text, it's quite entertaining.

[earlie]

I saw this book in a friends house, and I think it would make a good (great) television serious, accompanied by rock videos, and some rap. Rockit fock.

[Tomas N]

There's a book review available at the NYT now. Looks good.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/02/bo...55b17cb3aac8a5

Tomas

[135711]

after reading all of these posts, i can't wait to read the real thing, sounds wacky!

--ny post.

[pkt]

In4, et al,

Does anyone know where one can get a copy of "Martini A-Z Fencing"?

PK

[Inquartata]

http://dogbert.abebooks.com/servlet/BookSearchPL

[Sildar]

Originally posted by Jason

It seems to me that the main goal of the book is to create sensationalism, rather than record history.

Though, I should add that, as a sensationalist text, it's quite entertaining.

I'll second this. His history of fencing should be taken with a truckload of salt, since he relied on some rather flawed secondary sources for much of his information and grossly misinterpreted many other aspects of fencing history. Then again, it's (mostly) good publicity for fencing...

[jspierre]

Originally posted by Jason
Though in a lot of the modern parts (though, not exclusively--this happens throughout the book), Cohen seems to try to add a little ego-centric flair by connecting everything to himself; e.g.: the story about the time he beat Pawlowski, the story about his own Hungarian coach (who, unlike the other Hungarian coaches mentioned, was an international nobody).

Also, the details about a lot of the modern history is questionable.
I know a few Poles who would dispute a lot of the Kevey info.
I've also heard a few arguments against the Bela Bay story.

It seems to me that the main goal of the book is to create sensationalism, rather than record history.

Though, I should add that, as a sensationalist text, it's quite entertaining.

But Cohen gets kudos for taking on the whole recent history in E. Europe of the sport, which is filled with very intriguing stories, flamoyant indvidiuals, tradegies, cheats, poliltically movitivated sponsorship, etc. You really couldn't have written about the subject without some firsthand involvement since the fencing culture of Europe is such a remote and inaccessable world. That period really connects the sport today with it's much older antecedents, and European fencing from the 50's-70's was a period of innovation, fierce competition and politcal change that led to the disapora of coaching talent that so profoundly affects the development of the game elsewhere around the world today. Personally, I wish another book could be written on that period, and this time, focus in as well on the training innovations led by the E. Europeans, the key World Cups and rivalries, and state-sponsored national programs.

I have little way of knowing if the stories that Cohen tells are, in the main, factually correct, or more generally faithful to the events of the time. Other than some quips from some voices, here and there, his presentation seems to stand, by and large, unchallenged. The book has certainly stirred a lot of passionate talk in the fencing community.