Respectfully, why the vitriol to Clements on Amazon.com?

[John Hull]

Hi! Bear in mind that I've ordered both of Clements's books so that I can learn; I'm not agitating or anything like that.

I'm sure everybody has seen the reviews on Amazon.com of Clements's two books on medieval & Renaissance martial arts. Many of the reviews are negative in a way that seems downright hostile. I don't know Mr. Clements from Adam, but I doubt he could have personally offended so many people—which is not to say that I underestimate him ^_^—so it sounds like some sort of schism.

Based on my reading at this site, I gather than sport fencers may take offense. I understand that: many say that judo is useless since it's a sport, and yet those same people never explain why wrestlers, who practice a sport, so rarely lose fist fights. But having known a former soldier of the 82nd airborn who, when his buddies went out for a paintball battle, had his ass handed to him by a bunch of kids, I understand that weapons don't translate from sport to battle. (FTR, he and his buddies went out again, adjusted for the wimpiness of the paintball guns, and cleaned house.) The difference between touché and a bonifide stabbing is enough to change tactics considerably, and that's not considering the difference in the tools.

I'm not interested in petty nonsense, that's not why I'm posting this. I'm wondering if there's a substantive debate that's been hidden in the vitriol. And if so, I'm curious about what it is.

I apologize for bringing this question forward. I know that tradition brings out the most venomous behavior in people, and Mr. Clements seems to have questioned tradition, indeed. So, please, if this is a bad question to ask, it's out of good faith rather. I'm simply curious.

Thanks for your patience and consideration.

jsh

[Randall Pleasant]

... the reviews on Amazon.com of Clements's two books on medieval & Renaissance martial arts. Many of the reviews are negative in a way that seems downright hostile.

John

There are indeed a few hostile negative reviews John Clements' books. However, the vast majority of readers have loved his books and have found them very informative. Clements' books are still two of the best books on the market, especially to people new to these arts. My guess is that a couple of those negative reviews were written by the same person. Members of ARMA have long ago learned to just overlook those few sad people who are openly hostile to John Clements and ARMA.

By the way, Clements does not review his own books on Amazon.

[JeremyDillon]

It's quite sad how so many participants in the WMA give in to that kind of mentality. I seem to recall a similar review of Clements' Renaissance Swordsmanship by Ramon Martinez, a self proclaimed "Maestro" of rapier fencing. The review was written with such obvious hateful bias that any trace of academic or empirical examination of the work was l0st. Anonymous amazon.com customers are one thing, but such conduct by a "professional" in the field is uncalled for and counterproductive.

[Mike Cartier]

nasty petty children with axes to grind, if not for ARMA i would have nothing to do with HEMA as its got way too much political nonsense in it already, I have tried to explain to these fools the effect this has on a martial arts community but they are too busy pushing their agenda to really care for the end result of this sort of petty politics.

best to ignore them and spend our energy training and studying.

[J. F. McBrayer]

Clements' books are still two of the best books on the market, especially to people new to these arts.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that. With all due respect to mister Clements, those books were two of the best books on the market when they were published, and they were very valuable in promoting WMA early on. Today, there are many more published works on historic swordsmanship than there were back then, and the there has been so much research done since then, that there are much better books, even for beginners, than Clements' MS and RS. That's not a criticism of his work per se; given that the WMA community is progressing, it's perfectly normal that newer books would be better than older ones.

[Jay Vail]

Based on my reading at this site, I gather than sport fencers may take offense. I understand that: many say that judo is useless since it's a sport, and yet those same people never explain why wrestlers, who practice a sport, so rarely lose fist fights. But having known a former soldier of the 82nd airborn who, when his buddies went out for a paintball battle, had his ass handed to him by a bunch of kids, I understand that weapons don't translate from sport to battle. (FTR, he and his buddies went out again, adjusted for the wimpiness of the paintball guns, and cleaned house.) The difference between touché and a bonifide stabbing is enough to change tactics considerably, and that's not considering the difference in the tools.

I'm not interested in petty nonsense, that's not why I'm posting this. I'm wondering if there's a substantive debate that's been hidden in the vitriol. And if so, I'm curious about what it is.
jsh

Mr. McBrayer, nobody who posts on this site will dare to make the claim that judo doesn't work in combat. In fact, those knowledgeable about ringen, or Medieval German combat wrestling, will tell you that in many respects it is indistinguishable from judo or, more acurately, koryu jujutsu, the proper name for traditional Japanese jujutsu. I personally know of people who have successfully used techniques from the judo toolbox in real fights, some against armed attackers. It's real, it works, and you can bet your life on it -- as have many men in the past when they faced mortal peril.

As to the animosity unfairly directed to Mr. Clements, as in the Asian martial arts, many people regard their own approach to martial study almost as if it is a religion. Anyone who challenges their "worldview" so to speak is often viewed as threatening and therefore must be answered with hostility. Mr. Clements has many revolutionary views on historical martial arts and he is one of the field's leading pioneers in interpretation of the old texts. What seems to insense people the most seems to be Mr. Clements' insistence that all interpretations must be subjected to rigorous testing under conditions that come as close to actual combat as it is possible to do safely.

This necessarily results in vigorous free play with weapons designed, as closely as we can, to mimic the weight and balance -- in other words the handling characteristics -- of the originals. Many "masters" seem to be afraid to expose either themselves or their interpretations to vigorous full power free play apparently out of fear that they will fail, an event which would undermine their claims to authority and would call their "religion" into question.

[J. F. McBrayer]

Mr. McBrayer, nobody who posts on this site will dare to make the claim that judo doesn't work in combat.

Please check your attributions: your message doesn't seem to be in response to mine, and your quote is from the thread starter, Mr. Hull.

[Jay Vail]

Mr. McBrayer, nobody who posts on this site will dare to make the claim that judo doesn't work in combat.

Please check your attributions: your message doesn't seem to be in response to mine, and your quote is from the thread starter, Mr. Hull.

Oops. I stand corrected.

[John Hull]

Edit: I don't know why that second quote won't work.

[Me ^_^], nobody who posts on this site will dare to make the claim that judo doesn't work in combat.

It was an illustration through analogy, which I raised because the so-called distinction raises so much vitriol in the things I do know. Also, FYI, (note that I don't know how to link to a specific post) judo viz. traditional jiu-jitsu is a quite valid issue of debate. (It's an issue of physics and mechanics, which I'll be happy to discuss if you want to start a thread for it.)

[quote=Randall Pleasant]
There are indeed a few hostile negative reviews John Clements' books. However, the vast majority of readers have loved his books and have found them very informative. Clements' books are still two of the best books on the market, especially to people new to these arts. .... Members of ARMA have long ago learned to just overlook those few sad people who are openly hostile to John Clements and ARMA. [/quote]

A few? Heh. You'll notice that there's a reviewer of "Renaissance MA" by an eastern MA person that is sobering and balanced. Absent his or her review, I would have been very wary, indeed.

I'm a guy into science and logic, and I know some fights aren't worth bothering with. Just like Duane Gish can "prove" that evolution is not a fact, I can "prove" that planes can't fly. In the same way, people can "prove" that Clements couldn't find his rump with two rapiers. But, by starting my posts here and by buying Clements's books, I've established my bona fides in terms of what he's got to offer.

If there's nothing more than the moral equivalent than Duane Gish vs. Gould, then that's fine. But, is there something to the dispute that's interesting to a novice?

[Gene Tausk]

Edit: I don't know why that second quote won't work.

[Me ^_^], nobody who posts on this site will dare to make the claim that judo doesn't work in combat.

It was an illustration through analogy, which I raised because the so-called distinction raises so much vitriol in the things I do know. Also, FYI, (note that I don't know how to link to a specific post) judo viz. traditional jiu-jitsu is a quite valid issue of debate. (It's an issue of physics and mechanics, which I'll be happy to discuss if you want to start a thread for it.)

[quote=Randall Pleasant]
There are indeed a few hostile negative reviews John Clements' books. However, the vast majority of readers have loved his books and have found them very informative. Clements' books are still two of the best books on the market, especially to people new to these arts. .... Members of ARMA have long ago learned to just overlook those few sad people who are openly hostile to John Clements and ARMA.

A few? Heh. You'll notice that there's a reviewer of "Renaissance MA" by an eastern MA person that is sobering and balanced. Absent his or her review, I would have been very wary, indeed.

I'm a guy into science and logic, and I know some fights aren't worth bothering with. Just like Duane Gish can "prove" that evolution is not a fact, I can "prove" that planes can't fly. In the same way, people can "prove" that Clements couldn't find his rump with two rapiers. But, by starting my posts here and by buying Clements's books, I've established my bona fides in terms of what he's got to offer.

If there's nothing more than the moral equivalent than Duane Gish vs. Gould, then that's fine. But, is there something to the dispute that's interesting to a novice?[/quote]

Mr. Hull:

There is nothing to dispute that's interesting to a novice or anyone else for that matter. John C wrote two books which are bestsellers in their field. Some people were ticked off by them, which is their right. Some people, as you have observed, use the features at Amazon.com to criticize the book, some criticisms being constructive and others extremely childish and inane, which, once again, is their right. It is worth noting, however, that many people, myself included, found these books to be extremely worthwhile and we have left our own reviews at Amazon.com stating as such, which is our right.

However, this forum is not a sounding board for this topic as it has nothing to do with Mid/Renn martial arts. If you have purchased the books and find them worthwhile and a good investment, then this should be an answer for you. The books, for you, have served their purpose. Why does it matter what other then think about them? I happen to think "The Master and Margarita" is the greatest novel ever written; my former roomate in college thought it a pompous bore. Same book, different reactions. I certainly will not change my opinion about the book because my roomate had a different reaction.

I also will second Jay's statement that judo is extremely effective in "real" situations as are other grappling arts such as Greco-Roman wrestling, freestyle wrestling and sambo. I realize that this is a bone of contention and arguments about this abound on various websites and bulletin boards. I have also noticed, however, that people who are willing to accept a challenge and go into a ring (or octagon if you prefer) really don't have time to "diss" other martial arts as they are willing to back up their statements with actions and expect others to do the same.

If you want to start a thread on this topic, AND connect it to Mid/Renn and Western fighting arts, we have the Unarmed Forum for such conversations.

I am not going to close down this thread yet, but it will be observed very carefully. If the only purpose of further posts is for literary criticism of John's first two books or judo v. jujutsu, then the thread most certainly will be closed in a hurry.

[LafayetteCCurtis]

Well, it has been years since I last cared to read Amazon reviews of a book.

The WMA community, as healthy and rapidly growing as it is, is no different from other "science" or "art" communities in that disputes are bound to happen and interpretations are bound to differ from school to school--or even from person to person within the same school. Personally, I find the good old Clements books quite useful in the study of Western martial arts, and even more useful when I have other books by different authors expounding their differing opinions on the same subject. We must remember that the WMA community is resurrecting a mostly dead tradition rather than continuing an existing one. With that in mind, it's no surprise that there is no one opinion that can be considered absolutely authoritative, and we WMA folk learn a great deal from comparing notes and getting criticized by each other.

Personally, I've directed my studies under the idea that I'd focus on one historical master and trying to understand his methods as well as I can, but utilizing the opinions of more than one modern scholar on said master's mindset, theory, and techniques. And this is why I keep books that are sometimes as vitrolic towards each other as ARMA books and some classical fencing books in the same shelf!

(Now I wish I had more historical manuals to occupy the middle ground...)

[John_Clements]

Why the enmity? I think the answer is simple enough: human nature. People typically don’t like being told they are ignorant or doing something wrong. They often don’t even like to find it out or have to change. Instead, they attack the messenger, especially if the message is delivered without apology. But at the heart of things, it’s not really the messenger (“me”) or even the manner of its delivery, it’s the ego blow of the message itself.

It’s been said that you “can’t go around telling people they have an ugly baby.” That may be true. But, you can tell them when they have a sick baby. Indeed, you have a reasonability to do so. And when it comes to historical European close-combat activities there were, and still are, an awful lot of “sick babies” out there.

The ARMA and I first dared to set standards to raise the credibility and legitimacy of this subject starting in the mid-1990s. By the very nature of our efforts we rejected all the crap that was (and often still is) being pursued as Medieval and Renaissance close-combat. It’s no secret that a great many people originally came to this subject from Sca or LARP or living-history reenactment or stage combat backgrounds---activities we in ARMA simply don’t much respect or value ---and so they feel insulted that I lead the crusade I did for a true Martial Arts approach based exclusively on serious study of the surviving historical source works. We essentially "crashed the party"...and the rules have never been the same since.

There are a lot of people doing good work now in the field of historical fencing studies (and many doing very poor work), but the facts are the facts and no revisionism can suppress them: the ARMA and myself revolutionized this subject in the 1990s in the face of mountains of garbage that had long retarded real progress. So, when you go around and thoroughly outperform fighters in sparring, rip their practice habits and training methods, and then expose and scathingly critique faults in their understanding of historical combat, you are not going to win them over as friends ---especially if they indulge in the imaginary worlds of historical-fantasy role-playing, martial sport tournaments, or the pretend fighting of stage combat.

But, as the “embodiment” of our serious and no-nonsense approach, certain people have a personal need to personify me as their “villain” to excuse their own resentments and inadequacies. All I can say is, ARMA came to exist in the first place precisely because of those type of people. We are the revolutionaries in this field, we are the dissenters, and we continually push the envelope. We don’t BS and we don’t tolerate BS. We also try to set physical standards in historical fencing studies and uphold a Code of Conduct. Many other folk either won’t or can’t match either our skills or our intensity, don’t agree with our philosophy, and don’t want to follow a similar athletic methodology or martial attitude.

Moreover, a few vocal persons out there have actually been physically bested by me or my senior students in public sparring, or were rejected as ARMA members due to their own character flaws, while others simply resent our accomplishments and accolades. A few failed to get from us some personal validation they badly needed, and others just spite us for not supporting their commercial products or promoting their business. Their hostility, their vitriol, their continuous rumor-mongering and slander are a sign of their insecurity.

As Machiavelli wrote, “Hatred is acquired as much by good works as by bad.” It doesn’t matter then how martially skilful you actually are, how frequently you prove it, or how thorough your demonstrable knowledge of the craft. If others are insulted and embarrassed by being contrasted with you, then you will earn their enmity for life. (If they cannot surpass your fighting skills and cannot really dispute your scholarship, then the only thing left is to try to attack your reputation, and by association, any who respect you.)

In the end, the quality of our work and our efforts transcends all the pettiness, envy, and personal politics.

p.s.
My first two books (researched in the early 1990’s, and long superceded by our ARMA curricula) flawed as they were, as I freely admitted shortly after they were published, are now a convenient straw-man target for some to attack what ARMA stands for. The funny part is, as evidence of their continued value, these almost decade old books appear to out sell new titles on the subject. In just the last 5 months of 2006 alone well over 500 were sold.