New Stuff

[Webmaster]

A new editorial is now online in the essays section:

History and Heritage

And in case I forgot to mention them before, pictures of the Senior Free-Scholar Prize Playings for Stewart Feil and Gene Tausk are available here:

http://www.thearma.org/photos/FreeScholarPrizePlay/FreeScholarPrizePlay.htm

[Craig Peters]

Good article. It will no doubt ruffle the feathers of some people who read it, but I hope it will cause them to re-examine what they are trying to do with Medieval and Renaissance Martial Arts, and question whether their interest and training truly reflects the historical art, or whether it reflects sport fencing or playfighting, or some sort of fantasy roleplaying.

[JeanryChandler]

I agree with much of what is in the first half of this essay. In reading about ancient warriors, whether they be ancient Celts or Germans, or the Vikings of the 7th-12th century, I was surprised to learn how free and open their societies were. The Celts and Germans were criticized by contemporary Greek and Roman observers for their contempt for authority and their tendancy to make decisions by comittee.

Over time I have come to understand this tendancy toward federation, democracy, collaborative endeavor (as directly contrasted against authoritarian, mystical Eastern traditions of leader worship) as being a major or even key part of the Western cultural, and miltiary heritage. Reading for example of the ways of the greatest Mercenaries of the European Renaissance, the Landsknechts, the Swiss Reislauffer, the Gallowglass, I was struck by their surprisingly democratic traditions and open organizational system, how they had their own laws and courts, and voted on key decisions.

I think, in short, that the approach by some WMA groups including I think ARMA, which includes a lot of input from all members, the collaborative nature of the learning of martial arts, is in my cultural context much more than the EMA traditions of utterly kow towing to a master which I could never adapt to.

On the other hand, maybe I'm a little thin skinned but when I read references to "play and display" groups and their video clips on the web displaying their poor technique, I have to wonder if the humble efforts of our own small New Orleans group are being referred to here.

I have posted some clips of our sparring a few times over the years, including quite recently, in the hopes of recieving feedback from people better versed in the correct procedures of WMA. I'm sure there is plenty wrong with our technique, I posted the clips to the ARMA board hoping to learn from constructive criticism. And while I definately qualify as the "300 lbs couch potato" I am certainly not inflexible in my approach toward learning WMA. We are doing the best we can with the resources and time we have available. I think we are doing pretty well given those constraints, but we are by no means as advanced in terms of technique as some of those people who train every day several hours a day, and have every fechtbuch translation and large local groups to train with which include comparative experts in their ranks.

We are essentially the blind leading the blind, but we have one thing in our favor: we emphasize full contact, full force sparring, and we face all comers. This does weed out ineffective techniques fairly efficiently. I think it is the ultimate litmus test of any martial art.

For this reason I have aggressively pursued the development of safe and realistic high impact sparring weapons and have openly shared everything I have learned in 20 years of developing these weapons with the WMA community in general and ARMA specifically.



So If there is indeed an implied critique of our approach, or even if there is not, I for one would WELCOME any critical evaluation of our sparring clips or our approach to training in WMA.

Other groups or individuals may reject everything ARMA has to say because of preconceptions they hold dear or due to their adherence to fantasy roles. I want to learn the best ways to fence, period. Anything anyone can tell me, particularly people who have obviously spent an enormously longer time learning WMA than I have, is valued.

I was, incidentally, disappointed that I got no reaction from any senior or even long established ARMA members to the last series of clips I posted. It is kind of embarassing posting these things, one is definately taking a risk in exposing ones-self, and it is a useful yardstick for other people training in WMA, even if our performance is sub-par. For that alone, I think it is fair to want some kind of review or analysis, especially if it is indirectly criticised (but even if it isnt).

Also, one last comment. Part of the article mentioned facing EMA practitioners. I have faced several now, often with them using unpadded wooden weapons. I have fought escrima / arnis, staff, and kendo fighters. Though I have no way of evaluating their skill, they had good local repuations, and I haven't lost yet.


Finally, with regard to escapism aren't most WMA practitioners at some level trying to some small degree or other to escape into another world, and is there really anything wrong with that? Why (as I am often asked) is anyone learning fencing in a world of guns ? A big part of it is the pure dynamics of the martial art, but I have met WMA practiioners, including ARMA members, who seemed more oriented toward collecting fine replica swords than really being serious fencers. Even people for whom, like me, the fighting is more important, it's like learning a dead language isn't it?

For me, WMA is a physical workout, (some of the only i get, being a couch potato!) a vent for my aggressive instincts which would otherwise land me in jail for fighting down in the French Quarter (something which hasn't happend to me in 5 years now, knock on wood), and a way to learn an esoteric skill while playing an active physical (if very, very small) role in reconstructing the reality of an historical period which I am deeply interested in. In that sense I don't think it is so very far removed from some of the people who try to live in iron age hill forts or build medieval trebuchets or fashion correct roman armor.

Regardless, I'm always open to learning more and I enjoyed reading the article. I apologize in advance if my perception was off that some of it referred to our group, but I would welcome any analysis anyway.

J

[JeanryChandler]

Two other comments, while I'm thinking of it

1) Other groups I have encountered on the web and in person, worry me by their apparrent emulation of what seem to be to be EMA approaches. This includes veneration of the self styled "master(s)" of their own group (something which ARMA is very unfairly accused of), an overstrong focus on drill over sparring (which some groups do not really do at all), and the sole focus on studying a single ancient master, at the exclusion of all others, as if it were illegitimate or ahistorical to study more than one master.

I'm sure that fencers in the Renaissance studied the works of more than one master, or for that matter, more than one national (Italian vs German, say) technique.

2) as for our own group again, one thing I have tried to do is to involve people who have a long history and a great deal of experience in street fighting, to try WMA techniques in sparring. One thing that few people have in WMA or any martial arts, including a few among the ARMA members I have met, is a real level of real fighting experience of any kind. Taking someone who instinctively feels reach and range (or "measure" ), someone who has very good timing, who lacks fear, who has a high pain threshold and a confident fighting mein, who does not telegraph or flinch, can bring a lot of legitimacy to the WMA fighting experience. Or at least, that has been my thinking.

J

[Douglas S]

A double-edged sword. I have seen a lot of WMA groups rejecting ideas simply because "they are EMA" and later to discover through time and trial that they were actually well-considered. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[JeanryChandler]

I agree, I don't want to come out like I'm anti- EMA, I just think WMA agrees with me better for the reasons stated. I'm a guy with a poster of Toshiro Mifune in his office! I have immense respect for EMA, but I think WMA has equal value and is in some ways more suited to the sort of culture I personally am a part of.

J

[leam hall]

I would agree with the "EMA is fine, if that's your cup of tea" philosophy. After being a junior EMA teacher I find the meta-knowledge I learned about running a class transfers nicely and provides a good structure.

To me the benefits of studying European martial arts are that it fits more in line with my own culture and other interests, and there is no spiritual component to it. I have my own spiritual beliefs and dislike inclusion of things I don't believe into what should be a physical exercise.

On the other hand, the western stylists are behind in many areas. For example, someone asked about the Youth Program on another thread, and the Youth Members don't have access to the members area. And they are limited to age 12-16. (Don't be 17, it's bad <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" /> ) I've seen great advantage in teaching youth younger than 12 the value of martial arts and martial spirit. Youth seem to really listen more and practice harder than many adults!

Western stylists, except for some like fencing, lack background and structure. Not all tradition is good, but some of it is. And it's helpful to have years of study by larger groups to help your own training. It means your senior teachers can go someplace else, get the snot beat out of them, and then come back with more to teach! Nothing like that sort of challenge to crank your skills up a notch or two.

[leam hall]

I've spent the past few days pondering this article and trying to find a polite way to rebut. Let me up front apologize if I offend. After many hours of following my own mental trail the words may not come out as communicative as they should. Please also forgive the limitations of the medium; you can't see the concern for our subject on my face nor can you hear the tone of companionship I'm speaking in.

A few months ago I had the pleasure of working out with Tim Sheetz and the South Jersey crew. They all helped me grow, both in my combative skills and in my relational life. One moment is especially clear; Tim was talking about a technique and I was troubled because it didn't really seem right to me. As we already had our sparring gear on I asked to test my theory and Tim very nicely, and very solidly, helped me gain clarity. <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />

We put thought and concept to the test, and winnowed out the unworthy. This is one of the areas that ARMA can shine in; the discussion of technique and the personal experimentation to see what works, and what does not. In the article John speaks about martial arts groups that fail in this regard.

Yet what is decried in the sense of technique is wantonly embraced in the organizational sense. If our technique is to be judged strictly off its merit should not our organization? Why are we continually beating the "We're better than the SCA/RPG/EMA" horse? If it is true, then our behavior and influence will meet and pass the test. Every time we compare oursleves to "them", whomever they are, we empower them because we are only seen in comparison.

If we have a purpose, and that purpose has merit, then we need to communicate that. And that alone. Those who find kinship in that purpose will join us and we will mutually benefit. If our purpose is different from some other group it does not make us right and them wrong. On the contrary, if we have a valid, useful purpose we can associate with other groups in harmony and share our purpose. Those who are encouraged by our purpose may join us or they may alter the purpose of their own group to align with ours.

Everytime I look at an article like this I wonder how many good people we have alienated. How many people have been in the SCA and wondered if there was more, if there was a combat system that better embraced scholarly research and physically worked out technique? Yet we insult where they have already spent time and then expect them to listen attentively? We burn the bridge and then immediately expect to cross it.

I feel the article's intent has merit but it fails to build or to help our purpose move forward. A better case might be made discussing the concepts and then showing where we and other groups have improved using the methods given.

If the idea has merit, let it stand the test. Otherwise discard it and find better. That's the ARMA way.

[John_Clements]

Leam, I think you really need to reread the piece. It says not about tooting our own horn or critiquing other groups. It only addresses behavior and attitudes toward interpreting source materials and applying them in practice. The article itself was prompted by a question from an Asian stylist on this very forum who asked the legitimate question how any of this subject could realistically be reconstructed accurately without any surviving tradition.

We go out of our way NOT to compare ourselves to any specific group or organization (only to other practice methods and training approaches). I feel your misunderstanding in assuming the essay clouded the real issue the piece tries to address.

That there has also been way too much bullshit in this subejct for too long and that there is still a lot out there, may be a painful truth for some, but it's reality. And we have to deal with it. If we felt otherwise we wouldn't ever have bothered to do things our own way with our own club.

Additionally, when you examine the hostility, venom, and lies that has been unfairly and disgustingly thrown at ARMA by others merely for our trying to raise the credibility of this craft, your complaint is very hollow, I'm affraid.

As martial artists and scholars, our object is not to make other people like us or feel good about what they do, but to improve ourselves and our craft.

JC

[John_Clements]

Leam, I think you again mistake the purpose of some things. The reasons for the structure of the Youth program are to offer guidance and information, not to start trying to teach kids "how to sword fight" via the Internet. The legal and ethical concerns involved alone prevent any martial arts organization from doing such. I would have thought that would be obvious.

JC

[leam hall]

Critique accepted. For an internet based program it's right.

My thought, and what I failed to properly express, was that I've been mulling a youth/family martial arts class based on the ARMA material. More would be needed for that sort of program, but more that might not be suitable for unsupervised use.

[Gene Tausk]

You wrote:

"Western stylists, except for some like fencing, lack background and structure. Not all tradition is good, but some of it is. And it's helpful to have years of study by larger groups to help your own training. It means your senior teachers can go someplace else, get the snot beat out of them, and then come back with more to teach! Nothing like that sort of challenge to crank your skills up a notch or two. "

Respectfully, I disagree with your statement. When you say "Western stylists," I assume you are also speaking about quintissential Western arts such as wrestling and boxing. As a former Greco-Roman wrestler and also as someone who has studied sambo in Russia, I can most assuredly state that these two disciplines have a structured workout curriculum which translates well into deveoping the skills necessary to master these arts. When we were allowed to grapple all-out, it was only after we had mastered the skills necessary to ensure that we could handle ourselves.

Although I have never boxed, I have seen how boxers (both professional and amateur) train to know that these superb athletes and martial artists train well and hard in a curriculum which is also proscribed. In fact, there was a book published recently by a sociology professor who became a boxer as part of his studies and he wrote of the experience. I have not read the book myself, but read a review of the book in the New York Times Review of Books. It should not be that hard to find, if you are interested. From the review I read, the author was amazed at the "elite fraternity" he joined when he became a boxer, a fraternity based on people who gave 100% to their training efforts. The training efforts were intense and most certainly were based on experience and structure.

Therefore, and once again respectfully, I think that you are making your statement not based on any real examination of these areas. You might want to look into joining a boxing gym if you want to see a curriculum based on Western arts, or find a sambo school. Or, for that matter, ARMA has its own curriculum.

Western arts did not become effective because they were based on a few buddies getting together, drinking beer and wasting time. They became effective because they indeed had, and continue to have "background and structure."


---------&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;gene

[leam hall]

Gene Tausk wrote:

"Respectfully, I disagree with your statement. When you say "Western stylists," I assume you are also speaking about quintissential Western arts such as wrestling and boxing."

Gene, we agree. I have done western wrestling, boxing, archery, two different EMA styles, SCA heavy weapons, and now ARMA. When I used the phrase "western stylists" it did not refer to all. I used fencing as one example of western stylists that do have a structure. Unfortunately I didn't clarify enough.

Of the advantages ARMA provides, my favorite is the GFS/SFS curriculum. It provides structure and a balanced importance to practical skills and scholarship. I think real training, eastern or western, requires discipline and structure as well as individual commitment. I have had the pleasure to train with some very skilled ARMA members and I lost many sparring matches because of their skill. And each time I came away not only with a greater appreciation of them as swordsmen and individuals, but with a drive to learn more and come back again.

That drive is important, but often of itself isn't enough. The structure to support the drive; to feed the lessons when the student is ready, and the overt measure to compare ourselves to gives us both short and long term measurable goals. And it is in seeing that large gap between where I am now and where I can be that challenges me to grow better and to join that "elite fraternity" of serious students.

Gene, I hope to have the pleasure of training with you some day. I would expect to get hit a lot and feel the firmness of your convictions. But I can only "lose" if I do not come away with something else to practice coupled with the confidence I gave it my all.

[JeffGentry]

Hey All

I have read the article a couple of time's now and mulled it over in my head, i do agree with what John is saying, and i see Gene's point on the training curriculum, which is what John and the rest of ARMA IMHO are trying to do is develope a core curriculum and base of people who can effectively teach what we are learning and rediscovering this in and of it self is a difficult task i know John has been actively putting a curriculum together from what he has learned over the past 20-25 year's, Gene is also working on this having trained in other Martial art's, me personaly having been in the U.S. Marine's can say from personal experience that the mind set of those who are highly trained and motivated Marine's, soldier's , sailor's, whatever Military service it maybe, have a mindset more akin to the boxer, or highly dedicated athlete, and the continuity of lineage to a majority of athlete's mean's absolutely nothing, it is more a dedication to the sport or themselve's to be the best and whatever method they use is what work's for them.


IMHO i think of this as a fighting(killing art) and i try to train with that in mind i have to be stronger, smarter, faster and more skilled than my opponent in order to survivor an encounter and if it is going to a "modern gym", or getting a personal trainer, or training in yoga for the flexibility, then so be it, when i read Meyer and Vadi and cross compare them as i was doing tonight it may not be continous lineage it is insightful though.

When Vadi say's something that totaly contradict's Meyer i want to know the reason, was it a new development in armour or was it that Meyer was later and certain type's of armour had fallen into disuse that doesn't mean either one is wrong we are seeing how similar alot of these teacher's were(at least i am) no one "style", teacher or school is the end all be all.

I thought i had learned a few thing's and over the last week i have learned i have only scratched the surface and have a long long long way to go, and i will use all the manuel's i can to learn to "kill" and survive an encounter with the "old" western method and i say to heck with a traceable lineage of this guy learned from this guy who learned from this one.

We do have a lineage of Vadi, De Liberi', Ringeck, Meyer Goliath, Danzig, we have many source's to "trace" our "lineage", that lineage mean's nothing if what you are doing doesn't work all the lineage in the world will not stop an opponent from stomping your gut's out in a fight, the lineage mean's nothing, learning what work's and training to use it to the best extent is what matter's in any art be it WMA or EMA.

Step's down of the soap box.


This is just MHO, and remember i know nothing.

Jeff

[leam hall]

John Clements wrote:

"Additionally, when you examine the hostility, venom, and lies that has been unfairly and disgustingly thrown at ARMA by others merely for our trying to raise the credibility of this craft, your complaint is very hollow, I'm affraid."

John,

In the past I have communicated a question about something you wrote and I saw that you gave import to my words. Over the past year I have had at least one contact, e-mail or personal, with most of the SFSs and every time, without fail, they have been helpful and a pleasure to interact with. The people on this forum have been helpful and patient with my newbie questions. Some of my closest friends in New Jersey were the North and South ARMA crews. I'm not sure what it says about my mental state, that the best friends were the ones that hit me all the time. <img src="/forum/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" />

I have no evidence of what you're concerned with so I cannot speak to the nature of it. I do have evidence that the people in ARMA I've met are a great bunch and I'm glad to know them. The ARMA concept is good and the people are great. Like most groups we probably have challenge areas where we could do better, but that is the nature of life. If someone critiques us then we need to honestly evaluate their comment and see if it has merit. If it does then we can address the issue and improve. If not, then what does it matter?