Why I Hate Fencing

[Galen of Bristol]

dennis grace wrote:
<snip>
> We in the SCA have long maintained a bizarre tension between fencing and
> heavy fighting.  That tension has kept fencing in the back room, so to
> speak, for many a Societal Anno.  Only about half the SCA Kingdoms currently
> recognize the White Scarf (the rest just roll their collective eyes), a
> factor which I blame for the result that fencers with peerages are about as
> common as three-headed sheep (okay, now, someone ignore the rest of this
> posting and address this one claim--I dare you). 

Off the top of my head, and without looking to see what anyone posted:
Don Tivar Moondragon, Pel.
Mistress Atheylyan of Moondragon, Pel., Cadet to Don Robin
Don Robin of Gilwell, Pel.
Don Galen Niccolli, KSCA
Don Christian Richard Dupre, KSCA, Pel.
Don Eldric de Charbonneau, ML
Master Thomas of Tenby (formerly Cadet to Don Blayne)
Don Simonn of Amber Isle, Count, Viscount, KSCA, ML
Don Sigmund the Wingfooted, Duke, KSCA, Pel., ML
Don Dinaris the Wanderer, Graf, KSCA
Master Ambros (formerly a cadet)
Don Iolo FitzOwen, ML
Viscount Galen of Bristol, KSCA (I killed two Dons in Rebecca's 
Queen's Champion Tourney)
Sir Barn Silveraxe (who -- as Earl Marshal -- fought in the most 
recent Queen's)

<snip>

> In a recent missive, Viscount Galen of Bristol suggested:
> 
> >If I understand the traditional arguments against fencing, they boil
> >down to these:
> >
> >1.  Fencing is unmanly, for wimps.
> >
> >2.  Fencing should be banned because it is so dangerous.
> >
> 
> I do not doubt for a second that His Excellency recognizes the irony of this
> juxtaposition of claims.  

Thank you.  The original quote "swashing is for wimps; it should be
banned because it's so dangerous" is from Don Iolo.

>Nonetheless, this pairing accurately addresses two
> of the objections I have most frequently heard leveled against fencers.
> 
> Now, I know it's been a while, and I mostly played with sabre, but what I
> remember of fencing doesn't fit the "unmanly, for wimps" category at all
> well.  The stances are unnatural and uncomfortable, the stretches long and
> painful, the matches long and arduous.  I remember being quite sore and
> sweat-soaked after fencing sessions, rather like I am after heavy fighting.
> So how does this particular martial art earn the title "unmanly, for wimps"?
> 
> I can suggest two probable sources for this misperception (both of them
> rather silly), and I would love to hear any alternate theories.
> 
> First, fencing has an appearance that readily lends itself to claims of
> effeminacy.  Please, don't attack me for calling fencing effeminate; that's
> not what I'm saying.  The art, however, uses lighter and
> more-delicate-looking weapons than the heavy lumber SCA knights wield.
> Moreover, fencers naturally tend to garb themselves appropriately for their
> period: Italian fifteenth century slashes and puffs, English renaissance
> slops and peasecods and frill collars, cavalier ribbons and lace and lawn.
> Since--in the Twentieth Century--such frills are more commonly associated
> with women's clothing, the garb offers additional justification to the claim
> of effeminacy (Of course, I've always thought their was something immensely
> funny about a bunch of guys in dresses calling cavalier garb effeminate
> ;^>).  Finally, efficacy in fencing necessitates grace and fluidity of
> movement, physical attributes not usually attributed to powerful masculine
> warriors.  In the Aristotelian view (and, yes, I do believe Aristotle was
> the original Bubba), if it ain't masculine, it's feminine.

Also, a large number of people have gotten into swashing while saying
that they would or could not compete with rattan weapons.

And I, for one, find duello combat to be in no wise as taxing physically
as chivalric combat.

> Second, the primary martial art of the SCA is this noisy thing we call
> "heavy fighting" (bleaahh--you'd think, after thirty years, we could come up
> with a name for the art that didn't sound like something on par with
> "mud-wrestling"). 

"Chivalric combat", "Tournament Combat"

<snip>

> Viscount Galen further notes:
> 
> >TRM Meridies have added a new one:  Fencing isn't popular enough, as
> >only fifty people are authorized in six months.  If I'm the Baron of
> >a fifty-member barony, I'd tend to worry about the Crown willingness
> >to blow off the opinions and desires of fifty of their subjects, and
> >take unilateral actions without regard to their interests.
> 
> I tried to see how this lack of popularity might be a reasonable reason to
> ban the practice.  They DO, after all, have to maintain a Light Weapons
> Marshallate it they want Light Weapons.  If the Kingdom Light Weapons
> Marshall considers the job too great an imposition, TRM could simply replace
> the Marshall.  Other than that, I can't see how lack of popularity could
> possibly be an imposition on the kingdom.  This objection, then, seems
> (OmiBoD, I feel an uncontrolable urge to flame--no, no, no) somewhat
> specious (*whew*).  Steel plate armor isn't too popular in Ansteorra.  Gosh,
> maybe we should consider banning it. :^>

I only ask that we not _require_ plate armor, as some (never Ansteorrans)
have from time to time advocated.

-- 
Viscount Galen of Bristol, KSCA, CSM, etc. (now upgraded with ASTA!)
Paul Mitchell, pmitchel at flash.net / "noblesse oblige"
http://www.flash.net/~pmitchel/galen.htm (new site!)