ARN - Bruising (was Double wide vs. Schlager)

[Lenny Zimmermann]

(Kinda long, because I'm just a long-winded rambling kinda guy, sometimes.
;-))

On Thursday, April 15, 1999 10:13 AM Baron Michael Silverhands wrote:


[snip of discussions regarding bruising and lack thereof]
>However, I'm not sure I understand being either proud of having humongous
>bruises, or being proud that you have destroyed your body's ability to
bruise.
>
>Hmmm... I feel like I'm swimming in dark waters here. I think I might be
close
>to a revelation regarding the cultural difference about the regard for
bruises
>between the rapier and "heavy" crowds. But I *also* have the sneaking
suspicion
>that I'm dangerously close to somebody's sacred cow. :-)
>
>If you're proud of having bruises, then obviously there is no sin in giving
>them. On the other hand, if you're concerned about giving them, then having
them
>indicates a problem. Hmmm...


I think a certain level of tolerance and understanding is what is needed
here. I think there are many reasons for the cultural differences between
the armored and the rapier communities. Armored combat was here first, with
lots of that macho dish-it-out-before-you-have-to-take-it attitude so highly
prevalent in so many sporting venues we grew up with, such as football. We
have different rules and an aim at a more sporting/chivalrous attitude than
most modern full-contact sports, but that underlying mentality is still part
of our cultural heritage and not, very often, discouraged on the armored
field.

Rapier, on the other hand, appears to have grown up in a slightly more
constrained environment. It was that weird thing that just didn't look very
medieval, and reminded everyone too much of the Out-of-Period venues you
might find Errol Flynn in. (Note: I speak here in past-tense for
Ansteorrans. For some places this is still an on-going attitude. I daresay
even among some few in this Kingdom.) It appears to have grown up in an
environment where safety constraints were of great concern as a limiting
factor from those in power (i.e. the Armored combatants.) For some, their
hearts were in the right place having gained a certain level of, not
necessarily fear, but at least respect for actual steel. For others that
safety may have been an excuse for keeping in check something they felt did
not belong in the "game" of the SCA. Either way in order to allow rapier
combat it would seem that an overly-cautious (in comparison to armored
combat) attitude appears to have been taken.

I think that since that time we've also seen a further trend of delineation,
one that is actually starting to make tiny inroads into armored combat as
well, interestingly enough. That trend is one of attitude concerning WHY we
fight. The idea that is fairly prevalent and often encouraged in rapier
combat is one that what we do when fighting is a game of finesse and style
that has more to do with skill, than with power. (Not that fighting armored
does not use skill, mind you, as I fight both styles with vigor and I'm well
aware of the skills required for striking well AND with power!) As such many
of us tend to view hits more with the view of "I was unable to match your
attack with an appropriate defense allowing you to 'touch' me, and thereby
proving your skill." Something like blow-calling by embarrassment, in a way.
:) This attitude lends itself well to lighter hits, further assisting the
safety attitude of not wanting to hurt your friends. It is an attitude I
enjoy and greatly admire.

I do think, however, we should be fairly tolerant. Consider that not
everyone shares this view. Some prefer a stronger dueling mindset, as if
each fight were a fight to the death, with the idea that you'd want to throw
a blow you are fairly sure would "kill" you opponent, or at least wound them
grievously where you using a real sword. I think we all have to accept that
no matter how we view it, this is a full-contact sport. The hard-hitters
should try to be aware that they may not need to hit some people as hard as
they, themselves, might prefer to be hit, and the "touch" folks should
accept that they may receive an occasional bruise or injury. Nature of the
game, in armored OR rapier. Best we can do is to try and maintain our safety
measures and bring it to the attention of those who may be consistently
hitting hard that there may be some safety concerns involved for them based
on our rules set. (After all, rapier does have a maximum blow defined,
albight fuzzily, where I do not remember reading of such for armored.)

Just my thoughts on the matter. Don't know if I've enlightened or just
further confused the issue.

Honos Servio,
Lionardo Acquistapace, Bjornsborg
(Lenny Zimmermann, San Antonio)
zarlor at acm.org


============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.