Main > The Courtyard
John Clement, not being knightly.... again.
Ian:
--- Quote from: Sir William on 2013-07-11, 14:15:19 ---You make a good point, Sir Ian- it is not yet a fully developed art...who is to say we know half of what we should? With that said, does he really possess the wherewithal to cast aspersions when the truth really isn't fully known? I'm no fan of the SCA or some of its denizens (present company excluded of course) but I'll use them as an example anyway. Speculation being what it is, who is to say that what they do has no basis in history? Its probably the closest thing to a tourney we're like to see this side of the pond...granted, there's a good bit of leeway that's allowed w/regard to being historically accurate, mostly for safety and inclusion reasons. I know there's a lot of period nazis who take offense to anyone whose garb or accoutrements don't match their level of snuff but the majority of players don't for various reasons. Yet, they indulge in armored combat on a much larger scale- as we all know, not every man on the field was a consummate swordsman, pikeman, archer or even knight, conscripts rarely are so who can honestly say whether or not how they go about it is totally inaccurate or not? None of us were there...you can quote texts and cite pictorial references but those aren't always set down by people who witnessed the events. I say take it w/a grain of salt when its necessary, or the whole shaker if it suits you- but none of us can say they truly know.
--- End quote ---
Well, we can almost certainly say that what the SCA does has no basis in history. Read any surviving treatise on the sword, polearm, messer... whatever, and show me SCA techniques. I'm not talking about the way they dress and depict themselves. I'm talking about the techniques they use in their wars and heavy fighting. Wrap shots, and bizarre guards etc. These techniques are honed and designed for one specific purpose, and that is to be good at SCA heavy. They were never intended to be based on historical techniques. They came up with a game of hitting people with sticks and pretend their swords, they were never designed to use them like an actual sword was used in period. Most importantly, this is not something the SCA should take offense too, because it's simply it's own sport.
The problem JC has is that so many people in the SCA get all bent out of shape when you dare claim what they do is not a historical martial art. It was never intended to be! It doesn't look like any surviving text on real historical martial arts! It was invented by a bunch of people looking to have fun in armor in the 70's! Certain members of the SCA misrepresent what they do as a historical martial art to the public at demos etc... this is a problem when people like us are trying to bring real historical martial arts to the public and we literally have to battle the SCA's misinformation. I'm not claiming all SCA members do this, but the few who do cause a lot of damage to the minds of the public interested in real historical swordsmanship. Why can't it just be fun for fun's sake and be it's own sport? I don't get it.... It's like Renaissance Faire organizers getting offended because Living History enthusiasts assert that a Ren Faire is primarily for entertainment and not history. It's the same thing with SCA vs HEMA.
--- Quote from: Sir Vander Linde on 2013-07-11, 15:59:31 ---I unfortunately don't have the time to read this whole thing at the moment but here is my two cents.
John is a nice guy and we share similar opinions about the SCA and other HMB groups. I have also seen people he has challenge walk away from it, and I have also seen him lose a number of fights. He receives a lot of hate because he defends his interpretations of martial science, and people don't like that it conflicts with their interpretations even though a majority have only looked at depictions with out reading the accompanying text. I have only ever disagreed with Clements once, and it was on use of sword and buckler. As for him acting knightly, well he never as far to my knowledge clamed to be.
Basically, he is either liked or hated, I have never met someone who held him in a neutral position, well maybe not never but very few.
my 2 cents.
--- End quote ---
Well said.
Thorsteinn:
--- Quote from: James Anderson III on 2013-07-11, 17:16:02 ---If he didn't win, and "placed well"... that means he lost to someone, at some point. Does that mean he has no credibility at all any more?
Would that be different from JC showing up to spar with someone, and losing? Would that one fight between JC and someone make or break his "career"?
--- End quote ---
Gemini has never said he is King & God of the One True Path, (nor has Tobler, Capwell, Loades, & others), but it seems often to me that that's exactly what JC is saying. Gemini has entered Combatcon, La Prova Dura, Crown, Coronet, & other EMA & WMA tourney's. He faced other Ways, changed his style, and is constantly improving. I don't really see that as much in ARMA.
I don't care if JC wins or loses. It's not about winning or losing. It's about being more than just words & not being a braggart. Hell I have more honest fight vids, both SCA & HEMA, out there than JC cause I win & lose in them in honest contest.
Words feed Air. Deeds feed Ravens.
On a side note: Is it not nifty that folks like Christian Tobler exist? Still reading my free copy of Fighting with the German Longsword. Still very much liking the continued good work of Freelance Academy Press. :)
Sir Edward:
On the lighter side... 10 minute flourish. :)
Lord Dane:
It has a nice beat & I can dance to it. 8)
Sir Wolf:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version