|
Post by ineffableone on Apr 6, 2012 3:26:13 GMT
Will do, sorry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 3:49:13 GMT
***Content removed by the moderation team***
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 3:51:20 GMT
whoops, just saw your comment Sebastian, apologies. I think we were just trying to say that different body types predispose nations to different style weapons before it all spiralled out of control with political ideology about the homogeneous nature of humanity.
|
|
Sébastien
Senior Forumite
Retired Moderator
Posts: 2,967
|
Post by Sébastien on Apr 6, 2012 4:06:14 GMT
Then you will probably not mind that I remove your last post's content. IMHO your statement would've only furthered this debate in the wrong direction. Actually, I think it would have litterally poured oil on this fire.
Now, can we return to the two blades mentionned in the OP ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 4:10:46 GMT
Thanks Sebastion, that's perfectly fine by me, was half way through a reply, you posted, and I pressed the OK button anyway, so I missed your post. Time to get back on topic!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 4:57:53 GMT
Ok, took a step away for a moment and thought "Katana vs LongSword, what's wrong with this picture?" This is just going to go round and round indefinitely, so now is a good time to take a step back and look at the queston from outside the discussion, and figure what's driving this. Now time to pull it all apart! :lol: These discussions always centre around " Katana vs something" or " Samurai vs something" - always on the same focus, every single time. Now, we don't get the Chinese and English sword fans go at each other with Dadao vs Falchion arguments, or Jian vs Rapier. I've never seen anything like a US cavalry sabre vs Shamshir debate either, or a Viking vs Spartan discussion for that matter. This kind of begs the question, why??? The mindset that would see fit to pit either a Japanese sword or soldier against those of just about every other culture on every internet forum obviously holds some unexpressed and unstated assumption which are driving the need to make the comparison in the first place! The very idea of holding the Samurai or the katana up as a "defacto standard" to compare other historical warriors of blades up against is presumptuous, because there is a unspoken underlying assumption that the Samurai or katana are actually standards that we "compare things up to". It is the hidden assumption that the Samurai or the katana occupy a certain place in a heirarchy of "specialness", making them something to compare everything else to. Without even looking to far into it all, to hold this perspective, there is the unsubstantiated opinion that they must somehow be better than everything else, otherwise why would you choose a katana? You could equally choose something else as a standard of comparison. Why not longsword vs something as obscure as a sudanese kaskara? Next, the reason for a comparison? Why compare this vs that in the first place? I would contend that the reason is to try and "prove" the assumed "specialness" of the chosen standard over the others. That raises the next question, why would you try proving something if you knew it to be a fact? Could an element of self-doubt be lingering in the back of a person's mind that the katana or samurai are not in fact "superior" at all? Is it like the teenage male, who doubts their own masculinity, and fears they are "not man enough" so they act tough and start fights to try to convince themselves that they are, because deep down they don't really believe their own lies? Could it be a psychological ploy of self delusion to convince onesself that they own the "best sword" or support the "best team" (which is just proto-tribalsm), both non-existent ideals, to create that sense of identity and "otherness" to bolster a flagging self esteem? The question raises more questions about the people asking the questions rather than giving technical answers about swords. If the swords in question have never met in a battlefield, then the nature of the question is purely competitive, and not objective. It's straight "us and them". We draw the lines in the sand, assume the superior position, and repel any "others" to reinforce our position. Same mentality as sports fan engage in, a basic form of tribalism. What I find laughable is that people somehow think there is something special about a katana that distinguishes it from every other sword on the planet that has ever existed and ever will. This is serious self-deception. The historical fact is that it's just another sword, there is nothing inherently special about it whatsoever, and in terms of world history it is a historically insignificant blade that saw very little use outside of its birthplace. To prefer a Japanese sword over another is a matter of personal preference, like preferring chocolate ice cream over vanilla, and is based on subjective aesthetic preference rather than objective empirical fact. When we tear apart the question, we can "look behind the curtain" and see it's an empty question with unstated assumptions and an agenda to bolster one's own self doubt about the assumed and unfounded superiority of a sword which has no basis in fact, but in a strong tradition of mythologising from the Japanese makers of these swords, who have their own cultural agenda of trying to create a sense of specialness for themselves, which they are entitled to do if it makes them happier as a nation. Or to put it simply - where did people ever come up with the idea that the katana was a superior sword? We'll, that's what the Japanese have been telling themselves and believing it, much like their "divine emperor" to feel better about themselves and their insignificant history, and the gullible western world has swallowed that nations internal propaganada hook, line and sinker... As humans, we all engage in fantasy to some extent, and psychologically we all are drawn to mythical archetypes that make life bigger and grander than it apparently seems. We all like the idea of a "super sword" and since we in the west have been so taken by the "mysterious east" for the last few hundred years (yes, we think the grass really is greener on the other side), we've attached this fantastic archetypal ideal to none other than "the Japanese katana", a suitable target for our psychological projection. The only catch is that some of us are conscious that we're projecting the attributes of an archetype to a real life object which does not possess them, so we can still feel we have something "special and exotic" in a katana which is a positive thing, but we don't believe the fantasy associated with it - but some of us aren't conscious of the process and desperately want to believe that the projected archetype is a real sword, the ultimate sword, the best sword... A person aware of the projection, who has an aesthetic or functional preference for a katana, is able to objectively see this as the case and not actually insist on its superiority, though they can describe its strong points rationally. Now, if this is the case, then the question should never arise inthe first place??? :? So, that's my deconstruction of the internet phenomenon of "Katana vs _ _ _", enjoy!
|
|
|
Post by ineffableone on Apr 6, 2012 6:02:43 GMT
Actually I think the big reason katana are a source of comparison is simple. Japan kept their sword crafting knowledge alive while most other cultures let theirs fall to ravages of history. China still has a horrible reputation for their weapons as nonfunctional yet Japan learned sword smithing from them and the Koreans. European smiths moved on quickly after swords were made obsolete due to guns. While some old European smithing is still around, like with Swedish axes, sword smithing in Europe lost a lot during the time of the gun.
Japan however made sword smithing a national art. A heritage to preserve. In doing so they kept up a standard of swords in katana that was not seen most other places. Swords else where became cheap ceremonial SLOs mostly. Either decoration for ceremonial military dress, props for theater or movies, or SLO wall hangers. The rare Euro sword became sport weapons, like the fencing foil, but these were not true fighting weapons just sport. Which altered their design further into less functional for combat.
So why is the katana held up as the sword to compare to, not so much because of hype and propaganda, but because it is one of the most intact sword traditions still alive. The quality of katana was never lost to history and had to be rediscovered.
I understand not wanting to over glorify the katana, in the end it is just a piece of metal designed to kill people, like any other sword. I personally like all sorts of different styles of swords from cultures all over the world. While I don't think katana are the end all of swords, they do deserve respect for being an amazing sword. I also think the smithing techniques preserved in Japanese culture are due much respect too.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Apr 6, 2012 6:51:37 GMT
I think there's a very simple reason the Japanese kept their swordsmithing going as long as they did: peace. Or at least, a lack of warfare. In 1543, Portuguese traders brought guns into Japan, which changed warfare in Japan forever. In 1603, the Tokugawa regime began with the unification of Japan, ending the feudal warfare that had plagued it for 106 years and lasted for 265 years. Guns no longer really needed to be developed, but because the samurai were now the ruling class and the katana was something like his staff of office, they continued to be produced during this period, despite them rarely being needed, except in private duels or to cut down the occasional peasant.
The rest of the world, however, continued warring and, war being the father of innovation, kept developing newer, more powerful weapons that required less training to use; guns, in other words. Up until guns became reliable, as well as quick and easy to reload, the sword was still something of a necessary part of their arsenal, as evidenced by the fact that it was in use all the way into WWII. So, really, I think it's not so much that the Japanese desired to preserve their knowledge as the fact that they just never had the need to progress past it until the early modern age. Mind you, this is just my opinion, but when viewed through the scope of Japanese history, it makes sense to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 7:22:39 GMT
Good points from both ineff and Vincent. True ineff, Japan did maintain its production of quality swords when the whole world moved on, so it's understandable how their reputation emerged around the world as makers of fine swords. That was a long time ago, and a lot has changed in the world since those times, so it looks like some of the old outdated beliefs in the western world have persisted despite the changes. The main reason westerners have flocked to the eastern cultures for martial arts is because we've stupidly let our own culture slip away, and we've had a deep desire to reconnect with what's missing in our culture. Some cultures had the sense to preserve theirs, whether their reasons were good or bad!
Vincent, it goes even further than the Japanese not needing to progress, they actively resisted progression, which they saw as a threat to their culture and tradition, not to mention a huge impending sentence of doom to a whole aristocratic class of samurai, who were already redundant and purposeless in Japanese society, and were now were facing losing their social status and priviledge. The Tokugawa shogunate had a policy of isolationism, the Sakoku (maning "locked country") forbidding contact with most outside countries. That was soon fixed with western "gunboat diplomacy", forcing Japan to open its doors to trade with the west. So, yes, they clung to their swords out of necessity, and Japan also clung to its 'cult of the katana' out of necessity - national identity and unification.
|
|
|
Post by Jussi Ekholm on Apr 6, 2012 9:21:50 GMT
Well this will be my last post in this thread and I will keep it civilized (at least I'll try harder than last time).
This subject is always flammable, and this is so old discussion subject. There have been Viking vs. Spartan, Indian vs. Samurai, Knight vs. Roman subjects too, you name it people fight over it. Guess the human nature just wants to have conflicts.
I tend to think myself being in the grey zone, like I usually am. Sure I may sound like a fanboy of Japanese swords in this thread but I would do similar defense for European swordtypes if needed, I'll change my faction to that which needs defense. Like I've said even many times in this thread my beliefs are not better than your beliefs, each man has a right to have their own opinion. And I firmly believe opinions will gradually evolve over time as you learn more. I sure know mine have, and they will continue to evolve in the future.
If only things would be as simple as saying you can't do x because y will be more efficient because you think it's so. I've seen many really knowledgeable people to admit that they do not necessarily know why (insert something here). And I've learned that information likewise from them, so I will rather say I think it may be like this than stating that it is so (sometimes I forget to word out my sentences like that, and it changes the whole outcome). You can throw many facts around but in some cases even those who have spent much of their life reasearching on certain subject cannot give you one minded conclusion on how some thing really is.
There are many flammable discussion subjects and people usually tend to take sides. And as people are stubborn, they rarely change their mind overnight. And some people hold some authorities over others, and maybe rightfully so. Things like these will come with research, and might evolve as you research more. When your knowledge grows you'll get better understanding of things. Sure even some books are wrong, then it comes down to which author you hold as authority, will you believe that thing is like A says so, or is it like B and C say it is, decisions decisions. But these desicions will shape the basis of your knowledge, which you base your opinions on.
The conclusion has been on the 1st and 2nd page, katana and longsword are both excellent swords. There is nothing special in katana nor the longsword, yet everything special is in both sword types, you just have to understand those factors to appreciate them.
I think most of the superior sword legend will be psychological factor. I'll take Gauls vs. Romans for example, imagine hearing just before battle that your weapons are **** and can't even scratch the coming Romans, really nice to be battling soon, eh? Of course the psychological factors have to be turned to your own advantage as much as you can. Much more confident thinking you will easily crush the skulls of your enemies and maim through their lines.
If you keep thinking that apples are oranges, they will be oranges to you, although others still see them as apples. But in the end of the day all that matters to you is your own opinion. Like I said before people have the right to believe what they want to believe.
My apologies as this may sound really lecturing, I am no authority to do so, however I guess I tried to bring more philosophical side of things up. In the end of the day the people are those that do the fighting, not the swords.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 9:36:39 GMT
Interesting point, what matters to me is not my opinion, but to learn what is understood to be factual and correct, so I can constantly amend and update my opinions. Opinions shouldn't be like teddy bears, things we cling to and refuse to let go of, they should be temporary stepping stones to the truth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 10:32:51 GMT
So your making the assumption no one on the forum is neither scientist or professor ?
|
|
Talon
Member
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,554
|
Post by Talon on Apr 6, 2012 11:04:14 GMT
sebastien said its best left to scholars and scientists in universities he never said there were no scientists or scholars on sbg
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 11:04:52 GMT
No, I think he's just poining out that it's a bit of a touchy subject, so we'll leave it to others to debate elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Lukas MG (chenessfan) on Apr 6, 2012 11:07:00 GMT
I don't think this is what Sebastien implied, it's just that this is SBG and not a place for people to argue matters of ethnicity and race, no matter if some forumites are scholars, scientists or whatever else. This simply doesn't belong here.
Edit: The other guys beat me to it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 11:11:45 GMT
It was a diversion from the main topic anyway, so it's OK
|
|
|
Post by Fifteenthirty on Apr 6, 2012 11:28:20 GMT
MY katana cuts much better than MY longsword (through plastic bottles). I can easily cut empty bottles without knocking them over. This is due to the razor sharpness of the katana (customised Cheness Tenchi) and probably the curvature helping to slice. My longsword (actually a warsword, Atrim 1530) is designed to stand up to more edge abuse (armour!) and is not as sharp. I cut much more with it, however, as it is more challenging, and thus more fun. Plus, it is a better (and more expensive!) sword.
Cutting bottles has nothing to do with combat effectiveness, I know, but either do swords generally, these days. They are objects of fantasy, people!
I need a gladius.
|
|
|
Post by Fifteenthirty on Apr 6, 2012 11:30:03 GMT
I should have said earlier: katana are better for cutting with, and longswords better for thrusting (optimised for those types of attacks, generally).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 11:36:57 GMT
I have a gladius, it's only a Windlass Pompei gladius though Did you have to sharpen the Tenchi to get those silent cuts? Havent tried cutting with mine yet...
|
|
|
Post by Derzis on Apr 6, 2012 12:26:35 GMT
And the spartans are not the greeks. Don't generalize just to try to cover your initial point. For the rest all I can say is: Yeah, and?
|
|