|
Post by Cosmoline on Jan 4, 2019 2:39:32 GMT
Kenjutsu is tough to find from what I've heard, but you may be near Jake Norwood's Kunst des Fechtens. He's also on the list of people who easily destroy me.
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jan 4, 2019 3:51:05 GMT
yes, kenjutsu is very hard in the US to find a proper school. First off, there aren't a whole lot of schools even in Japan that teach it compared to the more popular martial arts, and in the US, it's not a well know martial art to begin with, and teachers are about as common as unicorn teeth since most of them come from Japan in the first place. I know of a few schools scattered around the US, but none are anywhere near close to me.
So with the issues of lack of popularity, lack of qualified teachers, and the resulting lack of governance through a sanctioning organization then the quick answer is no, we probably won't have any kenjutsu schools in my area any time soon. More's the pity for that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2019 4:32:17 GMT
Is there a sanctioning body in HEMA? I remember that time pretty much everyone got bent about the mere insinuation it might happen.
I don't mean to be down on the idea, but it really sounds like trying to compare apples and oranges when nobody can even define what a fruit is in the first place. I am sure getting together would be fun, but I'm getting squinty eyed thinking you can really take anything authoritative or definitive from the experience.
**Edit to add**
Nothing really wrong with the idea, you could probably get good insights on what the other practitioner's understand of their art. Just be mindful that what they understand may be a very limited and possibly incorrect or partially-informed interpretation of their thing. Just because you meet up with a guy who practices X doesn't mean you've tested your technique against X-Ryu and so forth. You can test your swordwork against someone else's swordwork, but just be careful that you don't overstep and start thinking that you're able to draw conclusions about a system or a tradition.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Jan 7, 2019 17:40:09 GMT
But within European systems we do it all the time. And it's often more interesting than same-weapon pairing. It isn't a matter of coming up with the authoritative answer. Rather, if enough people from JSA are willing to cross swords with the HEMA people we may come to a better understanding over time. For example, we've generally found that experienced rapier fighters do better in one-on-one fights than most of the medievalists. Rapiers are very hard to beat in skilled hands, and any fantasy about a displacement being easy with a longsword or S&B quickly gets disabused. But we don't really have any similar conclusions about the katana schools because crossovers with proper equipment are so rare.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2019 18:34:03 GMT
Your best bet would seem to be finding some kind of tournament or sparring focused JSA that is oriented to friendly contest, otherwise you'll really only be looking at distortion of technique. Gekiken looks like a likely candidate. It's all fine and great until someone tries to draw conclusions outside the scope of what you are really looking at.
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jan 8, 2019 2:28:03 GMT
I don't really view any match-up as a vehicle to make final conclusions about anything. I view it more as a proper exchange of techniques where both parties can learn valuable lessons for improving their own systems in an environment where you don't have just a bunch of clowns whacking away at each other willy-nilly. I wouldn't be looking for a "definitive" answer as to who is better or not- just a learning environment to see where certain styles are weak and others strong.
It would certainly be filled with the unexpected- I know I've never fought against a longsword or rapier so I am completely in the dark as to what that guy will do. And with luck, my opponent will be equally surprised about what I have in store for him. After the match, we can compare notes
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Jan 8, 2019 2:40:16 GMT
I don't really view any match-up as a vehicle to make final conclusions about anything. I view it more as a proper exchange of techniques where both parties can learn valuable lessons for improving their own systems in an environment where you don't have just a bunch of clowns whacking away at each other willy-nilly. I wouldn't be looking for a "definitive" answer as to who is better or not- just a learning environment to see where certain styles are weak and others strong. It would certainly be filled with the unexpected- I know I've never fought against a longsword or rapier so I am completely in the dark as to what that guy will do. And with luck, my opponent will be equally surprised about what I have in store for him. After the match, we can compare notes Exactly my perspective: 'comparing notes' is where the fun and the utility lies in such an exercise. It's not so much about 'this style > that style' as it is 'this and that is like this and compares to that like this'.
As a big fan of dual wielding Japanese styled swords as well as rapier and dagger, it'd be a blast to consistently spar with those two in particular. Hopefully the opportunity presents itself sooner rather than later.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 14:42:16 GMT
Everybody has their own idea of fun so can't really argue about that.
I guess I just don't get what is interesting about the notes you can take from someone misapplying whatever understanding they have of their art in a context it wasn't meant for.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Jan 8, 2019 20:08:42 GMT
I guess that begs the question of what the art was intended for. Certainly cross-style and mixed weapon fights were to be expected.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 9, 2019 8:11:28 GMT
GM Giron’s style, Larga Mano, has no defence. It is strictly chop, chop, advance, advance. He used a non-pointed long sword of his design, with no guard. He didn’t need a guard with his style that he used successfully in the Philippines fighting the Japanese during WWII. He is now deceased but his students continue to teach Larga Mano. Don’t forget the Shasqua when it comes to no guard. I looked up the system you mention, and I wonder if the reason it's mostly made up of offensive motions is because troops weren't expected to become melee combat experts, or that teaching them to react defensively like stepping back or may have put the men at a disadvantage when against an opponent with a fixed bayonet. It's definitely interesting to watch, and looks like an effective bladed martial art for the modern era.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Jan 9, 2019 13:38:47 GMT
GM Giron’s style, Larga Mano, has no defence. It is strictly chop, chop, advance, advance. He used a non-pointed long sword of his design, with no guard. He didn’t need a guard with his style that he used successfully in the Philippines fighting the Japanese during WWII. He is now deceased but his students continue to teach Larga Mano. Don’t forget the Shasqua when it comes to no guard. I looked up the system you mention, and I wonder if the reason it's mostly made up of offensive motions is because troops weren't expected to become melee combat experts, or that teaching them to react defensively like stepping back or may have put the men at a disadvantage when against an opponent with a fixed bayonet. It's definitely interesting to watch, and looks like an effective bladed martial art for the modern era. My understanding of his tactic was to operate in a 3 man unit with him being point with 1 man on each flank forming a triangle. On the attack it was his task to swing his sword, striking the enemy. A kill would be fine, but not the objective. It was the task of the flank men to kill the wounded he created. Speed was of importance as they were in and out before the enemy could organize. The US provided him with US weapons, M1 Garand, M1911 pistol, etc. but he preferred his blade. Due to his tactics I would prefer a blade also. Actually his tactics were not all that new to Filipinos as in tribal war fare a tactic was the young and able men would form the front line to incapacitate the enemy and move forward. The older and sick men would follow finishing the job.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 9, 2019 14:51:51 GMT
I looked up the system you mention, and I wonder if the reason it's mostly made up of offensive motions is because troops weren't expected to become melee combat experts, or that teaching them to react defensively like stepping back or may have put the men at a disadvantage when against an opponent with a fixed bayonet. It's definitely interesting to watch, and looks like an effective bladed martial art for the modern era. My understanding of his tactic was to operate in a 3 man unit with him being point with 1 man on each flank forming a triangle. On the attack it was his task to swing his sword, striking the enemy. A kill would be fine, but not the objective. It was the task of the flank men to kill the wounded he created. Speed was of importance as they were in and out before the enemy could organize. The US provided him with US weapons, M1 Garand, M1911 pistol, etc. but he preferred his blade. Due to his tactics I would prefer a blade also. Actually his tactics were not all that new to Filipinos as in tribal war fare a tactic was the young and able men would form the front line to incapacitate the enemy and move forward. The older and sick men would follow finishing the job. Interesting, blows my little theory up lol. I would hate to be a Japanese sentry in the Philippines with this guy in my area.
|
|