Western sword dueling (vs battling with a sword against an opposing army, or eastern martial arts), has a lot of caveats to it. You're not just trying to kill the other guy. Depending on the duel, you might be fencing to first blood. You might not be allowed to do certain things. You might be fencing until submission. You might be prize fighting.
It was a very rare case indeed where two people would fight with swords, with the sole intention of killing the other guy anyway they could, or escaping unharmed.
As such, it's hard to say what techniques are "realistic". There aren't a lot of duels on film, but there are some. Here's an interesting comparison:
This is an early 1900s epee duel to first blood. Honour is at stake, and each fencer is trying to wound the arm, but probably not kill.
Normally the epees are disinfected (you don't often disinfect something if you plan to kill the other person), and the action is halted to inspect and treat wounds.
By contrast, in chilean prisons apparently they like to make swords. I can't even begin to imagine what social structure rules come into play here (maybe if you back down, you won't get stabbed, but will have to suck the guys dick - your choice I guess)
It's pretty clear that these guys want to cause serious damage, and are incredibly aggressive, where as the 1900s duel, they are much more reserved. In the chilean prison fights, no one seems to stop the action if you get touched (see :50), so maybe there is good incentive to be the guy doing the attacking in a fight like that.
Modern fencing is about making touches, not about wounding or not being wounded, so it has different goals than these duels. Epee is different to sabre, is different to foil - but it's interesting how even though all these things are basically sword fighting (i.e. trying to hit and not get hit), just a slight change in the context can drastically change the style at which people approach it.
by venuswasaflytrap
by venuswasaflytrap
No comments:
Post a Comment