Plateaus

It happens to all of us: we keep getting better and better until all of a sudden, we just can't get any better. This doesn't mean we don't have anything more to learn, just that we've learned as much as we can by what we're doing. We've plateaued. And the sad fact is that this isn't something that happens once, but over and over again.

Usually, the first plateau happens fairly early in your career: you've learned the basics and have started doing pretty well for yourself locally, but then Bam! Your death becomes a common, oft-repeated part of fighter's practice and you begin feeling like the shire pin-cushion. The cause of this first plateau is that your fellow local fencers have learned all your tricks, all your patterns, and can counter them without even thinking about it.

For this first plateau, the solution is to travel. Go to other group's fighter's practices. Do pick-up fights when you go to events. And if you see someone do something really effective, ask them about it. This will expand your knowledge base and teach you new tricks that maybe didn't work for the other local fighters, haven't made their way to your local group, or maybe have been forgotten by your other local fighters.

This will get you going again and you'll start doing better and better at tourneys, maybe winning a few but definitely making a good showing for yourself. You're right on the edge of greatness, then Bam! Another plateau. You're still doing well, but you just can't get your head around those Gold Scarves. So, what do you do now?

You start teaching. You help out at fighter's practice with the brand new fencers, showing them the basics of footwork, parries and attacks. This slows you down and forces you to think about what you're doing and how. And it also starts to teach you how to watch other fighters and take apart their style. And after a while, you begin to make progress against those Gold Scarves who'd been your bane for the past few months.

And things are going great until the same thing happens again. This is when many fencers will begin doing research, either on period techniques or other martial arts, trying to find that certain something missing from their style. They'll start focusing on the why of fencing moves and begin adapting other arts to their needs.

And again, as you get deeper into your research, your skill will begin improving until you're the equal of all but the very best Gold Scarves, but then you hit another plateau. And it's time to change things up again. It's time to start "hunting Dons." You should be taking every chance you can get to fight with the White Scarves, both in tourneys and in practices. Ask them questions. Ask for their advice. Pump them for as much knowledge as you can: after all, many of them have forgotten more about fencing than most of us know.

And just like before, you'll start improving again. And, like before, you'll hit that plateau again. And this time it's back to teaching - but not focusing on the beginners. This time you're focusing on the intermediate or advanced fighters, teaching them your tricks and helping them through their plateaus.

But even after you get past this plateau (and hopefully earned your White Scarf), you're still not done. Every so often, you'll hit another plateau. And the fix for that plateau will always be to learn more or to teach.

As for myself, I've taught beginners, I've traveled, I've done research, and I'm definitely at a plateau. I guess that means I should start hunting Dons.

We're Not That Different

One thing that I've noticed over my many years of fencing within the Society is the segregation of the fencers and the armored fighters. It isn't at all uncommon for fencers to think of their armored counterparts as big, dumb stickjocks, just as there are a fair share of armored fighters who see us as nothing more than wire weenies. Now, it's not as bad as it used to be: we're getting more armored fighters doing fencing as well as more fencers trying their hand at armored fighting, but the problem is still there. Especially among the newer fighters.

I wish I could say that our opinion was a reaction to the armored community's view of us ("They don't like us? Well, to heck with them!"), but no. Historically, it's the other way around. In the early days of fencing, we (yes, I'm including myself) looked at the differences between fencers and armored fighters. We saw that they wore metal and fought with sticks while we wore cloth and fought with steel. They were whack-heavy while we focused on the thrust. They were heavy, while we were light. And we saw that these things made fencing more difficult - after all, armored fighters don't have to dial down their hits to where their opponents barely feel it, they just bash each other as hard as they can.

Here's the thing: fighting's fighting. It doesn't matter what style you do, the basics are the same. You don't believe me? Let me tell you a story. Back when I was with the 163d, we were heading off to do a Combatives (hand-to-hand) class and to motivate us, our sergeant said that whoever did the worst would have to go clean weapons afterwards. He then began going through our section, weighing the odds for each of us. Now, even though S1 and S4 are usually considered REMFs, we weren't exactly the paper-pushers you might think. Out of the 7 of us, we had 3 11B , an 11C, and a scout. Leaving me as one of only two members of the group not in combat arms. Needless to say, odds were pretty good that I'd be the one cleaning weapons. When the sergeant mentioned that, I replied, "But I fence!"

I'm sure you can imagine the results: everyone started laughing. Well, we got to the class (my first Level II class), and I found myself helping the other members of my section. It wasn't because I was an expert in Combatives. It wasn't even because of some belt I earned (I know just enough Aikido to fall without killing myself). It was my fencing. You see, footwork is footwork. And what's a punch but a thrust without a sword?

Like I said: fighting's fighting. You want to know the difference between armored fighting and fencing? Armored fighters learn to put power into their attacks and fencers learn to take power out of theirs. The difference between a good armored shot and a tip cut? Six inches and power. Between a heavy hit and a draw cut? The power. That's it. Oh sure, there are some conventions that are different: they allow body contact, and their forearms and lower legs are off-limits, but the basics are the same.

So back when fencing started getting a toe-hold in Artemisia, we fencers were doing our best to shoot ourselves in the foot. It was bad enough that our failing to see the similarities kept us from going to the armored fighters for help, but our putting ourselves above them did an incredible job of alienating them. I mean, think about it: it's only within the last few years that we've started to see any real sort of crossover between the two fighting styles.

We're finally starting to get beyond the playground games which hampered our attempts to legitimize fencing, but we're not out of the woods yet. Armored fighting has been around in Artemisia for a lot longer than fencing. We need to learn to recognized not only the traditions of armored fighters, but also the immense wealth of knowledge stored in that great body. Yes, their ways are different, but we can still adapt them to our needs.

Sticky Questions

At Whipping Winds, I was asked why there aren't any northern White Scarves. Boy, talk about a loaded question. But you have to admit it's a very good question, even if it isn't entirely accurate. There is one White Scarf in Bronzehelm: Don Adam, a recent transplant from the Outlands.

So why hasn't Northern Artemisia produced any White Scarves? I mean, we have fencers. Fifty-two, going by the official rolls. That's out of 178 total authorized fencer. In other words, almost 30% of Artemisia's fencers live in Northern Artemisia, and yet only one of the 19 White Scarves lives north of One Thousand Eyes. Now if we average out the number of white scarves (19) to the number of fencers (178), you come out with about one out of every ten fencers being a white scarf. So we've apparently got the numbers to allow us to produce White Scarves, so it can't be our numbers.

Maybe we're just too new of fencers. There may be something to that. After all, when I came back from the Army, there were only a handful of fencers that I recognized from before, so the majority of fencers up here have been doing it for something less than 7 years. The thing is, I can think of three fencers besides myself who were fencing before I left that are still active: Cormac, Antoine, and Albion. Yes, Antoine and Albion took a hiatus around the same time I did and came back at about the same time, but even discounting those absences, they still have better than ten years fencing within the Society. So there is a pool of experienced fencers to look at for promotion (about the 1 in 10 we see in White Scarves, even) as well as a pretty good crop of up-and-comers in the making.

So it's not lack of fencers or lack of experienced fencers. So why aren't there any Northern White Scarves? The only reason I can come up with that might have any merit is visibility. Artemisia covers a huge area, about a thousand miles from our northernmost group to our southernmost. And, although One Thousand Eyes is closest to a geographical center, Loch Salaan has been our cultural center since our days as a principality. Just look at a map of our kingdom and you can see this: centered around Loch Salaan are three other groups, all of which are less than two hours driving time apart. Even expanding out, there's another half-dozen groups within about 4 hours of Loch Salaan. So, yes it makes sense that Loch Salaan would be the cultural center. The drawback to that is that the southern-most group in Northern Artemisia (the former shire of Dun Braga) is seven hours from Loch Salaan. And beyond them there's three groups within an additional two hours, and three more another three hours out and then two more past that.

For the most part, those of us in Northern Artemisia can manage about a 4-hour drive to make it to events without too much trouble. Unfortunately for most of us, the only groups within that four hour range are other groups in Northern Artemisia. I'll admit it: in my 20 years of playing, I've made it south of One Thousand Eyes a whopping 5 times.

And we get upset because more southern fencers don't make it up to our events. Hmmm. If we can't make it to events more than four hours away, how can we expect our southern brethren to do it?

If we, as Northern Artemisians, expect to receive the recognition we feel we deserve, we need to make it out of Montana - and not just to Uprising. We need to be willing to make the long pilgrimages into the heart of Artemisia. And not just to be seen, but to also show our southern friends that it is possible - and worthwhile - to make the long trek.

My Mom's Not Going to Like This

You see, my mother's a died-in-the-wool feminist, achieving more in her mumble-mumble years of living the belief that there is nothing a man can do that a women can't (when she did hit the glass ceiling, it was because of religion, not gender) than most people can imagine. So you'd think that the odds of my being a chauvenist would be pretty slim, right?

And you're right, mostly. The thing is, I recognize the fact that - in general - there are some things an average male is better at than an average female. The big example is physical strength. Your average male is stronger than your average female. But along those same lines, your average female has better balance and a higher tolerance for pain (yes, it's true) than your average male. One isn't better than the other, they just have different strengths.

So, why does this matter in fencing? The physical differences don't, really. The psychological differences do. At least to me they do. Okay, before you jump up on your soapbox and start haranguing me for being a sexist pig, let me explain. You see, women don't, in general, find going out and blowing stuff up a relaxing way to spend an afternoon. For them, agression is something that has to be cultivated, whereas it comes so naturally to men that, if anything, it has to be reigned in. And when you consider that half of fencing is proper use of agression, you can see where this becomes an issue.

In my experience, you can bring out the agressiveness in even the most timid male fencer by two simple steps. The first one is to go at him hard and heavy for about five minute (not quite club him like a seal, but along those lines). This gets him to understand instinctually that you're not really going to hurt him. The second step is to have him do the same to you. If you do it right after step 1, he'll be frustrated enough that he will come at you hard and heavy. This will not only make him understand that he's not going to hurt you, but it'll also flip a switch in his cave-man brain, and he'll know that it's okay to attack. Yes, sometimes it'll take a few tries, but if it takes over a half-hour to get him to attack instead of just defend, I'd be surprised.

This doesn't work with women. At least not in my experience. And neither does having them picture their brother/sister/mom/whatever, at least not anywhere close to consistently. The truth is, I have no idea how to bring out the agressiveness in women fencers. Let me tell you, I had fun trying to explain that to the mother of one of our local fencers. She was asking if I could help her daughter become a more agressive fencer and I told her no. When she asked why not, I tried to explain how women and men think differently. Needless to say, she didn't take to that too well. But when I asked her if she understood how men thought, she admitted that no, she didn't. I told her that the easiest way for her daughter to learn how to be agressive would be for her to talk to someone who wasn't suffering from testosterone poisoning (i.e. another woman).

I'm sure there are people who don't agree with me, who do see this as and admission of sexism, but I like to think they are wrong. Rather, this is an admission of a personal limitation. Just as I can't take apart an opponent's style by watching them fence, I do not know enough about women to bring out the agressiveness necessary for fencing. The mechanics of fencing, I can teach to anyone, but the mindset is beyond my capabilities.

Was I right?

In one of the posts over on Artemisia Militaris, someone asked the question of whether the new youth stickers affected how us old farts fought them. Basically, she wanted to know if we were taking it easy on the young fighters because they are young. Pretty unanimously the answer was no, but.... Later, I approached the fencer who'd posed the question and admitted that I had treated my fight with her in the Non-Don tourney differently, but it wasn't because she was young. It was because she was looking to become a cadet.

Okay, here's what happened. Yes, I gave her the best fight I could - she even commented on not being used to me being "all flowey and stuff" - but she's young, quick and not without skill whereas I'm old, slow and left relying on my skill and we ended in a double kill. Almost simultaneously, we head-shot each other. Her shot landed a fraction of a second before mine, but well after I'd started my shot. Now, if I'd been treating this as a serious tourney, I would have taken it as a double-kill and the call would have been beyond question. But I was in it for the fun (I'd make a lousy cadet, so there was no point in drawing attention to myself). She was, too, but I knew that the added visibility would do her quest good. So I gave her the bout, claiming (rightfully) that her touch landed first.

When I talked to her about it later, she said she didn't really need the extra exposure - and she's probably right: she's a good enough fencer that she'll go far without too much help - but she didn't mind what I'd done. After all, she'd had fun.

But looking back, I do have to ask if it was the right thing to do. At the time, I was sure of it. And, in this instance, no harm was done. But I've realized that if she wasn't such a confident young woman, it could have left her wondering if she'd have done so well if I hadn't "given" her the win.

Was this another one of those things I can add to my ever-growing list of ways not to become a Don?

The Archetypes of Fence

One factor in rapier fighting that is often overlooked is how we view our fighting. Do we view it as a martial art? As a sport? A chance to look good? A way to advance? For each of us, the reason is at least a little different, but that reason can be broken down into five basic archetypes:

• The Artist: This is the fighter who sees fencing as a way to explore how it was really done in period times. They're the ones who can quote Capo Ferro and are drawn to Cut-and-Thrust because it's "more accurate." Their garb is usually immaculate and their blades are sized and balanced to perfection. They look down (at least in private) on epee-guarded schlagers and modern fencing jackets.


• The Contender: This is the fighter who sees fencing as a sport. Their goal is to win! Their main reason for pick-ups before a tournament is so they can pick apart their opponent's style and their gear is the lightest, fastest gear they can find that still meets the SCA standards.


• The Dandy: The Dandy sees fencing as the ultimate expression of style. Their garb is awesome, their weapons, things of beauty and their deaths worth of an Oscar. For them, their performance comes a distant second to how good they look performing and the greatest insult you can give them is to tap your chest and call good when their thrust lands true.


• The Soldier: The soldier lives for melee. They see nothing funner than a target-rich environment and the chance to command troops. Quite often, the best compliment their garb receives is that it's servicable - and usually over-built - and the number of RBGs they can carry is astounding.


• The Suitor: The suitor sees fencing as a road for advancement within The Society. Their garb usually follows the trends of those of higher station than themselves and their equipment comes highly recommended by those In The Know. Much of their time off the field is spent in conversation with Peers and Defenders and they quite often feel disdain for those lesser fencers who are forced into their presence.

Yes, this list shows the purest, most distilled archetypes you can find among fencers. And yes, a fencer who personifies a single archetype is a bad thing. But all of the archetypes are necessary to form a good fencer. We need The Artist's quest for knowledge because the purpose of the SCA is to recreate the middle ages. And without The Contender, we'd never feel the drive to improve ourselves. Likewise, The Dandy teaches us to embrace the pageantry of a well-run tourney and The Soldier gives us the ability to lead, both on the field and off. And, although The Suitor may seem the least attractive of the five archetypes, it is The Suitor that lets us learn appropriate behavior to get along with those around us and, yes, perhaps get noticed for our accomplishments.

It is only when we combine these archetypes in equal measure that we truly move from rapier fighters to fencers.

One in Ten

My captain told me once that he spent 90% of his time dealing with 10% of his soldiers. He was talking about how it was the problem children in the unit who required all of his attention, which made him feel like he was neglecting the rest of the unit.

And that problem isn't unique to the military, just about every large group suffers from it. Even us fencers. If you look through the rule books for the SCA, just about every decision in there can be traced to a single person (not all the same one, but still...).

I was taken to task over my last post, because it sounded like I was blaming all of the white scarves for what happened at Uprising. That wasn't my intention, and if it was taken that way, I appologize.

But, likewise, I cannot say that all of the White Scarves (either in Artemisia or the Knowne World) are the paragons of Truth, Justice and the Artemisian Way that we would hope they would be. In fact, I would go as far as to say that each and every one of them has had at least one lapse in judgement at one time or other, that's just part of being human. Unfortunately, just like in any group, there are a small few for whom these lapses of judgement go from occasional to fairly often.

And, thanks to good old Murphy, the bigger the lapse the more public it tends to be. This leads to the group being judged too often by our occasional mistakes, instead of by the numerous good deeds that surround them.

That is why I brought up the occurence at Uprising. Everyone makes mistakes, yes. But in order to offset these mistakes to the surrounding public, we need to be seen as being able to recognize them and show that we can take care of them, and the more in-house we can do it, the better.

So, why did I bring it up in a public forum? Wouldn't directly confronting the individuals about their actions have been better? If I'd have had names, yes. But I didn't. So, instead, I used the incident as a chance to remind everyone of the impact of their words.

Wheter this was the best choice or not, I don't know, but it has obviously gotten people's attention.

Giving Criticism

Okay, so this one bothered me.

When I got to Uprising, one of our young fencers came running up to me to show off his new prize - a buckler he'd made himself. I checked it over, and it was ugly, I think anyone who was there knows the one I mean. But like I said, I checked it out and pointed out a couple of flaws with it (it had some 1/4" holes in it) and told him the marshal might bounce it because of them and, yes, I'll admit I ribbed him some about it's appearance, but I also told him it was a very creative first try.

Now what I'd expected to happen was that he'd show it to the marshal and it'd get bounced for the holes (heaven knows I've had my equipment bounced for stupider things), but what happened was that the marshal ignored the holes (see The Society Rapier Handbook, Protective Gear:2.B.ii, I know it's meant for masks, but it can be interpreted to apply to other parts of your equipment), and let the young man take it on the field.

Where he was greeted by several rounds of "My God! That's ugly, how could you even think of bringing it on the field?" For some reason, he bowed out of the melees early. And refused to go to the Chivaly Circle. And refused to take part in any of the tournaments. When I tracked him down and asked him why, he said that he didn't need a bunch of white scarves telling him his buckler was ugly and he should be ashamed to bring it out on the field.

Thank you guys, you just killed rapier for a young man.

Vivat.

Okay, yes it was ugly. But I have to ask if anyone even looked at the fencer carrying it? He was 16, with purely store-bought equipment. I mean, even without the buckler, he just screamed "new fencer." Wouldn't it have been better to play Laurel and find at least one good thing about it ("I like that you painted it") before tearing him down? Or, even better yet, offer to, or suggest someone who could help him make a better one? I know I tried that, but by that time, he was so defensive from the repeated attacks that he refused to even think of giving up his buckler.

I hope that I'm wrong. I hope that he isn't getting ready to abandon us in favor of the armored fighters who praised his creativity, rather than criticize his appearance, but whatever the results may be with the young man, it makes me glad that I don't wear a scarf that would tie me to such wonderful people as our supposed paragons of fencing.

Finding the right scarf

We have a fighter up here who is looking to become a cadet. Aside from the opportunity this gives us old farts to rib them, it also leaves us with trying to advise them on who would be a good White Scarf to attach themselves to. I've been keeping my mouth shut so far because I don't see any White Scarf who would be a good teacher for our wannabe cadet. Not because I think so low of our Scarves, but rather because the nearest one is a good three hours away, making any real instruction impractical. Now, in a year or so, when they go off to college in Salt Lake, it'll be a different matter. But for right now, I don't see a good solution for them.

That being said, there are some questions you should when choosing which White Scarf to attach yourself as a cadet to.

The first question is do you respect them? If you don't, you won't take their advice seriously. And there's no point in mentoring yourself to someone you won't listen to.

Second is: are they a good teacher? Teaching - and the ability to teach well - is an entirely different skill set than doing. Just because someone is an excellent fencer does not mean that they can teach fencing. This is one of the areas where I know I fall short of the ideal of ever becoming a White Scarf. I'm really a lousy teacher. I'm grumpy, I'm impatient, and I'm waaaay too opinionated. On top of that, I just don't have the skill to take apart someone's form and critique it the way a true fencing teacher should.

Third is can they teach you what you need to know? Different people have different strengths and weaknesses, so finding someone whose strength is your weakness will offer you more chance for improvement than someone with your same strengths and weaknesses.

Fourth: is their code of honor compatible with yours? They don't have to be the same, but there shouldn't be any glaring differences, like, say they believe that there's nothing wrong with juggling kittens, but you are a firm believer that only hamsters should be juggled. Remember that as their cadet, not only does your honor reflect on them, but their honor reflects on you.

Fifth and sixth: do they have the time to teach you and do you have the time to be taught? Just like with someone you don't respect, it's pointless to attach yourself to a White Scarf you'll never get to spend time with. This is why I don't recommend choosing a White Scarf that lives more than a couple hours away: the travel time just makes the relationship too difficult to maintain.

And finally: are they who you want to be? Look at your prospective White Scarf. Are they someone you want to be like, both on and off the field? Of course, we want to be the best we can be on the field, but that's only part of being a White Scarf. You need to find someone who's not only good on the field, but who's also good off the field. Someone who lives up to your idea of the dream, no matter what your dream is. If you enjoy service, look for that White Scarf who's a shoe-in for Pelican. If the arts are more your style, find the one that made their own garb. Or if bardic's your thing, find the White Scarf who's always singing around the campfire.

Now if you're strictly a stick-jock like myself, forget it. Part of becoming a White Scarf is showing skill in the arts and sciences as well as a tendency towards service. So for those of us who's primary interest in the Society is fencing, we're SOL until and unless we find some other aspect of the SCA that draws our attention in addition to the sword.

The only of these questions that is really make-or-break is that of honor. You can get by if you answered no to one or two of the others, but the more questions you answered yes to, the better.

Omens, portents and augurs, oh my!

Walking into work this morning, I noticed the mirror that usually hangs by the door was on the ground, shattered. Needless to say, I wasn't overly surprised to discover that five of our six servers were down. Five hours later, and we were back up, but it got me thinking about how superstition plays a role in what we do.

Now I like to think that I'm a relatively realistic, fairly well-grounded type of guy, so of course superstition doesn't play a part in my fencing, does it? Of course not! Sure I've got some things I do every time I fence, but it has nothing to do with superstition. It's all about consistency.

Yeah, that's it! Consistency.

And actually, it is about consistency, at least for me. By doing the same steps in the same order before each bout, I'm attempting to force myself into a consistent state of mind for each fight. Does it work? Maybe a little too well. I am, at best, a mediocre tournament fencer. While I generally give my opponents a good run for their money, the last tournament I actually won was... eight? nine? years ago. Whereas on the melee field (a field barren of ritual, by just about anyone's standard), I am usually heralded by cries of, "Kill that guy!"

It might be that in my trying for consistency, I'm actually putting on my blinders and closing myself from options that I allow myself to see on the melee field. Maybe if I tried taking out some of the ritual from my tournament fighting (do I really need to spin around three times and spit into the wind before each bout?), I might find it is replaced by better flow and better fencing.

What about you? What are your rituals? And what purpose do they serve?