Postby John_Clements » Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:21 am
Why the enmity? I think the answer is simple enough: human nature. People typically don’t like being told they are ignorant or doing something wrong. They often don’t even like to find it out or have to change. Instead, they attack the messenger, especially if the message is delivered without apology. But at the heart of things, it’s not really the messenger (“me”) or even the manner of its delivery, it’s the ego blow of the message itself.
It’s been said that you “can’t go around telling people they have an ugly baby.” That may be true. But, you can tell them when they have a sick baby. Indeed, you have a reasonability to do so. And when it comes to historical European close-combat activities there were, and still are, an awful lot of “sick babies” out there.
The ARMA and I first dared to set standards to raise the credibility and legitimacy of this subject starting in the mid-1990s. By the very nature of our efforts we rejected all the crap that was (and often still is) being pursued as Medieval and Renaissance close-combat. It’s no secret that a great many people originally came to this subject from Sca or LARP or living-history reenactment or stage combat backgrounds---activities we in ARMA simply don’t much respect or value ---and so they feel insulted that I lead the crusade I did for a true Martial Arts approach based exclusively on serious study of the surviving historical source works. We essentially "crashed the party"...and the rules have never been the same since.
There are a lot of people doing good work now in the field of historical fencing studies (and many doing very poor work), but the facts are the facts and no revisionism can suppress them: the ARMA and myself revolutionized this subject in the 1990s in the face of mountains of garbage that had long retarded real progress. So, when you go around and thoroughly outperform fighters in sparring, rip their practice habits and training methods, and then expose and scathingly critique faults in their understanding of historical combat, you are not going to win them over as friends ---especially if they indulge in the imaginary worlds of historical-fantasy role-playing, martial sport tournaments, or the pretend fighting of stage combat.
But, as the “embodiment” of our serious and no-nonsense approach, certain people have a personal need to personify me as their “villain” to excuse their own resentments and inadequacies. All I can say is, ARMA came to exist in the first place precisely because of those type of people. We are the revolutionaries in this field, we are the dissenters, and we continually push the envelope. We don’t BS and we don’t tolerate BS. We also try to set physical standards in historical fencing studies and uphold a Code of Conduct. Many other folk either won’t or can’t match either our skills or our intensity, don’t agree with our philosophy, and don’t want to follow a similar athletic methodology or martial attitude.
Moreover, a few vocal persons out there have actually been physically bested by me or my senior students in public sparring, or were rejected as ARMA members due to their own character flaws, while others simply resent our accomplishments and accolades. A few failed to get from us some personal validation they badly needed, and others just spite us for not supporting their commercial products or promoting their business. Their hostility, their vitriol, their continuous rumor-mongering and slander are a sign of their insecurity.
As Machiavelli wrote, “Hatred is acquired as much by good works as by bad.” It doesn’t matter then how martially skilful you actually are, how frequently you prove it, or how thorough your demonstrable knowledge of the craft. If others are insulted and embarrassed by being contrasted with you, then you will earn their enmity for life. (If they cannot surpass your fighting skills and cannot really dispute your scholarship, then the only thing left is to try to attack your reputation, and by association, any who respect you.)
In the end, the quality of our work and our efforts transcends all the pettiness, envy, and personal politics.
p.s.
My first two books (researched in the early 1990’s, and long superceded by our ARMA curricula) flawed as they were, as I freely admitted shortly after they were published, are now a convenient straw-man target for some to attack what ARMA stands for. The funny part is, as evidence of their continued value, these almost decade old books appear to out sell new titles on the subject. In just the last 5 months of 2006 alone well over 500 were sold.
