Star Wars. A few words about fencing philosophy

The title of the article is no coincidence, because each of the seven styles is not only a set of specific techniques. It is also a whole worldview. And there are very interesting moments here. For example, internal contradictions in the Jedi LORA.

Everything is clear with the Sith; they are driven by ambition and a thirst for personal power. War, battles, duels are one of the tools to achieve the goal.

The Jedi are much more complex in this matter, more contradictory. We chose the path of serving society, the fate of peacemakers. At the same time, they are warriors, some of the best in the galaxy.

Their purpose is to extinguish conflicts, but this can be done in different ways - diplomacy, or the well-known scheme - no person, no conflict.

With form three Soresu, everything is clear why it is considered the most Jedi - Master Soresu sits on the defensive for a reason, I remind you of his worldview - he persuades the enemy to surrender - lay down your weapons, I will arrest you, you will live, just surrender.

A striking example is the duel on Mustafar. When everything seemed lost, Obi-Wan tries to appeal to Anakin's reason and conscience - Chancellor Palpatine is a villain! It's over, I'm above you!

Although this is a matter of approach - the same Sith can be brilliant masters of the third form - sitting on the defensive, additionally burdening the enemy with ridicule and intimidation.

Delay the fight in order to enjoy someone else's fear and despair. Or try to knock you off balance and drag you to the dark side. This is exactly what is shown in the duel between Maul and Devon in the series Lord of Shadows at the end of the third episode.

Everything is also simple and clear with the form one Shii-Cho.One of the main techniques of the style is the destruction of the enemy’s weapon, which also, for obvious reasons, ends the confrontation.

But I have a couple of questions about the other styles.

In various sources I came across information that the Order looked askance at the masters of the 4th and 5th forms.

It seems like they are too aggressive, rely on physical strength, the desire to dominate the enemy.

And we can partly agree. Ataru's 4th form was created in the later years of the Old Republic. A period when the Jedi did not meet equal opponents.

No need to think about defense, he quickly flew into a fight, chopped everyone up and moved on. One could say that this form demonstrated the arrogance of the Jedi during the decline of the Order and disrespect for the enemy.

Her masters apparently did not allow the idea that they would have to fight with someone equal. The mistake was costly.

And then I have a question right away. Does Makashi form 2 confuse anyone?

I once heard a phrase from a historian: the most vile invention of mankind is the sword. Intended for human killing only, no other use. You can at least hunt with a bow or a spear. No sword.

Makashi's form is intended to be used only against an opponent with a lightsaber. Focus on speed and fitness. Quickly and with minimal effort, stab the enemy with precise actions.

I see this as a statement addressed to the Sith - no chance of salvation, repentance, or cooperation with the administration. Tick ​​from the galaxy, you are 3.14 years old. Have you looked at the masters of this form askance?

And I certainly don’t understand the complaints about the 5th form of Shien/Djem So. This is not just a brutal penetration of the enemy’s defenses. This is a perfect dictionary illustration for the word counterattack, using an opponent's strength against himself.

In my opinion, very Jedi-like. Very pedagogical and visual.The more aggression you show, the more painful you will get in return. Calm down, stop acting up, and it will all be over, we'll arrest you.

And in general, it’s somehow strange. If peacekeepers carry these swords with them, it is assumed that they only draw them in a situation where diplomacy has no longer worked. And then there’s no time for breeding snot.

A curious thing, form 6 Nieman. Fencing experts say that this style is complete slag; a follower of Form 6 has no chance against a seriously trained enemy.

But in terms of worldview, this is very competent for a Jedi. The form assumes a superficial knowledge of all other styles. That is, an attempt to find a middle ground - you don’t shine anywhere, but you can do a little bit of everything.

Assumes developed flexibility of thinking and the ability to adapt to a constantly changing situation.

At first glance, it makes sense for a Jedi who might be sent on a negotiation mission, but it ends in a stabbing. We didn’t have time to arrive, damn it, I only received one stopper!

And then in general on Tatooine Qui-Gon (I’ll tell you a secret, my favorite Jedi) had to be extremely careful and cunning. Look for workarounds, non-obvious ways.

Does not at all resemble the stubbornness and straightforwardness that one might suspect in masters of the 4th form.

If I didn’t know the Star Wars ENT, I would assume that Qui-Gon is a master of Form 6, at least in his worldview, if not in his fighting style.

For a snack - form 7 Vaapad. This frankly doesn’t fit logically in my head.

I more or less understand what it looks like in terms of fencing - attacks and defenses, weakly connected to each other logically.Chaotic impacts from different sides, at unexpected angles.

But we are talking about worldview. Apparently this also has a reflection on the character of the adept. He, I think, should be impulsive, unpredictable, spontaneous. Perhaps even eccentric.

Somehow it doesn’t go well with the reserved, phlegmatic, cold-blooded Master Windu.

Is there a possibility that this is something like the fact that there are devils in still waters?

Yes, but most likely, the creative team led by Lucas simply didn’t think through this moment well.