VI. General Views on Directing
Item
-
Title
-
VI. General Views on Directing
-
Date
-
May 22, 1936
-
volume
-
1
-
issue
-
11
-
page start
-
3
-
page end
-
3
-
content
-
en
VI. GENERAL VIEWS ON DIRECTING
When you are asked to direct a bout, or a series of bouts in a competition, you are thereby offered the most powerful position available in tournament fencing. Your powers are broad and general. Each fencer is by the rules honor bound to obey scrupulously whatever orders you may give (I-A-1-b-i). Spectators must do likewise, under penalty of expulsion without the right of redress (I-A-4-b). It is entirely within your power to pass upon the adequacy of the fencers' equipment, including questions of compliance with the rules governing armament (I-B-1 and I-B-3).
It is also up to you to determine whether a fencer is physically disabled (I-A-1-c-vi) and whether he is unduly favoring the game of his opponent instead of honestly endeavoring to secure for himself the highest possible classification (I-A-2-r).
No touch is awarded until you have made a decision. Unless you have misinterpreted the rules or exceeded your very broad powers, your decision is final and without appeal (I-C-2-d).
In short, as director you are very much of an autocrat, and the success or failure of a competition, from the contestants' point of view, depends largely on the manner in which you exercise your authority.
Naturally, broad powers as you have are accompanied by a heavy responsibility. Part of this responsibility is placed upon you by the rules. A great deal of it depends on your own ethical code and general good sense.
For example, the fact that your orders must be summarily obeyed by competitors and spectators alike should not encourage you to be tyrannical and arbitrary. You should not "show off" and abuse your privileges. You should exercise judicious restraint, keep your temper even under the most trying conditions, and attempt to understand the nervous excitement of the audience and the fencers in competition. Courtesy and good nature in tense situations does much to dispel them, while a combative, belligerent attitude on the part of the director is inconsistent with his judicial duties. Remember always that, even though the rules give you much power over the contestants, yet the sport is fundamentally a game for fencers, not for the officials.
This does not mean that you must be afraid to exercise your authority when the facts of the case warrant it. On the contrary, and especially when the interest of other contestants may be unfavorably affected by the actions of a fencer or spectator, you must act swiftly and summarily to maintain the good order of the competition. My point is simply that there is no sense in making mountains out of molehills and in dissipating the forcefulness of your authority upon trivial matters.
Aside from questions of discipline, however, your chief job as director is to conduct the bout according to the rules. Generally speaking, your position is analogous to that of a judge sitting in a court of law. Your fellow officials (the judges) are more nearly in the position of a jury. It is up to them to determine questions of fact: that is, was there a touch? Once they have established that there is a touch, it is up to you to pass upon the validity of the touch. And only after you have decided that a touch is valid is the fencer entitled to it in his score.
The rules also give you some powers of determining whether a touch has been scored. You are permitted also to award touches as penalties. These questions I shall discuss with you later. But in the main your job is to apply the law of competitive fencing to the particular factual situation before you.
Consequently, to be a good director, you must be thoroughly familiar with the rules. But more than that, you must be able to recognize the play of the contestants, to discover what each one is attempting to do and the manner in which he is carrying out this intention. You must be able to understand the general theory behind the conventions of play set out in the rules, so as to apply them with consistency and fairness.
A number of difficult situations are likely to confront you in the course of any competition. I shall try to help you both with concrete cases and with the general theory in the articles to follow.
In the meantime, if you recall cases which presented interesting or difficult problems, why not send them in? We can discuss them and perhaps through these discussions we may be able to clarify many vague issues and arrive at practical conclusions.
There are many points of interpretation which are really of great interest and about which even the best directors disagree. Open discussion of these points is much to be desired.
M. A. de C.
