Book Review: Street Sword by Phil Elmore

[Althaur]

I should preface this with the following statement, in case Phil accuses me of being biased or putting words/thoughts into his mouth/head.
This is my interpretation of the following work. It in no way portrays the author's, Phil Elmore, intentions, thought process or beliefs. Everything that follows are my thoughts and mine alone.
Oh yeah, Phil, don't copy this to your site as I don't trust that you would leave it in it's original form since you seem to rewrite history when it is convenient.

Street Sword by Phil Elmore.

I just received my copy in the mail today. It’s a thin book of 83 pages. A very quick read. The cover photo and all photos contained within are of very good quality. The photographer, who Phil credits in the book, did a great job.

The book is broken into four chapters with an appendix. Chapter 1 is an introduction. Chapter 2 is about the mechanics of the sword. Chapter 3 is about fighting theory. Chapter 4 is about the Swordsman’s path. The appendix gives seven lessons from Musashi.

Chapter 1: Introduction
Phil starts with a humorous look at the stereotypical JSA practitioner and the inherent “elitism” of the group. He points out that he will not be getting bogged down in terminology or nit-picking the finer points that would be required in a highly unlikely sword duel. He describes three basic sword types and what a sword does. He is very succinct in his descriptions, and maintains a lightly humorous tone throughout not only this chapter but the entire book. He also answers the question, “why a sword”. He points out that not everyone can own or wants to own a firearm. He points out basic requirements for a usable sword. He even finds time to poke fun at the Highlander wannabes.

Chapter 2: Mechanics of the Sword
At the very beginning, Phil points out that he is not worried about exact terminology used as this makes no difference when you are confronted with real life. He provides a section on selecting a sword with a few companies listed which provide “user” swords.
He briefly goes over the grips used on a sword, both the two-handed “baseball” grip and the single handed reverse grip. One fault I find with the brief discussion of grip that isn’t explained here or anywhere else is the inherent difficulty in single handed cuts with a long blade. There is no information about edge control and its effect on cutting. That being said, his grip requirement is pretty simple, hold in a way that it won’t come out of your hands.
No we get into basic sword techniques. This is where Phil’s apparent lack of qualified training can be most noticed. Most of his “stances” seem awkward and binding. His cuts are overcommitted, reminiscent of an action film. Most of the cuts are wide and telegraphed, allowing for the possibility of avoidance and then entrance due to the ending positions of the cut and sword placement.
He covers draw cutting, which in some instances are appropriate, but never touches push-cuts. He follows up with a story about cutting a box in a class.
Phil covers overhand/underhand arcs, thrusts, 5 angles of attack and attacking from the low line. He does a good job describing the path of the sword in the various angles of attack and also covers footwork and its integration into the sword use. He follows with photos of the various angles of attacks which once again show awkward, front hand attacks that are over-committed and use very little “body” behind the cuts. Think of a hitter at home plate with his bat swung up and over his LEAD shoulder, hips and shoulders square to the pitcher.

Chapter 3: Fighting Theory
Phil briefly discusses a number of items in this chapter, the first of which is blocking, or the “angle parity theory”. He basically says that if someone is using an angle 1 attack on you, you use and angle 1 attack to defend/block the attack, preferably striking either the person or his attacking limb.
He points out the absurdity in thinking you will be able to draw and cut down your opponent like some modern day samurai.
Phil covers a little more footwork, to include some simple steps and loading/unloading of the joints and the pulley principal. Think of coiling and uncoiling to generate power and movement. (At least that is my take on it)
Phil has a section on drawing and attacks and vulnerabilities in stances. A few of the stances I seem to recall from the previously derided Highlander series.
The most ridiculous, in my opinion, section of this book was the use of the gun and sword together. His explanation for this is the practicality of a ballistic weapon and edged weapon for multiple attacker scenarios. While he rightly points out that a sword will not run out of ammo and can provide a shield of steel to “hide” behind. However, the photos display a firearm being swung around as a sword is being used with the statement that when one is forward the other should be back. It has more of the look and feel of a “street samurai” living out a fantasy. His muzzle is sweeping any number of people standing behind him, quite possibly loved ones being protected.

Chapter 4: The Swordsman’s Path
Phil focuses on the legal ramifications of using a sword in this section, transporting and carrying, safety and first aid. In his own forum and on others, I’ve read that the sword is most useful for home defense; however, Phil devotes one very short paragraph to this subject. It mainly consists of his recommendation to use a reverse grip, a shorter sword and watch out for low ceilings and furniture.
Based on the one little section discussing home use, I would have to assume that Phil’s idea behind this book is the use of a sword for everyday defense out in the big bad world. If this was truly a book devoted to realistic use of a large blade in today’s world, there should have been more space devoted to use in tight confines, or where innocents may be nearby.

Appendix A: Seven Lessons from Miyomoto Musashi
Phil covers some main points that he and some others have gleaned from the Sword Saint’s book. On of which is Be a Skeptic. He quotes Musashi in the text, “The field of martial arts is rife with flamboyant showmanship, with commercial popularization and profiteering on the part of both those who teach the science and those who study it”. Phil follows this up with comments about “fear no man schemes” and “desperate but ridiculous attempts to be different” which seem to describe Phil himself.

In all fairness, Phil has produced an enjoyably easy to read book on the very basics of sword use. He isn’t claiming to be a master of the sword; however, his lack of knowledge is evident and could lead to issues for anyone that actually tries to learn from this book. I’ve spent more money on worse books, so I’m not too upset about my $15.

Josh Reis

[K. Cantwell]

Hello Josh,

Thanks for the review.

It mainly consists of his recommendation to use a reverse grip, a shorter sword and watch out for low ceilings and furniture.

You know, aside from the reverse grip part, I agree with Phil. This was my substantive criticism of his blurb and pictures, which seemed to be highlighting a long sword (like a katana) for home defense.

If you must choose a blade for home defense, a kukri, kopis, shorter Japanese blade...hell, even a gladius to stab the guy as he is coming through the window would work better than a longer sword. I think this was the point that many on this forum raised.

If his original post had given a barebones summary like yours, instead of the inflammatory post he left ("Deliberately Bastardizing Sword Arts" with nothing but a link to the polemical blurb excoriating JSA practitioners), I think he would have gotten the reasoned debate he so often says he craves. (“Hey guys, I wrote a book on using the sword for practical self-defense,” instead of ,” Hey guys, I wrote a book on practical self-defense with a sword because you guys are all talk and no action.”)

It's interesting that Phil always says things he writes should stand on their own merits, yet this work seems to draw its lifeblood as a defiant blow against tradition. I wish he had presented this work as simply a book on practical self-defense with a sword instead of an anti-traditionalist work on the sword. He will probably say that he presented the book as nothing more than a practical guide, but he sure spent alot time telling us dojo dwellers how much we suck. (This is a good portion of the blurb on the publisher's website.) I could have done without that part.

I guess I shouldn’t get too upset about the marketing hype, though. It does sound from your review that the book does what it purports to do. Probably not my cup of tea, but I'm sure a good portion of my library wouldn't be Phil's cup of tea either. (I keep the Rand locked up in the basement lest some of the self-interest seep out and get the kids.)

Kevin Cantwell

[gendzwil]

Are there any koryu that cut from the reverse grip? There's the reverse grip noto, for no reason that I'm aware of.

Judging from the overview, Phil doesn't have enough technical information to really even get people cutting properly. Grip is key, even for people who thrive on being non-traditional.

[K. Cantwell]

If this was truly a book devoted to realistic use of a large blade in today’s world, there should have been more space devoted to use in tight confines, or where innocents may be nearby.

Herein rests another potential problem: what "realistic use of a large blade" could possibly be cogent or legal in "today's world"? (I’m assuming the “realistic use” is purporting to be combat oriented.) When one hears of such an incident in today’s world, it is usually accompanied by a terse evaluation of the large blade wielder’s sanity.

For example, in this month’s In These Times, there is a blurb about a guy in Milwaukee who busted in the door of his upstairs neighbor brandishing a cavalry sword. He thought her heard a woman’s screams and was there to rescue her. Turns out, the guy upstairs (no joke…this is what the article says) was watching a Spanish porno film.

Guess who the police charged?

Kevin Cantwell

[K. Cantwell]

Are there any koryu that cut from the reverse grip?

Zatoichi does it.

If a blind guy gets those kind of results, that's good enough for me.

Kevin Cantwell

[DDATFUS]

Are there any koryu that cut from the reverse grip?

There's actually a thread in the archives where they debated that question. It's been a while since I read it, but I think the gist was that one or two old schools might have a few reverse-bladed techniques as some sort of contingency attack, but it's pretty darn rare. If it were a good idea, you'd think you'd see it a lot more often.

Then again, I've heard that it is common in knifefighting, so if one is using something more like a gladius than a nihonto, perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea.

[gendzwil]

The point of the reverse grip being to trade the range and speed amplification of a regular grip for... what, exactly? Looking cool, near as I can tell.

I guess I'll have to dig up that old thread.

[Shindai]

Deception + style, I think My friend sometimes does it when we spar, I think the main advantage is unfamiliarity, it's a new set of angles coming mostly from a lower upward slash motion, as opposed to the downward/sideways slash I'm used to, so it really throws me off.

Regarding the book, it sounds a little un-thorough, but more reasonable than I would have expected from what I've read on his site and the blurb. It still seems a little pricey for what it sounds like, but if I saw it for a fiver somewhere I'd grab it.

[Kim Taylor]

The point of the reverse grip being to trade the range and speed amplification of a regular grip for... what, exactly? Looking cool, near as I can tell.

I guess I'll have to dig up that old thread.

Utsu Semi from the Shindo Munen ryu as taught by Mitsuzuka Takeshi.

Thrusts though, not cuts but it does indeed look cool if you can avoid stabbing yourself through both hips.

Kim Taylor
"one time collector of fine kata"

[Althaur]

Kevin, I agree also with the remarks about use in a house. It just seems that there should have been a little more time and space devoted to this aspect if the book was truly about application of the sword in today's world and not just someone's fantasies put to paper.

[Fred27]

There's actually a thread in the archives where they debated that question. It's been a while since I read it, but I think the gist was that one or two old schools might have a few reverse-bladed techniques as some sort of contingency attack, but it's pretty darn rare. If it were a good idea, you'd think you'd see it a lot more often.

There actually was a guy, (discussed on both e-budo and kendo-world), who had created his own ryu..."Zatoichi-ryu"..Yes THE Zatoichi of the silver-screen. Apparently this guy had literary copied the moves from the movies and put them into a ryu and even started teaching. He went on kendo-world to defend his ryu and argue that the gyaku-draw was VERY effective and his credentials (copying from a movie) was adequate education, but after getting a thrashing he ended up saying grace and essentially admitting the error of his ways..so to speak.

But as DDATFUS said however, if reverse-draw had been a great technique or even adequate technique it would haven been more evident in the koryu. Most evidence speak of the clear disadvantages of using reverse-grip including shorter cutting-reach, inflexible wrist and so on.

Now back to your regulary schedueled program.

[SLeclair]

That poor Zatoichi Ryu guy... He went about it the wrong way around, I think.

I've read that Zatoichi drew some techniques (or the inspiration for them) from Muraku-ryu. I've never seen the style, it would be intersting to see if a reverse grip is used in there at all, and how often.

[bushikan]

Utsu Semi from the Shindo Munen ryu as taught by Mitsuzuka Takeshi.

Thrusts though, not cuts but it does indeed look cool if you can avoid stabbing yourself through both hips.

Kim Taylor
"one time collector of fine kata"

Mitsuzuka Takeshi's Shindo Munen Ryu has nothing to do with the koryu in anyway shape or form. I know you stated SMR as taught by the Sanshinkai, but there is a big misconception about it being the same and certain people have published DVDs explaining the set as such. No disrespect intended Mr. Taylor I just get a pain everytime someone says that peticular set. Although in Shoden Tachi Iai Nihonmae we use a backwards thrust but the kata itself is very different from that of Utsu Semi.

Example of a dvd claiming such:
http://www.budovideos.com/shop/custo...cat=366&page=1

Sorry for straying slightly from the topic, but I feel a need to address this issue everytime the situation presents itself.

[Sharp Phil]

"Althuar" should also preface his review by stating that he was banned from my forum just last week, and his review is an attempt to take a swipe at me in return for the argument in which we engaged. Take away some of the supposition and personal nonsense and you actually get a pretty positive take on it, from someone who obviously had a problem with me to start with:

"...A very quick read. The cover photo and all photos contained within are of very good quality. The photographer, who Phil credits in the book, did a great job.

...Phil starts with a humorous look at the stereotypical JSA practitioner and the inherent “elitism” of the group. He points out that he will not be getting bogged down in terminology or nit-picking the finer points that would be required in a highly unlikely sword duel. He describes three basic sword types and what a sword does. He is very succinct in his descriptions, and maintains a lightly humorous tone throughout not only this chapter but the entire book. He also answers the question, “why a sword”. He points out that not everyone can own or wants to own a firearm. He points out basic requirements for a usable sword. He even finds time to poke fun at the Highlander wannabes.

...Phil has produced an enjoyably easy to read book on the very basics of sword use. He isn’t claiming to be a master of the sword...I’ve spent more money on worse books, so I’m not too upset about my $15.

- Joshua Reis

I'm going to excerpt this portion for whatever web page I eventually put up for Street Sword.

Looking over the original review the only really substantive criticism "Josh" offered (one easily addressed) is the notion of sweeping imaginary family members with the barrel of the pistol in the very brief section of the book that discusses using a sword with a pistol.

The whole point of wielding two weapons in this context is not just to engage different distances, but to cover both in front and behind the practitioner. Obviously you would alter where you point the barrel of your weapon, just as you would alter the depth of your strikes in proximity to innocents. I did not feel it necessary to specify this, as I assume my readers are not morons, but I did preface the entire section with the following:

An entire book could be written on using the sword and pistol together. My intent is not truly to teach you how to do this -- it is a safety nightmare in training, for example... -- but there is no harm in relating to you the fundamental concept.

Combine the basic principles in this book with the four basic rules of firearm safety...

...To these principles, add a fifth that couples of the use of the sword with the use of the handgun: Never allow the effective areas of both weapons to overlap.

...The following sequence illustrates how this works in practice. [emphasis added]

I did specify that you must never cover anything with the muzzle of the pistol you are not willing to destroy. There follows only a single sequence, and of course there is no one behind me in that sequence. An entire book on the subject would deal with those issues at length, but the material is explicitly prefaced as being the relation of a concept, not instruction in how to apply it in the fine details. "Josh's" criticism is therefore specious.

Overall his review is pretty biased, but you can see that even then he could not help but, however grudgingly, acknowledge the body of work contained therein to be sound (despite the fact that he does not like how I demonstrate the techniques, and setting aside the absurdity of criticizing form in a book whose premise is that form is largely immaterial to pragmatic delivery of force with a long, sharp blade).

Eventually I'll have some truly objective reviews to put up to go with Josh's excerpts (I've not yet created a web page of my own for the text). I'm proud of it and I think it stands up well, despite the flak I'm likely to take from those who are (quite understandably) less than happy that the book exists (and that it was me who wrote it).

[MikeWilliams]

"I'm going to excerpt this portion for whatever web page I eventually put up for Street Sword.

ahem...

Oh yeah, Phil, don't copy this to your site

Overall his review is pretty biased ... Eventually I'll have some truly objective reviews to put up to go with Josh's excerpts

Phil, you need to let this lie. Josh's review seemed pretty well-balanced to me, and I struggle to see how you would get a more positive review from anyone on here. Putting your work into the public domain exposes you to criticism - I'm afraid you have to take this criticism, regardless of whether it ties in with your own self-image.

You seem to hold yourself up as some kind of paragon of honesty and integrity. IF Josh gives you permission to quote his review, the only honest approch would to be to quote it unedited, in its entirety.

Oh and there was plenty more substantive criticism in that review - you need to read it again.