Hi,
I'm an acting student in North America and I have been learning about Stage Combat for the past few months. We recently began a discussion about whether stage fighting is a technical skill or an art form. My classmates and I all have our opinions on the topic, but I'm looking to get the opinions of some people who are actually in field, or even just somebody from outside my class. So if anybody reads this and has some insight I'd love to hear it.
Thanks,
Lily

I'd say it's a lot of both.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFewvkL4q34&NR=1

I agree, it is both. Learning techniques, moves and styles is a technical skill. How you stitch that information together and how you perform your scene is art. Funny how the same thing translates to the crafting sharp and pointy objects.

Agreed, and the precedent is already there in the arts. Painting, sculpture, instrumental music, dance, etc.--all require an enormous degree of technical physical skill and historical knowledge as well as intellectual creativity. At its best, fight choreography can be as creative, informed and inspiring as dance. Given the degree of choreography required, I would think it differs from dance mainly in the absence of musical accompaniment. FWIW, I say this not as a performer, but as the director of external relations for a university school of the arts, encompassing theater and dance, music and visual arts.

Lily,
I am a certified Actor Combatant in the Society of American Fight Directors and have studied stage combat, acting, studio art, graphic design as well as martial arts. So I feel I have a few qualifications to talk about this great subject.

First is the semantics of art vs skill. In times of yore, when you saw the word "art" it usually was in reference to a particular skill rather than something that was subjectively aesthetically pleasing. You will frequently hear the phrase, 'the art of war' or the art of this particular weapon or fighting style. What they are teaching is a series of skills needed to be proficient at this particular thing. Later on, in different fight manuals we frequently see 'the art and science of defence'. These writers are equating the exactness of science with art. So in essence, art is made up of technical skills.

Even with our modern ideals of "art", such as paintings, drawings, sculpting, etc...any artist will tell you that the "art" is the product of a learned series of technical skills.

In stage combat, you are practicing the art of telling a story through the portrayal of violence. In order to do that, there are a series of technical skills you need to master or at least be capable of. The arrangement of these technical skills into a cohesive story is what produces a product that our modern minds might equate to an aesthetic art form. So in essence, yes it is both.

Stage Combat is not a martial art. True, there are many common elements and principals that both use, but the difference in the purpose of the activity separate them at birth. I do believe much more can be done in stage combat to portray these scenes in a more accurate martial manner, but that is another topic.

Hope this has been helpful!