Oh well, sure, if this is going to turn into an "argue both abstract theory and human behavior" thread, count me in, LOL
I don't think I agree very much with
any of the above posters, although definitely with bits and pieces of pretty much everyone. Here's why:
1) Man oh man, the gap between what dressage is meant to be and what goes around the ring at a dressage show is almost as big as the gap between what a western pleasure horse is meant to be and what goes around the ring in a WP class.
2) Many factually-ignorant things have been said over the years by dressage proponents, including on this thread regarding historical issues; however this does not mean that dressage itself is just a load b.s., nor just a foofy arbitrary art form either.
I would suggest that the truth lies somewhere in between. The roots of dressage do lie in quasi-utilitarian pursuits (battlefield mobility and ability to awe and disconcert the enemy). However dressage as it has been practiced for, what, probably the past 400+ years (and I question whether one should call a lot of the old-timey stuff, e.g. Duke of Newcastle and remember he was one of the *nice* ones, "dressage" in the modern sense of the word) is BOTH an utilitarian means to utilitarian ends AND an abstract non-useful art form. The upper levels of dressage are basically useless from a practical standpoint, those horses are burnin' rubber like mad goin' basically nowhere, it is the OPPOSITE of an efficient way of doing practical things. However the
principles and skills used to develop a horse to the abstract-art-form upper levels are also useful when applied in many real-world utilitarian things (straightness, the ability to get the hind end quickly and powerfully under oneself, the ability to *use* the topline, etc)
3) I think it is bizarre to say that western riding is less historically deep-rooted than dressage, since in very large part it comes from the same roots and had many points of contact along the way, up til a coupla hundred years ago or so. Hint, think about Spain and the marks it has left on the world. Notice that modern dressage really is pretty MODERN, like mainly developed in the past coupla hundred years and particularly in the past 50ish years. Look at the Spanish Riding School, even back in the good ol days. The horses are in large part very correct and athletic but they do not follow the modern showring fashions and would not do real well in serious competition.
4) I do not see that dressage folks have even remotely cornered the market on good horsemanship. I have known as many or more really good horsemen in other disciplines (hunters including actual field hunters, ranchwork-type western, driving, and distance riding) as in dressage. And though I never had the pleasure of seeing them in person, from what I have read and seen of Bill and Tom Dorrance, I think they had a better sense of crucial dressage principles than the extreme vast majority of Actual Dressage Trainers do.
Note that in this context, by "really good horsemen" I don't mean riding/handling skills (although, that too), I mean people who understand how a horse's body is meant to work and can refine and straighten and balance and 'charge up' the natural design of the horse into a superb and CORRECT athlete that does as much as the equine body can do and does it healthfully and beautifully. Of course "correct" depends on the task; correct body use for a canter pirouette just IS different than for galloping after hounds or cutting cows.
5) to the extent that there is some truth in saying that "dressage is the essence of training and riding horses", it is only SOME aspects of dressage for SOME purposes. For instance, aside from somewhat straightening the horse and making it controllable and correcting really pathological use fo the topline, dressage really has very little to contribute to racing. It is just too different. People have found that going too dressage-y with serious jumpers is also a mistake, as the requirements of jumping big fences are in some ways pretty different. And as for those things that DO transfer from dressage to essentially-all disciplines... they are not unique to dressage.
At most, I think you could fairly say that dressage aims to take a number of basic principles of how a horse's body is meant to work, and develop them to a greater and ultimately-pure-art-form degree. But that is a far cry from saying it is The Fundamental Equestrian Essence or anything like that.
Signed,
Pat, more or less a dressage person (has ridden thru third-fourth level, owns a half Lipizzaner, etc) but taking a very jaundiced view of BOTH the super-dressage-enthusiast camp AND the dressage-is-snobbish-and-arbitrary camp
