Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ol' Skool
Trad climber
Oakhurst, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Sep 22, 2011 - 04:23am PT
|
Given: climbing "common law" holds a strong tendency to allow first ascents to be done pretty much (within loose parameters) as the FA party sees fit- ie, protected as they deem appropriate, routed here and there as they see fit, etc. This is regarded as "creativity" on their part.
Reverse logic would seem to hold that, since a party already did make the FA, they own the pink slip- and shouldn't be questioned in terms of how they did it- ie, "creative license." I've heard comments made to this effect around the rocks, upon which something inside me balked, at least subliminally. Here's why:
Let's face it, in climbing as well as other endeavors in life, there are jobs done well and there are jobs done not-so-well. Understandably, style is, of course hugely subjective- still... Monet beats out a kindergarten finger-paint in most polls.
Nobody would say that all routes reflect good craftsmanship.
You can't do anything about poor rock. But you can avoid amateurish, poor route development. Under "poor," I'd list superfluous bolts, unnatural clips, plumb-line bolting, overbolting, unnecessary zig-zag rope drag, contrived, unnatural lines, etc. As a specific example, how about a bolt placed that was strictly staking a visible claim to a route (apart from any need for protection)- the lamest reason ever- even Harding would object- well, on second thought, maybe not...
Again, many subjectives involved. Nevertheless...
If a party does a crappy job- especially on something that showed great potential to be a classic, the one time opportunity has been lost forever- Sometimes in the race to get names in ink, the quality just flat gets compromised.
So maybe "ownership" of routes should be viewed more as "stewardship," with a respect for what's there and the humility to recognize there's only one chance to do it justice- and perhaps it's not such a bad thing in the community to voice discontent when routes are going in that aren't done up to par. Especially in the context of FA frenzy.
Maybe a FA is something that's crafted (with limited raw materials), rather than something that's created. It sounds a lot more humble. The rock was already there- and will be long after the bolt holes erode away.
We often cite, with reference to technical skills, that a route should be left to others if it can't be done without lowering it to one's level. I believe that applies in terms of quality and style also. Anything less is a rip-off to the entire community.
My two bits.
BB
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 04:53am PT
|
Maybe you should make a distinction between sport and trad routes as the latter aren't "developed", they're climbed. Rearranging the bolts on a sport route, I could care less; retro-bolting trad lines is another story altogether and one I do care about.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
A Token of My Extreme
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 04:54am PT
|
Nice.
No major commentary this time of the wee hours.
Also BB
|
|
Norwegian
Trad climber
Placerville, California
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 07:27am PT
|
my coffee is up so's i'll make quick, this.
i applaud those whom master some of life's moments.
with all the physical forces pulling us,
and all of the emotional theatres entertaining us,
to grasp a task, and of it make perfect
suggests a supreme stature.
a person's travels upon virgin rock tell
a slight, though endearing story of their depth and of their momentary mastery.
by following their's physical steps,
and mimicking their metal temperature,
we are enriched.
the f*#kers whom cant raise themselves from the grave of fear,
must modify the universe so's that they can get laid too.
hop on the new potato caboose,
and dance stone paths up and across and around these fools,
as they trip on their own sorrows and drown in their own dry whine.
|
|
steveA
Trad climber
bedford,massachusetts
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 08:02am PT
|
Well said!
|
|
Bill Mc Kirgan
Trad climber
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 08:17am PT
|
Thank you for your considered sermon Ol' Skool. I think it all comes down to REPUTATION and MUTUAL RESPECT, and that can apply to the FA/developer, or to what use and nature has done to change the route, and the method for deciding when to fix something that is not right. I don't think an FA/developer owns the route, but is one of many stewards that ultimately rules by consensus.
By way of example, in our area sport routes are the norm because our rock is not considered to be of the quality that can be safely protected with stoppers, cams, etc.
The routes that have been put up develop reputations ranging from safe to dangerous and easy to tough with a wide variety of intermix which depends on variables like how the route was designed, how use changed the route, to how nature changed the route.
The safe easy routes have received much traffic such that the footholds have been polished and increased the difficulty. These are considered good routes, but popularity has changed them from safe to somewhat dangerous, and the locals warn new and visiting climbers.
Of the tough routes, many have been put up with great consideration of the geometry of fall line. Some are safe, and some are especially difficult and require the climber to recognize the risk. Here again the route develops a reputation and new leaders and visitors can learn from others what to avoid or what to be wary of while climbing.
I agree with the notion of communal stewardship by way of reputation of the climb and developer. If a crappy/dangerous route is put up then the local community has every right to take it down or modify it after some deliberation. If a route becomes dangerous through use or natural change there again it should be fixed, preferably by the FA, but if they are no longer around or are too busy then by whomever has the skills to fix problem bolts.
|
|
climber bob
Social climber
maine
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 08:45am PT
|
i've got a couple of routes for sale..also, is it true that routes before 1980 dont need a title?
|
|
Nate D
climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 10:54am PT
|
BB,
There's a back story here, and it'd be fun to know. Hope it wasn't a route of mine! :)
Lots of rip-offs out there in the hills for sure. But there's also still a fair amount of rock out there on which to craft your own temporary, and hopefully better, dance. I do understand it's a limited resource, so best if we can all do better. Voice your discontent. The FA frenzy mentality is nauseating at times.
Comparing routes to art always gets a bit sticky. Better to compare to something like architecture and design - where form and function try to achieve a balance - where the work is primarily crafted for others to use.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
A Token of My Extreme
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 10:58am PT
|
a person's travels upon virgin rock tell
a slight, though endearing story of their depth and of their momentary mastery.
by following their's physical steps,
and mimicking their metal temperature,
we are enriched.
the f*#kers whom cant raise themselves from the grave of fear,
must modify the universe so's that they can get laid too.
The Weege Abides!
Brutha can turn a phrase now, eh?
|
|
Delhi Dog
climber
Good Question...
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 11:26am PT
|
"Brutha can turn a phrase now, eh?"
That he can does.
I just wonder...does he go around thinking that way too all the time?
I do so enjoy his/your rambl'ins.
Cheers,
DD
|
|
Eric Beck
Sport climber
Bishop, California
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 11:39am PT
|
While I totally agree that the FA principle has saved us from the emasculation of climbs, it is definitely true that some routes which could be moderate classics are underbolted. Consider Werner's Wiggle, put up by a person who was at the time only a marginal climber with zero bolts and is now popular.
Another example is the Snake Dike where we conserved our modest collection of 12 bolts, constantly expecting the climbing to get much harder. When we finished we realized that we had made a big mistake and asked Roper, doing the 2nd ascent to add more bolts. He did, doubling all the belays and putting in single protection bolts where there were none. I had hoped he would have added more, but consensus seems to be that the route is fine as it now is.
|
|
Slater
Trad climber
Central Coast
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 05:46pm PT
|
Eric, I think you just completed Ol' Skool's picture. Nicely said.Interesting too. I had heard that Snake Dike was originally put in as a R/X on purpose. I understand the conservation of bolts while out on lead, and can also appreciate your willingness to allow Roper to add to it, and then accept consensus. Common sense prevails... rare, but cool.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2011 - 06:11pm PT
|
I don't think an FA/developer owns the route, but is one of many stewards that ultimately rules by consensus.
Amen! And I've always greatly appreciate Eric's and his fellow FAers' example on Snake Dike. I think at the time, the number of people who climbed regularly in the Valley was relatively small, and there was a fairly strong consensus on what sort of route was "appropriate" for what sort of terrain, although there were still some exceptions.
Now there is broad divergence on appropriate climbing styles in so many areas that it's harder to see that sort of consensus being universal.
John
|
|
Doug Robinson
Trad climber
Santa Cruz
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2011 - 01:26am PT
|
We were just talking about this at Facelift. About how a lot of Tuolumne routes are accidentally runout because the FA team was too poor or a bit rushed, and just didn't put in as many bolts as they later thought right. And then climbers foreverafter had to just suck it up. The phrase "misappropriation of resources" got tossed around.
So I'm glad Eric jumped in with the example of Snake Dike. It's still plenty sporty up there, but it also seems doable to most leaders.
I did a similar thing on West Country. It originally had a full pitch runout on 5.5. With permission from the FA party, Todd Vogel and I added 4-5 bolts. Still sporty, you could take a sixty-footer off that pitch. But now it's a 5.7 climb that's within leading ability of 5.7 climbers. Which is rare in Tuolumne. 5.7 leaders deserve more opportunity up there.
|
|
Ol' Skool
Trad climber
Oakhurst, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 24, 2011 - 01:56am PT
|
Maybe my original point is just a throwback to the Harding-Robbins controversy back in the day (which I'm old enough to remember...sheesh)
Robbins argued that style mattered. Harding could give a sh!t, just climb.
Their conflicts over quality (and ownership) of routes are well chronicled.
These same basic polarities, or propensities (style-eg Robbins vs freedom- eg Harding) still exist in our vertical community. The trad vs sport phase was a somewhat ugly extension of this conflict. It never really was resolved with any kind of conscensus at the time- But clearly, the influential balance of power seems to have shifted significantly over the years. People got used to sport- it hung around and got a lot of the press- and thanks to the rise in gym climbing, over time seems to have become the norm. But back then, the basic point made by the trads was, there's a better way to do it. When it comes to methods used in the wilderness, I'd have to agree. See my previous comments on "stewardship."
Bolts placed alongside perfect cracks would have stirred outrage at one time; today they are accepted and even favored, if for no other reason than that they eliminate the need for packing in anything other than a quickdraw rack. The rise in numbers of gym climbers has skewed the philosophical perspective over time- as evidenced in the fixation with "safe" bolt spacings (ie, sport route) and minimal racks- even in wilderness settings.
DMT and Jeremy- My citing "ownership" with use of parentheses is my way of acknowledging that the thinking on the subject is certainly not unanimous- but in terms of how most climbers operate, there is usually a degree of deference shown to those that did the FA, at least in terms of leaving the route as is, asking permission before adding bolts, etc. (implying a sense of "ownership" or rights). So for pragmatic purposes, most of the community views it as "their"- ie, the FA'ists route. If someone is outside that fold, they probably hold to a warmed over version of a Harding philosophy, preferring an absence of rules in general.
Gentleman from Iowa- good point on the fall zone consideration- I hadn't thought of that when listing criteria, but it can make a big difference in doing a quality job of designing a route- Avoiding sharp edges in routing the rope should also be mentioned, as it is a big concern in some areas. Some FA's give this no thought whatsoever.
I didn't really intend to steer the discussion as much in the direction of under and overbolting- as those are REAL subjective calls- and I absolutely believe that runout routes have their place. Even head game routes are relative- eg, after I had just led the runout pitch on Dike Route, Bachar cruised by on his morning solo. That instantly put my "accomplishment" in perspective and limited any ego inflation on my part. Still, we absolutely need routes like Snake Dike and Hobbit Book for those that like Thai food, figuratively speaking.
To simplistically boil down some of the points from my original post-
The rock is a limited resource
Routes should be done well- with a quality finished product that does the rock justice. This takes time and thought-
I would add-
Everybody makes mistakes, but the more we can avoid them, the better.
|
|
2 l l
Sport climber
Rancho Verga, CA
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2011 - 04:34am PT
|
When you think of the first's complete investment of themselves on most of these things, then yes, they do own it lock stock and barrel.
|
|
hooblie
climber
from where the anecdotes roam
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2011 - 07:43am PT
|
what the climber gets to own is a story.
simply put, an initial transit occurs. what stands nobley as a stoney suggestion
becomes, with a flourish of will, a passage. hopefully what goes down is a pas de duex
with a note of loss, since the solid world won't be coaxed open firstly ... twice.
it should be clear the supplicant is being led, what the lithe partner brings
is a response ... and counterpoint is an art. craft is likely the ommission of foolery,
more elusive is the elegant seduction of virginity.
time gets marked. an odd association between
animate and otherwise is made,
and it holds
|
|
Todd Gordon
Trad climber
Joshua Tree, Cal
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2011 - 10:54am PT
|
This sort of discussion is usually over not enough protection....rather than too much protection. It's a slippery slope;....of course we don't want anyone of our friends or family or community getting hurt or killed, but there will always be climbs which are run out, dangerous, and quite risky. As one who does do alot of first ascents, if anyone who logically argue the point that any of my first ascents had fixed protection in the wrong spots or that they wished to add some fixed protection to said climb.....I would probably 9 out of 10 times say;.....go for it. We already had our adventure and thrills;...if you feel strongly about the climb needing more fixed gear;....have at it.........I do realize that not everyone feels this way;....just check out all the many past internet forums on this subject.....it's a slippery slope.
I think it's those grossly over protected climbs and the grossly underprotected climbs that get us all worked up;.....the one's that are within the range and rating of normal climbers at their level of competancy.....usually not something to even talk about...
After all is said and done....there will ALWAYS be unlimited scary run-out climbs, ALWAYS unlimited safe sport climbs, and....within our lifetimes....lots of virgin rock to decide for ourselves.....
.......a hundred lifetimes of opportunities for all sorts of adventures...
Too little or too much.......which one is it today.....
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 01:37pm PT
|
Snake Dike ... I had hoped he would have added more, but consensus seems to be that the route is fine as it now is.
I think Snake Dike is a good example of keeping the character of the climb (as discussed on the Super Chicken thread) consistent throughout the pitches. The first pitch sets up the rest of the climb. Easy but runout. Nature provided a few opportunities for natural pro and some easy runout sections. The way the climb is now continues that feel and technical/mental challenge to the top. Perfect.
Harding did care about style, just not to the extent of Robbins. I think the biggest difference was Warren would look up at a wall find an aesthetic line and think "I want to climb that" and make it happen. Royal would look at a wall and find the most natural climbing line and climb that. You can see it in their route choices.
|
|
Mangy Peasant
Social climber
Riverside, CA
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 04:10pm PT
|
Many great accomplishments are less than perfect in their initial form.
The US Constitution comes to mind: The party who made "first ascent" of this profound political achievement put a few "bolts" in the wrong place and left out a few as well.
Does slavery represent that 'X' portion of a climb that really should have never been there?
True wisdom is knowing that you have dome something great, but also knowing that it is never perfect.
There are other examples. I'm no expert on the Bible, but I understand even God changed his mind a few times (great flood?)
But I also understand that "better is an adversary of good."
It's a fine balance.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!