Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
nature
climber
some other life
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Aug 11, 2003 - 11:11pm PT
|
What is it? I mean, I'd like to here your thoughts on how you define "trad" climbing.
This isn't a troll nor a question from ignorance. I very much understand what the old dads went through. The reason I ask is varied.
It seems to me that to define it you have to accept that the definition is evolving. I don't see "you guys" out there tied into hemp ropes, racking only real nuts (the one's you put on bolts), nor climbing in hob-nailed boots. To me it seems that the essence of trad climbing is the boldness. Yet now trad climbers have high quality ropes, springs, and a variety of other gadgets that the old dads never had. I often note an attitude of boldness that is suppose to compare with the old dads. Can it?
Did anyone but myself note that a few years back trad climbing was trendy?!?! It's almost funny thinking about the troll thread regarding gym climbing ruining the sport when a few years ago there was a minority group of new climbers that purchased hex's and wandered around climbing areas pretending to be trad climbers. I got the feeling this group of tweakers decided to spurn the gym crowd they evolved from. Maybe you guys saw it and chuckled like I did. Even so, having said dork gumby wannabe trad climber ask me "Are you a sport or trad climber?" got me all pissed off (and now years later i'm venting in this thread :-).
I can't help but look at the Huber's and think they in many ways live the essence of trad climbing - they are bold bold bold!!! Yet they are not strict trad climbers - at least not by the definition that seems to be currenty touted. They raised the bar, they melded many aspects of climbing and are now pushing the limits far beyond comprehension. I love it in every way shape or form. Break the mold and look what you can do. I guess in short they are climbers and should be defined with no other adjective.
Anyway, have fun with this one, please.
|
|
lin
Trad climber
ca
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 03:50pm PT
|
Blah Blah Blah. I have an idea head out and go climbing with old hemp ropes, placing only real nuts, and climbing in hob-nailed boots. Then come back and explain to everybody why we can only be called trad climbers if we use this grand equipment. Or better yet see if you can get the Huber's to use it.
|
|
Apocalypsenow
Trad climber
Cali
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 04:37pm PT
|
Good post... going to give this one a little thought. Unlike ^^^this comment
|
|
Mike
climber
Orange County CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 12, 2003 - 06:04pm PT
|
Blah blah? At least somebody's thinking and asking an honest question without trying to be a ass or cast a mindless troll. The old guys did what we do now, lin - they got the best tools for the job that were available and within budget. If there were kernmantle ropes, sticky rubber and offset nuts back then, I'd bet the Golden Guys would have scarfed them like we do now. Nature hit it right on with the assessment of boldness.
"Trad" nomenclature came about only because of "sport" climbing. Before "sport" climbing, rock climbing was just "climbing". (Perhaps "crack" or "face" to be specific - interesting how the technique involved used to describe the climbing, now the protection involved describes it in "sport/trad".) Sport climbers wanted to know which routes were too sack-reliant (read: too run-out, too dependent on routefinding and diverse climbing skills) for them, so they invented that name to designate all rock climbing other than "sport". "Is it trad?" was easier than asking "is it naturally protected with bolts too far apart for me to yard through, safely attempt difficulty that's beyond my ability and to delineate where the route goes?"
This dood I know asked if I wanted to sub for one his team of three who dropped out before they attempted Whitney. He (they) had zero collective experience on big projects, but pull hard in the gym. I told him it would be way more fun and productive if they just gunned it with the two of them. "Yea but it's trad" came his amusing response. I told him I would prefer to be as far away from Whitney as possible when they get on the route. Well, I lied - I only thought that. My actual response was that I had already done the route, which, thankfully, was true.
"Trad" has still not entered my climbing vernacular. Rock climbing is still "climbing", under which sport climbing is classified as a recreational subset at about the same level as gym "climbing".
|
|
Apocalypsenow
Trad climber
Cali
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 06:13pm PT
|
I think the true essence of trad climbing is as much a way of thinking, as it is a physical activity.
I work in the field of Outdoor Education and many of my coworkers, who got into climbing young, often point out that had it not been for climbing they would most likely be dead or drug addicts.
As for myself, I was working my way through different adventures when I stumbled upon climbing, because (as I later found out) my friend needed a belayer. Through his traditional style I was introduced to the lifestyle/attitude, of a climber. When I saw and read about the Vulgarians in the Gunks, I knew there was more to climbing than a sport.
I question whether someone is a climber, or do they climb? There is, and should remain, a difference. Not that one is better than the other, it simply is the way it is. And one aspect of being a climber, which I am, is that defining oneself and our actions would be against the very nature of who we are.
What I do feel needs constant attention, is what I refer to as the “racketball” mentally. Gym and sport climbing,if not watched, can work its way into the realm of a climber.
Rules, “not fair,” intense debates about grading, no sense about “hazing,” bolts being added to make things safer, no camaraderie, not having any common sense at the crag camp area. One dumbazz actually took a piece of paper from the sh@tter and wrote on it,”where is the toilet paper forest service.” Stupidity like that will have us paying at all deforestation campgrounds!
The racketball mentally... on the way through the healthclub, where I score my showers, I walk by these clowns arguing about their silly games. I am so thankful I did not take their path in life.
I may soon be facing a challenge greater than any climb I have done. But it is through the strength of being a climber that I know I will prevail. To my friends that disagree with my course, I understand. “Every man dies, not every man truly lives.”
“Like I was shot with a diamond bullet right through my forehead... the genius of that... the strength to do that... if I had ten divisions of these men, then our troubles here would be over.”
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
SF Bay Area
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 12, 2003 - 07:08pm PT
|
climbing on gear-
climbing on bolts-
climbing w/ pads-
it's all climbing to me.
i am just as entertained by the traditionalist who shuns all other climbing as somehow unworthy or impure as i am by the boulderer who has never owned a rope or the sport climber who has never placed a cam or found security in a bomber hand jamb.
more often than not, the trad climbers i know and the sport climbers i know and the boulderers i know are all the same people.
just look at the most accomplished climbers in the valley these days and you will see climbers who push the limits of more than just one game. when yuji was in the valley to do the nose w/ hans in under 3 hours, we ran into him in camp 4 pulling everything from V-hard to V-ridiculous, all the while shaking out on horrible slopers on a way too hot afternoon...
i agree w/ you, mike, that climbers have been historically limited by the available gear in their era, and the old dads would have loved to have the crap we get to climb with these days (i also say that john gill would have had bouldering pads if there had been bouldering pads!), but i disagree that sport climbing is about safety while trad climbers are all about runouts and risk. i have climbed in the valley quite a bit over that last several years and i know plenty of trad climbers who take very few risks. i also know lots of sport climbers who are drawn to that type of climbing for the continuous and sustained effort that steeper climbing can offer. some of those guys turn around and put up free lines on el cap- are they now not sport weenies?
i fail to see why there have to be all these labels and categories by which we all measure ourselves and each other. there may be sport climbs and trad climbs, but that woman over there- she is just a climber, plain and simple.
|
|
gremlin
Trad climber
CO
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 07:15pm PT
|
The main difference I see between trad/sport besides gear/bolts is that sport climbing focuses more on the individual moves, where trad is more about the location of the climb. A good sport route only really needs good moves, but a good trad climb usually has a cool location, has exposure, and leads to a summit. Trad climbing seems to have the primary goal of climbing striking formations, where sport climbing seems to have the goal of climbing hard moves.
|
|
Melissa
Big Wall climber
oakland, ca
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 07:31pm PT
|
In my perfect world, a notion of "trad" or "climbing" if you prefer might be able to exist without insisting upon its superiority to all other forms (or subsets) of climbing.
Often the self-percieved "climber" does not want to see the "gym climber" or "gumby dork" approaching with his sparkling new hexes and stupid questions. The vibe, having very recently carried hexes and asked total strangers similar stupid questions, is that the seasoned "trad" climber must be a higher life form... one that we should aspire to be. When the "trad" climber acts as though he or she sees him- or herself in a higher light than sport or gym climbers, the "gumby dork" can easily reason that since any "trad" climber can clip bolts, but many sport climbers don't know how to place gear, "trad" must be the next level up from sport just as sport was the next level up from gym. The whole "self definition by virtue of that which one is not" thing backfires because the "gumby dork" doesn't really want to be a gumby or a dork. I suspect that like even the "climber", the "gumby dork" wants to be loved and appreciated. So, after sending the "I'm a pompous bleepity bleep" message, the "trad" "climber" indirectly says, "You've got to keep coming up here with your "trad" gear if you wish to ever be anything but a "gumby dork". If you try hard enough you may even be able to transend "trad" and become a "climber" like me."
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
LA, Ca
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 08:08pm PT
|
The fact is that "trad" climbing does present a very different and often more complex set of problems to solve than "sport" climbing. This becomes more interesting on the harder trad routes where you have to deal with moves as hard as many sport routes while protecting yourself in a traditional manner. What does "a traditional manner" mean? No bolts where you can use gear. No bolts unless absolutely necessary. If you do place a bolt (first ascent only please) it's done while you are climbing up. If you prefer to run it and you can, that's acceptable and even stylish. Does this make trad climbing a higher art? I hesitate to say so because I think the best climbers excell at many aspects of the sport, and a sport route can be climbed beautifully as well.
|
|
mojo
climber
Birmingham
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 08:23pm PT
|
Having emerged from the primordial trad slime of the late 70s and 80s I see sport climbing as just another adornment to the thrill and fun of climbing. Ditto ice climbing, and boulders. The pleasures of heightened kinaesthetic awareness and hitting the zone is a nice break from working, taking out the trash, and talking on the telephone.
Maybe it's easier because the whole trad thing was so thourghly inculcated into me before the advent of gyms and sport climbs. I imagine for newbies coming out of the gym environments, using gear and good judgement seems like this monumental affair rather than a simple set of skills that can be learned with patience and persistence.
If anybody has attitude because they are trad climbers, that's their problem. We were all newbies once and if you want to really make someone feel good extend your hand to them and be a comrad. I remember years ago in Eldorado, when David Breashears took me around and showed me some of the boulder problems. Kind and helpful, without a trace of arrogance, he pointed out and demonstrated the showpieces as well as the easier one's that were at my level.
Yo, it's all good.
|
|
Rich the Brit
Trad climber
San Ramon, CA
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 08:29pm PT
|
idea for a new subset of the sport - add "retro" to sport, trad, aid, etc.
retro climbing would invoke the practice of historical climbing styles. The retro climbing world would split into viciously contested factions. Each camp would contest that their "chosen" era was the true golden age of climbing.
different factions would shun different technological advances (or in their opinion "style inhibitors"). some would shun bolts (not much of a sacrafice in Tuolumne). others would go all pre 70s, and shun cams, chalk and stick rubber. The pre 40s set would go all natural fibre - hemp ropes, cotton and wool clothing, etc.
kudos would be given to a 40s style ascent of the nose. imagine that - climbing a route with equipment that is worse than that used by the first ascencionist.
|
|
Melissa
Big Wall climber
oakland, ca
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 08:37pm PT
|
"I remember years ago in Eldorado, when David Breashears took me around and showed me some of the boulder problems. Kind and helpful, without a trace of arrogance, he pointed out and demonstrated the showpieces as well as the easier one's that were at my level."
That's kind of what I was thinking about Matt's post...Yuji was sharing a house with a bunch of us "gumby dorks", and while he was shaking out of V.sick slopers, whe was pulling for us on the V.duh appoach talus that we were projecting.
It's easiest to be encouraging to people who are totally out of our league (in either direction) though. I think the sophomores are always the ones hazing the freshment the hardest. The seniors have no interest anymore and the freshmen aren't really trying to hang out with the seniors anyway.
I sure do feel like a fountain of stupid metaphors today...
|
|
nature
climber
some other life
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 12, 2003 - 09:08pm PT
|
Wow! I'm really not sure what to think or where to start. That'll soon change....
First of all I'm amazed at the thought put into every post that is longer than four lines. I'm amazed at the angles you all took with this - not what I was expecting at all.
Mike, you make some excellent points. Some of which I had not pondered. The genesis of the "trad" word in climbing I think is pretty accurate. As far as the Whitney (potential) epic goes you made the right choice. I also have to agree - the old dads would gobble up the gear we have in a heart beat.
One thing I sort of disagree with is putting "sport" climbing at the same level of gym climbing. I don't see that. I like sport climbing a lot. I spend most of my summers strictly climbing (and putting up) sport routes ( though I climb year-round doing other types of climbing). I've entered a gym about 10 times in my life (the last six with free passes). I'll give you this though, there is an "easy" transition from gym climbing to face climbing outdoors. Still, the difference is very real. I've never seen tape on a face route nor do very many sport fixed draws. There is still route finding required and you still stand a pretty good chance on twisting an ankle or something on a real route if you fall. Gyms are safe almost 100% of the time (liability) - face routes are not.
I guess in thinking about it that easy transition helped the "differences" between the two worlds (sport/trad) grow. Early on in the evolution of gyms there was very little instruction. People got strong, went to the climbs, got spanked and often times hurt. Gym owners recognized this and now instruction is an integral part of offering a gym program. I'm glad to see this. Still, those early, unedjumacated gym climbers, were obvious and dangerous and I can't say I wouldn't avoid them like the plague. Heck, it's a lot easier to take on an apprentice that knows nothing than to take one on that just came from the gym. The former doesn't happen often any more these days.
And then we have Apocalypsenow - this post almost seems to be a better fit in the stupid "Stem the Tide" post. Still I think he lends some insight into the evolution of climbing, and thus tangentially hits on this topic. That we climb i think is more important than the style with which we climb.
T*R - interesting perspective. A great attitude and in some ways a path the few choose to tread. I think that maybe part of the "issue" (really hate to call it that but for lack of a better term) is that this path is no longer the only way to go but rather one way that is seeing less and less people follow. I guess I cannot help but notice a certain (even if small) amount of animosity from those that took this path and have stayed the course. Maybe I'm wrong but for whatever reason it seems to me that the right of passage to becoming a climber is a tougher course in the eyes of a strict "trad" climber than with the rest of us. Let it go?
Matt - ding ding ding!!! I'd quote that again in its entirety if it would serve the purpose to show how much I agree. I think the big point you made is that trad climbing is not always risky and sport climbing is not always safe. The illusion needs to vaporize.
gremlin - I appreciate the input 100% yet I don't agree with it at all. Trad climbing may climb more obvious lines (cracks) but it's not always about the feature or the location. Face climbing is also very much about the feature and the location. Bachar-Yerian is a trad climb - Shipoopi is a sport climb - same rock, same formation SAME feature. I think it takes a different eye to see a face feature. But certainly there is more of a gymnastic element to sport climbing but how many crack climbing addicts dream of that perfect hand crack that you "swim" with thumbs up jams? I know I do some daze.
Oh man, so by the time I finish reading up to gremlins post there are five more!
Melissa, as always I enjoy your perspective. Perhaps I should explain what I mean by "dork gumby blah blah" from my original post. You seem to be having a ball with it but perhaps you are using it a bit out of context. Neophyte does not a gumby dork make. They are two different things. We love Neophytes - they want to learn and if "we" show them they will suck up any knowledge like a wet sponge (had to throw in my stupid metaphor :-). The "dork gumbies" i was referring to are the ones, in general, who think they know more than they do and won't admit their short comings. This is scary.
Eeeek gads! I gotta end it here pretty quick. Ksolem - right on! Mojo, I can't make a comment regarding your post until I look up some words in a dictionary but I think I agree ;-). Rich, you scare me - all you brits scare me. Can I be on the 21st century team, please?
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
LA, Ca
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 09:43pm PT
|
Rich-
Let's take a walk down to the RR tracks, gather up an assortment of nuts, sling 'em with some hemp cord, pull some wool socks over our boots and go climbing in the rain...
Ever read "Mountaineering in Scotland" by William Murray?
|
|
BR
Trad climber
The LBC
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 10:15pm PT
|
A question for those of you who worry about whether a certain brand of climbing is "trad" or "sport" or something else:
Do you want to know so you can classify your own climbing, or so you can label someone else?
Most of the people I hear talking this talk fall into the latter category. I was reminded of this ongoing ("blah, blah, blah" is right) discussion when I was out surfing today and some 15-year-old looking kid startied mouthing off about longboarders (guilty as charged).
Wouldn't it be nice if everyone just worried about getting their own stoke in their own way, rather than exhausting their energy trying to tear other folks down?
Maybe you folks debating the issue (or is it a non-issue?) here on Supertopo are the exception to the rule ... if that is the case, I have a different question for you:
Who cares?
br
|
|
Gene
Social climber
Two hours away
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2003 - 11:03pm PT
|
ApoxNow,
"I may soon be facing a challenge greater than any climb I have done. But it is through the strength of being a climber that I know I will prevail."
Whatever it is you are facing, best wishes and Godspeed. Send it!
G
|
|
nature
climber
some other life
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 12, 2003 - 11:10pm PT
|
T*R - I think I got what you were trying to relate. And I certainly hope I was not judgemental in my response. I'm hoping to make some observations, see some new insights (provided by others) and make some conclusions (if no where else but in my mind). People chose their own paths for their own reasons - as long as we do so without pissing others off intentionally I think we "can just get along".
So, BR said... "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone just worried about getting their own stoke in their own way, rather than exhausting their energy trying to tear other folks down?"
Yes, it would be nice. It would be really nice. But I've been bugged for years about the differences between the two positions and said differences seem to be causing rifts that transcend beyond our little climbing world. Toss in this great little forum where the differences are beyond obvious and well, here you go, I've started this thread to continue my persuit in wondering "why?". Land managers and others are noting our inability to get along. This to me is a problem.
Who cares you ask? Do you not read this forum? Do you not see a lot of people care and a lot of people try and make amends while others seem to feed the fire. Heck, why do you even read this forum if you don't care?
"Do you want to know so you can classify your own climbing, or so you can label someone else? " No, and No. Next question that might hit closer to home?
I have an agenda that will stem from this post. Before I even embark on that (assuming I ever will), I felt like simply asking people's opinion. What's the problem? I'm curious. It's that simple. Deep down, I really don't care why you climb in the style you do from a personal perspective - whatever floats your boat. But I do care when that reasoning influences the people around you and eventually the ability to access the land we all so preciously value. Through dialog we might better understand each other and perhaps settle some stupid differences that seem to be growing. A pipe dream probably but after years and years of the BS I can either ignore it or try and do something about it. It's way to late to ignore. Everywhere I go it seems there are land management issues. That stupid Wall Street Journal article shows the misconception the general public can presume. It will only get worse before it gets better. So whatever dood. If you don't care, why did you post?
cheers...
|
|
Apocalypsenow
Trad climber
Cali
|
|
|
Aug 13, 2003 - 12:33am PT
|
Thanks Gene. I will.
|
|
Wade Icey
climber
|
|
|
Aug 13, 2003 - 11:59am PT
|
Hmmm- Q:Longboard or short board?
A:Depends on the surf. both way fun
Q:Road or Mountain bike?
A:Depends on the terrain.
Q:Long skateboard or short board?
A:Short for pools, long for the drop from Tioga Pass to
Lee Vining.
Q:Aid or free?
A:why limmit myself?
Q:Sport or Trad?
A:Depends on the crag, and the current object of my
overachieving.
Q:Knickers or Lycra?
A:Knickers Definately.
It IS all good (except lycra, and come to think of Lycra is okayif my wife is wearing it.)
|
|
Apocalypsenow
Trad climber
Cali
|
|
|
Aug 13, 2003 - 01:11pm PT
|
Lycra and sports bra's... the two best things to ever enter climbing.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!