Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
the bolts on the Grand Wall at Squamish . . . weren't ridiculous, in context of the times.
that first run was fairly ridiculous, even at the time, since you could basically walk to the top of what is now apron strings. and since it turned out that the first chunk of (what became) mercy me was ridiculously easy-- and should've been visible from various lower vantage points --i'm not keen to give that team a pass. it's not like the recon for those lower sections were dauntingly difficult to approach.
but yr right that the catechism most of us grew up with-- clean, pins, bolts, in descending order of preference --wasn't entirely standardized at the time in north america and esp. at squamish. we could start another thread on bolts in the fifties and early sixties with a heavy pnw emphasis, so as not to drift this thread. heh
|
|
uli__
climber
Milan, Italy
|
|
Typically, as the ladders deteriorate, folks add occasional additional bolts along the way. Chop some bolts. Gank others. Glue plumber's tape on top of others. At some point, folks have to make a decision: Replace the bolt ladder or not? Replace parts of it? Move parts of it? Repl;ace belays? Rap stations?
yes that's it, and the whole process IS SHARED by the community
after that process is complete you get a CLASSIC, like the nose, like thousand of other routes, with bombproof rappel stations, with some bolt ladders where people like to have it and with crack cleaned from pitons
that's the way that compressor route should have followed. Now let's see what will happen
anyway this PARTIAL unbolting done that way (1) was only a BAD shortcut to fame (2) for them
(1) on stealth: not stated as a goal before the ascent
(2) good or bad let's see
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
K&K decided to chop the bolts during the climb in an emotional burst of rage over the bolting "atrocity" and "the rape". They think of themselves as heros tearing down the "Berlin wall". The emotional thinking and the self-aggrandizement has no power to convince. The actions were done by two exciteable boys in two mens bodies.
Colin is doing his best to make their ethical thinking look better. He has the ambition of producing a coherent bleak after-justification. I am not impressed.
They left some of the bolts for "us" he says... They did it for "us"? Really??? LOL...
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
They were there primarily to climb, not chop. It was nice of them to clean up what they did. They or someone else should now go up and finish the job and patch it while they're at it. I'd be happy to donate a box or two of epoxy sticks for the job.
|
|
Roger Breedlove
climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
|
|
I wonder whose side the weather is on?
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
As far as the Grand Wall goes, all I'm suggesting is that it be assessed in context of 1961. That is, in light of the equipment, skills and knowledge they had then, and not with 20:20 hindsight. And especially considering the physical environment, and what was known of it. Baldwin and Cooper wanted to do a climb on the Grand Wall. Unless you go to its far left (University Wall) or far right (Crap Crags), all lines feature substantial blank stretches. The Grand Wall utilizes as many natural features as are available, and is as close to a 'natural' line on the wall as there is. (All in 1961 context.) Jim had done the Peasants' Route a year or two before, with Les McDonald - a sort of reconnaisance, perhaps. I believe that Baldwin and Cooper looked at the route with binoculars before starting, and wanted to do a 'direct' line.
In terms of some specifics:
1. They used few if any bolts below the top of the Flake, which is also the top of what later became Apron Strings. A non-issue.
2. The bolt ladder leading up and right to the Split Pillar starts a little below the top of the Flake, perhaps to reduce diagonal drilling. Meaning a few more bolts.
3. It's unclear if they knew that the top of the Flake could be reached by scrambling from the left along a ledge system.
4. In 1961 context, Mercy Me is not an obvious line leading to the Pillar. It diagonals up and left, involves some tricky climbing and traversing to get back across, wasn't the sort of thing that was climbed much in those days (dyke), and wasn't established as an alternative approach until much later, using a fair number of bolts. It's doubtful that Cooper and Baldwin were aware of Mercy Me, or considered it as a line - whether they should have considered it is perhaps another matter.
5. The "Yosemite comparables" for the Grand Wall were things like the Nose of El Capitan and the west face of the Leaning Tower. The Salathe Wall wasn't done until autumn 1961.
Overall, the Grand Wall was no great advance in style and technique, in terms of world climbing at the time. Neither was it a step backward. And Cooper, at least, was then one of the strongest climbers in North America, even if he was seen as an unfashionable outsider by the Yosemite 'elite' - some of whom jumped to conclusions that they still won't give up. He'd done a number of long, hard climbs, more alpine than rock, but including things like the east face of Bugaboo Spire.
The contemporary comparables for the compressor route in 1971 are (possibly) routes in the Dolomites, the Dawn Wall on El Capitan, and Tis-sa-Ack on Half Dome. All involved quite a lot of bolts, although on the latter two few if any unnecessary bolts, and of course no compressor. Mind you, neither is the weather in Yosemite so foul as in Patagonia in winter. Not that Maestri necessarily knew or cared much about what those in Yosemite were doing.
Comparing the compressor route to the Grand Wall, or the west face of Leaning Tower, is ahistorical nonsense.
|
|
house of cards
climber
|
|
Regarding Mario Conti's recent statements against the bolt chopping,
in Giorgio Spreafico's book, Enigma Cerro Torre, page 266 Mario Conti says:
"Noi abbiamo dimostrato che era possibile spuntarla in modo normale, in definitiva con un stilo classico che riproponeva e force evolveva quanto si era sempre fato in alpinismo. Con il compressore invece Maestri ha rovinato tutto. Se oggi il Torre ha cento ripetizioni, e perche esiste quella sua via. Solo se toglie le fisse, i chiodi a pressione e tutto il resto che la sopra si e acumulato con il trascorrere del tempo, solo cosi puoi imaginare la montagna com'era, anzi io dico come dovrebbe ancora essere!"
May be Enzolino can translate the whole paragraph but in essence Conti says that "With the compressor Maestri ruined it all" and that "Only by taking out the fixed lines, the bolts and everything else that has accumulated up there over time one can imagine the mountain like it was, like it should be". A shorter translated version of this quote was used by Rolo in the opening of this thread.
One could make any number of interpretations from this quote, but it seems pretty clear that it is at odds with Conti's recent statements. Did he have a change of heart? Why?
|
|
uli__
climber
Milan, Italy
|
|
@house of cards
quick and dirty translation of your Conti's quote:
"We proved that was possible to reach the summit in a regular way, with a classic style that re-proposed and maybe evolved what has ever been done in alpinism. With compressor Maestri ruined it all. If today CT can count one hundred ascents is because of his route. Only by taking out the fixed lines, the bolts and everything else that has accumulated up there over time one can imagine the mountain like it was, I say more like It ought still to be."
in the recent statement (my translation is in post#1505) the same Conti said
"On removal of Maestri's bolts I absolutely disagree."
and
"I certainly did not approve the methods used then and I do not approve them either today"
up to everyone decide if this is a contradiction or if Conti knows that "ought to be" is a personal statement and in order to deal with other people's personal statements (that maybe he thinks equally legitimate than his own) it is better not to undo the past.
(at least in europe to prove better rock-ethics you don't erase bad one in existing routes rather you open a new route with different style)
Another quote form his recent statement
'This route is in fact, along with controversy and the pages of literature inspired by it, a piece of history, history consists of beautiful and ugly things, nevetheless those things are representative of those years of mountaineering."
this is orthogonal thinking with respect to stating ethical value to CM ascent right or wrong that it was
I like the Conti that emerges from these writings, I like the complex multi-level logic opposed to the binary manichean one used by some rock-religion fanatists
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Two questions, one a repeat of my prior question.
1) Given the precedent set by both parties (Maestri's and Kennedy/Kruk) of pretty much doing whatever they wanted, why don't those of you who want to climb the Compressor Route with bolts head back up with a power drill (or drills), bolts, and place what you feel is needed?
2) I don't understand the first "fair means claim" (nor the need to make a "first" claim to begin with), could someone please explain? It's not like the did not use some of the existing bolts, especially on rappel. In today's day and age do people still really feel the need to thump their chests and claim "I was the first" in order to stroke their egos? Especially in an activity like climbing / mountaineering? (Stupid question, I know)
"Conquistadors of the useless (les conquérants de l'inutile)" was indeed an appropriate title.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
I'd just like to celebrate the new foreign contributors here and celebrate the valuable community discussion that's been relatively civil.
Peace
Karl
|
|
house of cards
climber
|
|
This written by Ermmano Salvaterra last year for Desnivel Magazine, after Kruk and Geisler's attempt (note that around the same time Zach Smith also made an attempt on the SE ridge):
"E la loro idea di togliere o rompere i chiodi di Maestri? Altra questione che ha suscitato un grande dibattito. Personalmente sarei d’accordo perché la via del compressore è stata semplicemente rubata al futuro come ha detto Silvo Karo. Secondo me chi sale come facevano Jason Kruk e Zack Smith avrebbero il diritto di fare un lavoro simile. Lasciare solo il compressore appeso in parete come segno di quella salita."
Rough translation: what about their idea of chopping the bolts? This is something that has generated a wide debate. Personally I would be in agreement because the compressor route, as Silvo Karo says, was stolen from the future. I think that anyone like climbs the line like Jason Kruk and Zach Smith ((means: "clean"/"by fair means"/etc)) would have the right to do it, to leave the compressor as the only sign of that climb ((reefers to Maestri's climb))
Just like Conti Salvaterra had a change of heart after the deed was done.
While I can appreciate the "complexity" of Conti's thoughts as Uli describes, it seems clear to me that he changed his mind and I cant get over that fact. When well respected climbers like Salvaterra and Conti speak they should be careful to explain themselves clearly because the young generation listens.
|
|
uli__
climber
Milan, Italy
|
|
@house of cards
If not about Conti, about Ermanno I agree with you, I had the same impression that he changed his heart (also from other statements I read and forgot to note so I can't' quote here) and my impression is that he changed *after* the unbolting has begun to make some mess with lot of contrary opinions in Italy and also in Europe (and maybe some in America). Seems more like he swam downstream following the main current...
But it may nevertheless be that the debate has "enlightened" him to be less manichean and more "complex" :-)
|
|
monaco
climber
marseille (FR) - parma (IT)
|
|
I thinks that, if there is one positive thing about this unilateral action done by KKK, is that force people to reflect...
reflect about ethics...for those that sometimes justified bolts/spits/siege
but also reflect about the history of mountaineering and the respect for what had been done by our ''fathers''...good or bad things
as someone state before KKK entered a grey region, and nobody is a white knight. I think this is the reason that push people to change advise...like Conti or Salvaterra
don't we accept the Maestri's bolts?...ok, I agree.
but in the same way I don't want to accept all the bolts on alpine climbs
1/10/100...bolts is the same things...the murdering of impossible, is our egoistic un-capability to accept to fail and to renounce to the summits.
would we like to have a clean mountaineering? I hope so.
so be able to u-turn and let something ''inviolated''...there is not an acceptable level of bolting!
In my opinion this should be our evolution...but does not means to destroy the past, at least not in an unilateral way...
I would like to show you the words of a great climber...what a man! what a bold ethics!:
''This arete will be climbed by someone that will use artificial methods,
I prefer to renounce''
Paul Preuss concerning the S arete of Aiguille Noire
cheers,
matteo.
|
|
enzolino
climber
Galgenen, Switzerland
|
|
Salvaterra's and Conti's positions might appear inconsistent. They expressed an opinion within a debate. When there was not yet a broad consensus.
I think that none of them simply liked the way the bolts were removed. Disregarding the opinion of a large part of the climbing community. I call this arrogance.
Here a recent interview with Salvaterra.
http://www.montagna.tv/cms/?p=38676
In the past he said several times that he wanted to remove the bolts, but he wanted to know Maestri's opinion first.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Why be concerned with Maestri's opinion? We know his opinion about the 1959 route and that it isn't based on reality. I think Salveterra is just concerned given the fervor of Italian nationalism- which is a thing to behold. Maybe that's why my grandparents immigrated.
|
|
uli__
climber
Milan, Italy
|
|
@donini
so it is the fact (your opinion) that Maestri is a liar that legitimate the unbolting, other routes cannot be unbolted only just because (you dont' think that) their authors are not liars?
is this the discriminant?
|
|
enzolino
climber
Galgenen, Switzerland
|
|
Beliefs, sometimes are like little walls.
They are walls which protect our values and our identity. The problem is that sometimes, these walls may grow so thick and so high, like silos, that prevent to enlarge our horizon and understand things with a larger perspective.
Then belief undergo a metamorphosis and becomes fundamentalism.
This is what I thought when I read the Colin Haley’s comment on the KKK chopping.
I’ll just highlight some of the funny issues he mentioned in his blog.
http://colinhaley.blogspot.com/2011/02/cerro-torre-attempts.html
The unjustified hate against Maestri. Even if he lied, he credited Egger the merit of the ascent and we don’t know why he did it. It’s like to send to death penalty someone who killed for legitimate defence. Or even worse, to disrespect someone because has a different view on etics.
I simply don't have respect for liars. Maestri told the biggest lie in the history of climbing for the gain of his own reputation.
The fact that Maestri also vengefully showed the world the most heavy-handed climbing style it has ever seen - the epitome of the "murder of the impossible" - doesn't help him gain respect.
But his fear for denigration is just funny ...
Just because you disagree with my opinion doesn't mean you need to hate me or denigrate me personally.
The number of bolts without considering the weather circumstances, the Maestri’s ethical background, etc far from the actual technologies and standards.
It is difficult to comprehend the Compressor Route without seeing it in person - both in terms of the enormous quantity of Maestri's bolts, and in terms of the bolt ladders' locations, in close proximity to easily-protectable, easily-climbable terrain.
The hypocrisy of who preach “fair means” and a “clean mountain” but bring with himself a bolt kit for a new variante.
On both attempts we carried a small bolt kit which we thought we might use on the headwall, rationalizing that adding a few bolts to avoid a few hundred was a sound trade.
The disregard towards locals and other alpinists’ opinion.
I believe that Maestri's bolt ladders do not belong on Cerro Torre, so it really doesn't make any difference to me if they are removed by a Canadian, Argentinean or Cambodian climber, young or old climber
This is one of the silliest comments. I wonder for how many mountains of the world we can say they are compromised. But nobody is “crucified” in the way Garibotti, Haley and so on have being done.
For the 40 years that Maestri's bolt ladders were in place, Cerro Torre was a compromised mountain.
|
|
enzolino
climber
Galgenen, Switzerland
|
|
@donini
Why be concerned with Maestri's opinion? We know his opinion about the 1959 route and that it isn't based on reality. I think Salveterra is just concerned given the fervor of Italian nationalism- which is a thing to behold. Maybe that's why my grandparents immigrated. Well ... why should we be concerned with your opinion?
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
My opinion is based on being one of the first people to climb the Maestri/Egger route to the Col of Conquest. My opinion is based on fact not emotion. All I said was that Maestri's opinion should not be factored in. I said nothing about chopping bolts.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Saw your post Enzolino. Regarding the controversy you need not be concerned about my opinion. Regarding the 1959 climb, if you care about things like facts, evidence and truth, you should be concerned about my opinion- apparently you don't.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!