Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
uli__
climber
Milan, Italy
|
|
@Randisi
fair enough, so I print all this s.it and mail it to CM and you do the same with K&K
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Normal people move on either climb it or fix it.
Drama queens just keep on spinning around in their heads and babbling endlessly doing nothing .....
|
|
uli__
climber
Milan, Italy
|
|
@Randisi
sorry, I was joking
anyway I understand that misunderstendment can be an issue: being called "italian nationalist" quite make me throw up the lunch
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
Thank you to WBraun for being a babbling dramaqueen... Everyone contributes as best he can.
Healyje
In my opinion I am not a misplaced Italian nationalist, though you may have some facts concerning my case that I am not aware of?
|
|
uli__
climber
Milan, Italy
|
|
The one person who may have benefited most from the bolt removal is David Lama.
used the 8mm holes for pinkies :D
|
|
TwistedCrank
climber
Ideeho-dee-do-dah-day boom-chicka-boom-chicka-boom
|
|
It made his free ascent all the more impressive.
It might have been more impressive without the K&K "fair means" claim.
Standing on the shoulders of giants, and all that. NTTAWWI
|
|
house of cards
climber
|
|
@uli
yes, of course, Garibotti has done his share of "instigating", with his 2007 R+I article and his comments in this thread. Other than Josh Wharton and Zack Smith, a number of other climbers had been discussing this openly: Colin Haley, Bjorn-Eivind Artun, etc. Amongst "seasoned" climbers there has always been a lot of support for the chopping, although clearly there was/is more support in North America and the UK than in continental Europe. I think that there are obvious cultural and historical differences that account for that. There are countless routes like the Compressor in the Dolomites, with bolt ladders from bottom to top, so it is not surprising that Italians dont find the Compressor route offensive. Clearly that is not the case in North America or the UK.
My point was that it is unfortunate at best that Conti and Salvaterra back pedaled. It does not make them look very good.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
Werner sees drama queens, but I see something truly laudable.
We are having a real time relatively polite argument over culture and the importance of history vs the challenge of our sport across the globe and between some highly knowledgeable and experienced players.
I think it is terrific.
We could smooth out the process a bit with some better translation help, but nonetheless I think this is very cool.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
You guys on the other side of the Pond blow my mind. You so much want to believe Maesri no evidence will convince you that he lied. I was pro Maestri until I actually DID the climb and viewed the evidence. If you don't believe me get your asses off of the couch and GO over to CT and climb the route and see for youself. Arm chair climbers are a dime a dozen.
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
Donini
Talking as a guy "on the other side of the Pond": Your mind is blown too easily. I have no need to believe anyone, maybe except you as an observer. LOL...
Evidence would have convinced me. As it is, based on the observations/indications my best hypothesis is that Maestri didn't tell the truth, as a conscious act or not.
Your observations are as close as anyone will ever get to evidence unless Maestri himself speaks. If I got my ass off of the couch and WENT to CT to see I would never be able to get better observations than you got. There is no problem concerning your credibility as an observer.
I have no problem being "dime a dozen" as long as my mind is clear.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Marlow, hard to imagine what would pass for 'truth' for you...
|
|
Snorky
Trad climber
Carbondale, CO
|
|
There is plenty of evidence that Maestri didn't complete the 1959 climb. There is NO evidence that he did. What is proof if not the weight of the evidence?
And besides, what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Also, spectacular claims require spectacular evidence.
If evidence is unimportant, then what is to stop me from claiming all sorts of first ascents? (You doubt me? You are questioning my honour? Yes.)
Maestri's Compressor Route is essentially physical proof, beyond reasonable doubt, that the 1959 attempt was a farce. If you want to demonstrate a claim, you must repeat the action in the claim, not perform a different action. Why didn't he just repeat the 1959 route? He would have known the bivy locations, the way of the route, and how to descend. Instead he decided to repeat a different route that had already been attempted by a strong British team (so there was ACTUAL beta for that route, not just vague imaginary descriptions of endless thin, moderate ice). He followed someone else's route, didn't summit, and STILL claimed it for himself, in the process of providing no evidence to support his original claim. He had now claimed two routes on Cerro Torre, despite having never gone to the top. And, on top of all that, just to add a character reference, Maestri was a nasty bitter shrew whenever confronted with any of this information. And, since there is no evidence of the 1959 climb, the honesty of his character is the only thing supporting that claim. And it turns out he has the character of a combative child, and it seems doubtful that he can speak honestly about anything, let alone his claims to fame. Has anyone ever given a nastier interview about their great life-defining feat?
If he had really intended to prove his 1959 claims, he would have launched expeditions to repaeta the 1959 route and/or find Egger's body and camera (and bring it home with dignity), not bolt a via ferrata up the headwall (as that demonstrates NOTHING about his previous attempt, except for his wholesale conversion from alpine to siege style).
The obvious reason he didn't attempt to repeat the 1959 route was that he knew he could never climb it. His overwhelming hybris could not allow such a result as total failure.
We speak of the "murder of the impossible" and of the death of fair means, but those are abstract concepts. What of the death of Egger and the circumstances surrounding it? If Maestri's other claims regarding the 1959 climb are false, why would he be telling the truth about what happened to Egger? There is evidence that they did not agree about climbing strategy (Egger favored single alpine push, Maestri wanted to fix more rope). There is evidence that Maestri has a very volatile temper. Clearly, Egger fell from the mountain, that is true. But when a real man falls out of a cartoon, what are we supposed to believe?
Maybe Maestri thinks about that a lot.
Fava knows what happened up there. Doesn't want to talk about it. Why not?
Uli, Monaco, and Enzolino repeatedly defend Maestri's honour, even while admitting his probable lack of honesty. Why are they doing this? Because he's "old"? Why are they so personally invested in maintaining his folly? Are they respecting history? As Colin Haley pointed out, where's their respect for the real history of the SE ridge British attempt that Maestri originally retrobolted? And then they frame their argument to polarize Italians against Americans, which I suppose is a side effect of nationality, but really has nothing to do with the Cerro Torre controversy and really just dilutes the pertinent information in this thread and makes everyone feel bad and defensive. Meanwhile, nobody gives a f>ck about Toni Egger, and nobody talks about defending his honor or memory. He was denied his rightful opportunity to be an old, fake, bitter liar along with Maestri. Or maybe he would have told the truth and that was the big problem. For better or worse, his name is hitched to the legacy of Maestri. From a historical perspective, doesn't Egger's memory deserve better? Maestri has had many opportunities to address the inconsistencies of the case, but willfully refuses to be civil or to specifically respond to the evidence against him. For all the valid points raised by Uli, Monaco, Enzolino, and others who seem like otherwise reasonable people, their blind allegiance to Maestri is baffling. With such a great tradition of European alpinism, and so many truly inspiring climbers to idolize, this is your hero? This is history? This is who you spend your energy defending? Is this an example to hold up to the world and say "An Italian proudly made this in error, and it must therefore stay forever!"
For those of us who value nature, adventure, human spirit, and teamwork over industry, conquest, dominance, and ego, your tired defense of Maestri will never gain traction, only polarize us further. Even if the camera were found, and indeed provided proof of the 1959 Cerro Torre summit, whereas we would all eat our words about that ascent, it would not at all justify the abomination of the Compressor Route.
Someone (can't remember who) posted that the pro-chopping crowd has an irrational, religious-like belief in some impossible ideal. I would turn that assertion around and say that Maestri's defenders are much more religious, having blind faith in ridiculous magical events that have no evidence in reality and in fact perpetuate a pernicious tradition of man subjugating nature to his own narrow interest, specifically for the achievement of his own glorified immortality. And they will go to war over these disputed events, even while admitting the fundamental claims should not be taken literally. Sounds exactly like religion to me.
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
I don't see Uli, Monaco and Enzolino as typical Italian history writers. My opinion is that neither am I up north. What I see is that there is a difference in the way we look at what should be taken for evidence and to what degree doubt should come the the advantage of the one "investigated".
Italian history writing has traditionally had some problems. Bonatti was for a long time one of it's "victims".
Lacedelli and Cenacchi: K2 The Price of Conquest
"To discover what was missing it would have been enough to question the witnesses. The problem is that nothing that has been said or written about K2 has ever been subjected to a rigorous historical interpretation, and most of the witnesses have never been questioned.
The only people who have been heard are those involved in the arguments, and then only when those arguments were actually in progress. As a consequence, it was not possible to get past the arguments.
This is a recurring problem in the way we Italians confront our recent past. Rarely do we consider history as an institutional or cultural question. On the contrary, we tend to think of it as a question of personal opinion, or worse, a private event of no concern to the general public. The consequence is that it is hard to make historical judgements, because these tend to be seen only as personal judgements. In order to write an account of the past, we have to wait until someone dies, someone forgets or someone loosens up. Only then, and with the blessing of the heirs, but still with the risk of being taken to court for libel, can we confront things"
|
|
Snorky
Trad climber
Carbondale, CO
|
|
Marlow
Nice. Thanks for the explanatory post. Clearly some cultural difference at work.
Once Maestri dies, he can be properly buried. but not yet.
Egger is dead already though, and he wasn't Italian, so feel free to confront his past.
@fattrad: Italy's socialist policies are among its best assets. Quit lobbing non sequitir political grenades into our debate chamber. It's not a contribution, just an irritant.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
anders, re grand wall, we could do another thread. early 1960s was indeed still an experimental period for expansion bolts. the bolting on lower grand was one of the failed experiments and far less likely to have happened, in, say yosemite at the time. it could happen in squamish precisely because squamish was a backwater.
neither the alternative cracks nor the 4th class ledge system to what became mercy me --nor that line of holds --were obscure features at the time, regardless of how different the veg may've been.
in any case, as i said before, neither this nor the infamous comici routes in the dolos are exact equivalents to maestri's compressor route.
fwiw, i think perry did the right thing in moving chunks of the ladder over to protect the newer OW free variation. i've never been on the compressor route, so it's not clear to me if what k&k did is analagous or not.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
fat trad-- this thread is inevitably getting snarky. but yr post is remarkably idiotic even by the standards of this thread, and you should remove it.
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
Snorky
You say: "Egger is dead already though, and he wasn't Italian, so feel free to speculate about him."
Now you're reading my post as the devil reads the bible. Edited: Interpreting it in the worst possible sense, that is.
My speculation supported by observations and reasoning is as I have already said that Mastri didn't tell the truth, consciously or not. But the doubt that is left I let come to Maestri's advantage. You see your speculation as truth and the doubt that is left you look away from.
Egger was a brave climber deserving respect. I will let him rest in peace.
|
|
Snorky
Trad climber
Carbondale, CO
|
|
this thread is inevitably getting snarky
inevitably getting snorky.
couldn't resist
Egger was a brave climber deserving respect. I will let him rest in peace.
Yes. Absolutely. But he's resting in Maestri's dark shadow, not in peace.
As far as how to award the points of doubt: Yes, I am a skeptic. Zero points for doubt. You say "But the doubt that is left I let come to Maestri's advantage." OK fine. But if you believe Maestri didn't tell the truth, what doubt is left?
I like the phrase about the devil reading the bible. That is how I read it.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Marlow, Marlow, Marlow....there is no doubt, Maestri did not climb Cerro Torre in 1976. Thus, he lied and, given that fact, his climb in 1971 reeks of hubris, arrogance and cynicism.
edit: Also, be mindful of his attempts at character assassination of fellow Italian Bonatti.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Snorky, Egger can rest in peace. He was dead long before the lies that besmirch the climb he was on started. I found his remains the year before I did Torre Egger. The mountain that bears his name is a fitting reminder of Toni's place in climbing.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!