Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
scuffy b
climber
The deck above the 5
|
|
on the edge: keep in mind that almost all those scary Leeper
hangers out there are connected to 1/4" Rawl compression bolts.
I've certainly heard of many more broken bolts than broken
hangers.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
OTEASTD wrote: 'Why don't you give a call to the loved ones of climbers killed as a result of defective mank put in during the "golden era" and tell them that.'
Give me a list, name the climbers who have met their fate in this manner.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
Anastasia started a thread about the strength of the climbing community, and she proposed her hopes for constructive advancement, generation of safe harbor, and realization of an overall positive impact enabled by our communal bond.
So on to bolt wars!
Enemies share one of the greatest of bonds.
-Machiavelli.
(OK, he probably didn't say that, I just went through “The Prince” trying to find it, but someone said something like it. And I'm sayin’ it, even though it's also probably totally out of context as well. Any pundits out there?)
Is this really the type of bond by which we wish our community to be known?
Often, what strengthens this adversarial bond is in fact, a strong will on the part of the opponents to engage in a conflict which provides the opportunity to rigorously cling to and fortify a stance. Enemies need each other to continually sustain their struggle for Position.
By its very nature, this type of relationship excludes solution because it feeds on mutually entrenched positions. But we have a choice: expression and maintenance of intransigent positions on the one hand, versus the alternative: expansive and instructive dialectic couched in an understanding of and regard for the interests at play, which can lead to a more agreeable pattern of resource management and a more productive style of communal discourse. The latter may still cleave to the concept of an engagement with an enemy making us stronger, which is why a worthy opponent is worth honoring, yet it encompasses growth.
Positions versus Interests:
If we seek only to fortify our position, we feed the beast and strengthen the bond in a purely divisive way: the bond of enemies is maintained, yet only through prolonging the trouble. If we examine interests behind the positions and engage in and employ a more functional exchange, the bond may remain; although it might be transmuted to one of mutual respect, understanding, and in doing so inherently nurture the community through expansion of a greater appreciation for the big picture.
Example of Positions (wants): -we should engage in risk because we grow through it-, or -we should climb unhindered by risk, because our lives shouldn't be risked unnecessarily and we’ll athletically exceed-.
Example of Interests (needs) behind both the positions: we all have a need for self-expression, for growth, and we all want that to be validated. We sense a need to be right and we need to be understood, to be appreciated.
This approach is sort of like agreeing to disagree, but it is more: by evolving the bond from adversarial to collusive, we move toward synthesizing an expanded relational space where more interests of both parties are met. This is usually not the case in a head-on clash were only positions are fought for with equal amounts of combative force.
At the least, in striving to understand, respect, and honor the opponent, we shift the tonal quality of the exchange from discordant, shrill attack, to one of inquiry and creative integration. Hopefully, the outcome produces a shared use of resources usually achieved through some fashion of compromise, which accommodates the expressed interests of those involved, especially to the degree that they overlap, while engendering a pattern, a bond, leaning in the direction of communal harmony and stewarded growth.
Oddly, we already enjoy a fairly well divided playing ground. This argument, which we see here in this thread, is more often just about arguing. As Bob Antonio said, to paraphrase, nobody is really adding bolts to established trad icon routes such as the Bachar Yerian, Perilous Journey, and the like. We already have tons of great sport climbs. Nobody is saying we should be leaving rusty pins and bolts in situ, to the contrary, everyone agrees maintenance has to happen and it is happening. Yes, Hammer would like to see old pins replaced with bolts instead of newer pins; he is uncomfortable with routes, which are poorly protected for the grade. Yes Wes has proposed an argument for retro bolting. We will not always agree; but we do enjoy extant examples of all these styles and more.
Werner initially proposed a discussion on the status and value of some of these older routes that have rusted gear, which seldom see an ascent, which languish …and away we went on the typical clash of positions. (We like going apesh#t over your thoughts Werner).
Enter Wes, when he sees a fight, he likes to push buttons and often he only needs to express his sincere viewpoint to do so; after all that is easy, because his viewpoint is one of modern access and protection and clearly at odds with the old ground up, risk-taking mentality. But sometimes he just states something to get a reaction, so we call him a troll. Sure, it seems annoying, and it is because that is what button pushing is all about, at the outset. What he is partially trying to do, is to loosen up some of those aspects of ourselves which reside in the subconscious unknown, often called the shadow. Often our interests are in fact unknown to ourselves and they reside in the shadow, behind the stated position. So Wes comes along and applies his drawing salve to the wound, to leech and extract the vitriol and likewise to expose the deeper roots of motive and interest which lie behind, in the end to get us to think about our stance (our position) which we guard so strongly.
Whether or not Wes has regard for the traditional approach to rock climbing, and the keen rewards which it offers is not so much the point. The point is he understands that life moves forward un-haltingly, unsparingly, and it is forever changing our landscape, our bodies, our minds.
“The ocean waves surge freely against the shore, wetting the pebbles and shells.”
-Ken Wilber, “No Boundary”
(Crushing, cleaning, sorting, eroding, depositing...)
"Just as the Ocean waves, the Universe Peoples."
Alan Watts.
John Fowles, in one of his novels, to paraphrase, said that war is essentially a failure of the understanding and application of the fundamental nature of relationship: of relationship to the self, to the other, to nature, to life.
Ever notice how you get very few women in these bolt war arguments? In international mediation and conflict resolution a standard model is to work with the women in an embattled region; to educate them, to grant them the skills to foment change, to seek resolution and to engender peace. Why? Because they intrinsically understand relationship: they give birth. They have an irrevocable stake in a more harmonious, communal future.
Cheers,
Roy
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Roy wrote: Ever notice how you get very few women in these bolt war arguments?
They are much smarter than we are. My wife laughs at me all the time about this stuff.
|
|
nick d
Trad climber
nm
|
|
Edge, while I admit I can be over the top at times, your answer clearly shows you feel a sense of entitlement,"I don't think I'm entitled to nuthin in climbing beyond what the FA party had, which was hardware that was not rusty and defective."
What did the FA party have when they went up? Unknown rock quality, difficulty of moves, and no assurance they would be able to get any protection at all.
Also, since you are so ready to get down on Ed Leeper for his "defective" gear, if it was so bad in the first place, then how was the FA party any better off than you are now? I have used a lot of his gear over the years and in my opinion most of it was pretty darn good. I think Ed really contributed a lot to the climbing world.
Since now you know everything about the routes before you leave the deck, perhaps you should think about replacing the gear that makes you afraid on the lead. It would still be easier for you than it was for the FA, at least you would have whatever they placed to make you feel more secure while you drilled. It would make your ascent that much more of an accomplishment, and simultaneously allow you to contribute something to the climbing community at large.
Michael
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
No two people climb for the same reason or climb in the
same way. If I even leave chalk marks on the holds(never
mind putting in a bolt) the people who want the full mystery
will be shortchanged because of what I did. Because we
share the land there will always be people at cross
purposes. That is a given. Neither party is “Right” though
frankly I rather prefer the people who try always to impact
others as little as possible. I don’t know what to say about
the people who do not accept this as even being an issue,
except to say they exist and they seem irretrievably stuck on
being right. They don’t even realize that is what is
happening. Sometimes we have to live with what we have
got. Well, actually this is always true.
What Anastasia is getting at on another thread is that
unmitigated conflict, while momentarily reinforcing our
pleasant feeling of being “Right” , also corrodes our
interactions, our relationships, and degrades the climbing
experience to a much greater extent than our feeling of
being right can ever improve our experience. Decreasing
returns. The problem is made complex due to the fact each
of us has a different point at which our returns begin to
decrease.
If I had the you know whats needed to tell you there is an
easy answer, I would be better off spending my time running
for president. There is a difficult answer. People need to
listen to each other and begin to value the other’s needs as
highly as they value their own.
Both sides accepting perfection will never be achieved.
|
|
nick d
Trad climber
nm
|
|
Stannard for President! Oh yeah... You've got my vote baby!
Michael
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
It ain't me babe.
|
|
nick d
Trad climber
nm
|
|
We could do worse, in fact, I'm sure we currently are.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
hey, hey now, I smell thread drift!
(J Stan for, ... sumthin' good)
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 5, 2007 - 10:25pm PT
|
Oh ..... now the walls a draped in the clouds of uncertainty.
There's a mist and intermittent drizzle in the air.
Oh it's so very quite.
The Gods are waiting .....
And mortals are deciding their fate.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
Hartoony, Nickyd, to be honest, I am just arguing for the sake of arguing. Have a good weekend.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
Hey, I only said that for a political comment.
Sorry,
|
|
goatboy smellz
climber
colorado
|
|
meanwhile out in the barn...
This thread reminds me of that story in the movie Smoke.
"PAUL
I suppose it all goes back to Queen Elizabeth.
AUGGIE
The Queen of England?
PAUL
Not Elizabeth the Second, Elizabeth the First.
(Pause)
Did you ever hear of Sir Walter Raleigh?
TOMMY
Sure. He's the guy who threw his cloak down
over the puddle.
PAUL
That's the man. Well, Raleigh was the person
who introduced tobacco in England, and since he
was a favorite of the Queen's -- Queen Bess, he
used to call her -- smoking caught on as a
fashion at court. I'm sure Old Bess must have
shared a stogie or two with Sir Walter. Once,
he made a bet with her that he could measure
the weight of smoke.
DENNIS
You mean, weigh smoke?
PAUL
Exactly. Weigh smoke.
TOMMY
You can't do that. It's like weighing air.
PAUL
I admit it's strange. Almost like weighing
some one's soul. But Sir Walter was a clever
guy. First, he took an unsmoked cigar and put
it on a balance and weighed it. Then he lit up
and smoked the cigar, carefully tapping the
ashes into the balance pan. When he was
finished, he put the butt into the pan along
with the ashes and weighed what was there.
Then he subtracted that number from the
original weight of the unsmoked cigar. The
difference was the weight of the smoke.
TOMMY
Not bad. That's the kind of guy we need to take
over the Mets.
PAUL
Oh, he was smart, all right. But not so smart
that he didn't wind up having his head chopped
off twenty years later.
(Pause)
But that's another story.
AUGGIE
(Handing PAUL his change and putting
cigar tins and lighter in a paper bag)
Take care of yourself now, and don't do
anything I wouldn't do.
PAUL
(Smiling)
I wouldn't think of it."
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
The West
|
|
Do hammer and edge ever read their own posts?
Bob d', point taken, though Mimi has been known to voice, or otherwise contribute an opinion, on bolt issues.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
That's just one more reason why she's been known as Mimi Dude!
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2009 - 05:47pm PT
|
This was quite an interesting thread, and deserves to be bumped. A perennial subject.
|
|
MisterE
Trad climber
One Step Beyond!
|
|
I'm almost done bumping, bump
|
|
wstmrnclmr
Trad climber
Bolinas, CA
|
|
|
Aug 24, 2011 - 08:30pm PT
|
As Mighty Hiker said back in '09, this should be a "perennial subject". And though it's a bit more to '11, I respectfully send it up. I personally love climbing over historic gear up in Tuolumne and am trying to stay a step ahead of Cummins and Brown but they're catching up fast!
After a few years of reflection, the answer to the question pertaining to whether re-bolting may lead to a renaissance in climbing museum pieces(Largo et al)seems to be "no" as a run out is a run out is a........beautiful run out! I love what Russ Walling said (paraphrasing) about knowing that these
beautiful climbs are still there waiting for us to enjoy.........
|
|
mike m
Trad climber
black hills
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2012 - 01:28am PT
|
This thread drifted to nothing.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!