Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
Karl,
I didn't know you were a climbing "communist"!
We seem to have forgotten that climbing is an art form. Most particularly in the FA process.
Perhaps its the embarrasment of riches I have in terms of boundless rock, but it always seems to me that the critics ought to just go out and put up their OWN routes to show how they think it should be done instead of obsessing over someone else's work.
I'm so tired of the all to common attempts to suppress individuality and "homogenize" cultures in our society in general. It seems a shame for the climbing community to emulate it in defiance of a long standing celebration of the first ascent principle.
Would we go to an art gallery and make "corrections" in the work of others?
I agree with John when he says, "as though everything less is a crime against humanity and common sense".
I suppose thats why the whiners can't see it as monday morning quarterbacking when they're out to save mankind.
An aside to Wuss Christ,
I guess some of us don't have a reason to go out on a friday night.
If you can't see a contradiction in "no judgement though,... everyone makes mistakes" then you may be impossible to reason with, especially if you think crying out "drilled pockets" is the universal trump card. But you seem to have a hard-on for me and Jeff. He'll be here tomorrow evening, and I'm in the book. Why don't you call and see if we can work it out instead of this endless drivel?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Ron wrote
"Karl,
I didn't know you were a climbing "communist"!
We seem to have forgotten that climbing is an art form. Most particularly in the FA process.
Perhaps its the embarrasment of riches I have in terms of boundless rock, but it always seems to me that the critics ought to just go out and put up their OWN routes to show how they think it should be done instead of obsessing over someone else's work.
I'm so tired of the all to common attempts to suppress individuality and "homogenize" cultures in our society in general. It seems a shame for the climbing community to emulate it in defiance of a long standing celebration of the first ascent principle. "
I'm pretty tolerant myself. I'm just saying what reality is, not what I think it should be. The community has always had something to say about if an FA is an outrage or not. Sometimes, looking back, a later community doesn't agree with earlier community.
That's why Robbins chopped the Dawn Wall and why it was later reestablished.
If somebody took a beautiful, clean overhanging blank section of Zion Sandstone and just put a bolt ladder straight up the thing so they could hang out in an awesome place with no risk or actual climbing, would you guys be cool with it or not? I'm not saying one way or another but it sounds like they did the FA and in the name of diversity you'd honor it.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
Wrong person to ask Karl.
An even older climbing partner and I have discussed doing just that.
If another party did, and they did a good job with solid work it wouldn't bother me a bit.
In fact, if overhanging it would be far more resistant to the drag buffing that many of the current Zion classics exhibit, a problem which could very well soon threaten ALL Zion climbing.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
And when did our community even agree with itself?!
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Again Ron.
I'm just describing what I see around me, not my personal opinion about how it should be.
And just like our regular community, it's the ones who feel most radically about things that make the most noise and take action.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
"No trump card, just another illustration of how pathetic it gets when one person thinks they own the route."
Perhaps it gets most pathetic when someone comes along after the first ascent and, thinking he owns the route, refashions it after his particular tastes and sack quotient. If there is no shame at all in reference to this issue, then anyone can come along and do as they please on any route, anywhere, rendering a route meaningless insofar as the character is ever changing.
It's called spotsmanship, and in virtually any other sport if you can't jump the bar or hit the pitch or sink the shot, who goes altering the venue so it better fits their skillset? That's called cheating in virtually every sportsman's book--plain and simple.
JL
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Don't kid yourself ......
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
Apage satanas!
Wes, Hedge: Your ideas are superficially attractive, but it'd be a slippery slope.
There's always been tension in climbing between the various values. You may just be playing devil's advocate, but since its inception climbing has been about adventure and challenge, including risk, at least perceived and usually real. (Even gyms and "sport" climbs see a fair number of injuries, mostly DIA.)
Your alternate values seem to be safety and convenience. With such values, more and more places in the U.S. would soon be like much of Europe - bolted to the hilt, to maximize traffic and minimize commitment. Including many places where there's perfectly good natural protection. The race for homogeneity.
There are already a fair number of cliffs where safety and convenience have led to overbolting - many "sport" climbing crags. The cracks at such cliffs don't have much of a chance. We're fortunate to have enough rock (so far) to allow you to play your game by your rules, and (hopefully) for you to allow me to play by my rules. I'm inconvenienced because Just Do It doesn't provide much in the way of hand jams; you're inconvenienced because the Bachar-Yerian has relatively few protection bolts. Inconvenience isn't a very convincing indictment.
We have some problems with convenience bolting in Squamish, and they're starting to be discussed - suddenly, people have become aware that we have a limited, and precious, resource. We can't all do what we'd like, where and when we'd like.
You've done well to bring this up here, given a (foreseeable) less than sympathetic reception. We're all part of a community, in the inclusive sense of the word, and have to do our best to work these things out ourselves. That means involving all parts of our community.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
The retro bolters are the robots who can't see the magicians.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
one pass away from the big ditch
|
|
what if all FA routing was done anonymously?
what if we all guidebooks were outlawed?
what if all topos were verbal descriptions?
(sorry will start a new thread for these)
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
It would probably be a good idea to note who is doing most of the retrobolting and why.
First is replacing fixed pin and tree anchors with bolts. That's complete in many areas, and still resisted in others.
In Yosemite, the vast majority of retrobolting is by 5.13 to 5.15 climbers freeing aid clmibs. Again, will somebody address the question of bolts on the changing corners pitch on the Nose? Yes it would be more dangerous to use placed pro on that pitch but WAY less dangerous than climbing some of these run-out faces that some are thinking about.
I know, because I had an RP pull on me on the changing corners and my belayer had, for a dumb reason (years ago), a ton of slack in the system and I went like 30 feet before I stopped. Clean fall. No other pro pulled.
Where's all the condemnation for retrobolting the most famous, proudest route in Yosemite? Strikes me of elitism that the best climbers can retrobolt the proudest stone that gets climbed every day but it's bloody murder pussyhood if some 5.9 climber wants 3-4 bolts per pitch where there is 1 bolt or none on some classic face that hasn't had a dozen ascents.
What's good for either should be good for both, either way.
The retro-bolting of changing corners started with just two bolts within easy reach of the crack. Now there is a variation with more bolts. So there is the question about how far you have to get from the original route before it's OK to bolt a variation. If it's ok to multibolt a variation 7 feet left of the crack on Changing Corners is it ok to put a bolted route 7 feet left of Apparition on Daff Dome?
It should be noted that some parties are saving time by bringing a cheater stick to avoid one of the harder aid sections on the Nose (The thin part of Changing Corners) by cheater stick clipping the retrobolts.
Just asking questions and keepin us honest. Never bolted within 100 feet of another route myself.
I hear a lot of talk about abstinence only but that's not the reality I see. What is it reality and why?
Peace
karl
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
"The longer you old school guys go on presenting an argument that ignores logic, common sense, and physical reality, the more ridiculous your argument becomes. If you want to run it out or die if you fall, no amount of retrobolting prevents you from doing that. Where do you get this idea that you absolutely must clip in to any and all fixed gear?"
This, as I said earlier, is a totally new mindset. Before, the notion was that a route was not just a series of moves, but an overall experience that required of the climber a certain skillset. Especially on bolted climbs, that overall experience was authored by the first ascentionists, and anyone who came along afterwards had the choice of either going after that experience, or not. Your take on all of this, Joe, is that the experience authored by the first ascentionists is of no importance and is, basically, meaningless unless it fits your criteria. You also take it upon yourself to assert ownership over every route that doesn't meet your criteria, and to assert your "right" to reconform the route to your specs because it is "logical" to do so.
Now this seems terribly selfish to me, as well as vastly dummying down the challenge of a climbing experience--reducing the climb to a series of moves rather than an adventure. It seems particularly crazy when you consider that these run out climbs are by far the minority -- there are a hundred sport bolted route for every run out face route. Why not just leave the old run out climbs alone, rather than stitching them up with bolts because it's "logical" to do so.
Dood, most of these climbs are like 30 plus years old. If you don't want to climb them, don't. But you can't go "improving" the work of others simply because it's logical to do so. Imagine doing that in any other sport or enterprise? You'd be railroaded out of town in a hurry.
JL
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 3, 2006 - 12:52pm PT
|
Like I said, it's a good thing you can't bolt waves, because after this crowd figured out that, even after factoring in the advantages of new boards (better rubber) and towing in, they could still get killed at a Mavericks or ground into the coral at any number of breaks, every big wave in the world would be grid bolted. Weak sauce. Like I said, it isn't climbing so much as a just another risk-free, suburban, entertainment option.
The problem is that gymspawn who have never placed a piece gear are now 70-80% of the population of folks who identify themselves as a 'climber'. The infrastructure necessary for them to be climbers at all is a significant burden on the rock, but sort of like the repugnicans successfully taking over the government, they're here to stay and now represent a 'tyranny of democracy'. I expect similar results from their 'governance'. I will say they are unabashed in the support of the logic of stripping climbing of those things that made many if not most of us old folks interested in it in the first place. And to be honest, being assured of not running into these sorts of folks was one of the most attractive aspects of why I took up climbing back in the day. I guess in the end I'm just not a 'uniter' at heart...
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Can someone define a "sport route" and then define a "trad route".
There is a huge difference in how they are established and what the FA party is trying to accomplished.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
I still think it would be a good idea to be more specific and less idealistic when discussing these ideas. I don't get the impression the different posters are talking about the same things. We're not on the topic of this thread anymore (rap bolted, rehearsed climbs) and the history and ethic of each area has something to do with it, along with the rep and popularity/obscurity of the route.
Because reality is that, in the areas I've climbed, the First Ascent has only been respected if it falls within Community Standards. Community Standards change and the facts on the ground begin to change. Like it or not, even Largo's generation offended the previous generation and so on.
Examples:
Harding puts up Dawn Wall, Robbins chops it, many years later it's put back up and is still there
Kauk rap bolts sport climb, Bachar chops it and stress in the community erupts. I think that route is back on the stone as well.
It's true that most dangerous FAs like Solitary Commitment have been respected but the community standard respected that, but again, generations in the future may respect that and keep it and they may not. Just like what our generation does about sex would be unthinkable 100 years ago.
Chalk, Hangdogging, Cams, topos, all considered weak sauce at some point.
I wonder what the guys like Robbins would have thought about stuff like Eric Kohl's aid routes (back in the day, not now after things have changed) Plenty Bold, but sometimes lots of holes and not necessarily obvious lines of weakness.
Peace
Karl
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Elitism
Yes, there must be dictator, and there must be sheep.
Hehehe .......
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
To begin with, why do we really put any kind of protection in place?
What is our real goal ultimately?
To have fun?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Classic Kevin! and your points are all valid points of view.
Now some aid climbers might disagree with you. They did raise a stink about a couple added bolts on Wet Denim Daydream that made the pitch safer if an aid climber clipped them.
and for the 99.9% of climbers who aid the changing corners, it's easier and safer for them to clip the retro-bolts as well.
It doesn't turn out that my satisfaction in aid climbing depends on it staying dangerous but for many that seems to be the case. Arguing that getting the route free is worth it, if only for a few, even though it deprives the rest, the many, of the natural conditions is a point of view. But it seems to be a point of view that again favors the elite. After all, if folks had the option of climbing those 5.9 face climbs while staring down 40-70 foots falls rather than death falls, it would benefit the many, and might actually increase the number of people doing scary face climbing, and the elite could still solo it.
But then there's that slipperly slope eh?
and that slope exists in aid climbing as well since I have heard criticism of the close bolting done in freeing the dihedral wall. By our notorious friend Todd if I remember correctly.
There's also a retro-bolt on the very moderate free-climbing pitch of Texas Flake on the Nose. I just think folks are too lazy to chop it and maybe who knows why it's still there. (I might suspect how it got there though, I tried to link up that pitch with the previous one and the rope was almost out by that bolt. I hadn't placed any pro at all on the pitch and then I was almost out of rope. I had to do some ridiculous rope trick-sling debacle to finish the lead.)
Just tossing some specific examples out there so we can get a perspective on how individuals and the community come to view route alterations.
We're human and don't tend to be consistent. That's a given. One of the most outspoken trad guys around actually added a bolt to one of the 50 classics so it would be easier to guide. That bolt has since been chopped.
Wes, I think we should just debate the ideas and look at each other's perspective without involving personalities. Many of these threads have a very good exchange of ideas without needing to be spurred on by hyperbole that just makes people defensive.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Kevin wrote:
"My point was that the difficulty/challenge of the climbing on the Nose route overall was not significantly changed or "dumbed down" by adding bots to protect freeclimbing, as far as I know. I'm not strictly against using bolts even if there's natural pro if the natural pro poorly protects what is essentially a sport pitch."
Well it certainly dumbs down the challenge of freeclimbing the Changing Corners Pitch on the Nose and it makes it safer for Aid Climbing too which is a major factor in aid climbing.
The changing corners pitch is not essentially a sport pitch and the Nose is not a sport route. There were no pro nor aid bolts on that pitch when Harding climbed it. That pitch could be climbed on all natural pro by a top climber more safely than a 5.9 Tuolumne X rated route could be climbed by an average 5.10 climber.
So why do the elite tell us to sack up, and tell us don't change the natural protection offered, and then fail to set that standard of boldness and respect for the established route that they preach? And the rest of us look up and say, wow, must be hard to climb 5.14. Better not say anything.
Some do. The Huber have shown the bold way is possible on El Cap. Recent 5.13 ascents on the Falls Wall and the Ground up Free First ascent over by the Waterfall Route are examples.
Kevin wrote in another post
" Enabling the route to go free trumps the aesthetic compromise of added bolts for most, because it helps to raise freeclimbing standards. "
I wonder if you really mean to say this because what I'm reading is that adding bolts is worth it to raise freeclimbing standards. That sounds like sport climber talk to me.
And I'm not saying your wrong, because my brother, I don't know if there is a right answer. It may be all about how we get our own answers for ourselves and how we take those answers to the stone that shows our colors.
I'm in nobody's camp here cause I'm too old and weak to crank hard but I'm still skilled enough to do the runouts on the easier stuff. I have just found it's an exciting excercise of courage in the mind to question our assumptions, root out, or at least admit, our hypocrisy, and let go of dogma.
peace
karl
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
The boldness factor in climbing has always been one of the attractions to me. With a couple of exceptions, I've never climbed anything beyond the 5.11 - 5.11+ range, but my resume on bold climbs is pretty good. When I think of climbs that have captured my imagination, it's always the bold, scary ones. Take away the boldness factor and climbing would be a lot more like tennis or something.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!