Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 07:35pm PT
|
Chipped holds alter the foot and handhold options. Bolts were a concession for protection on blank faces. People like Kamps realized they were some sort of transgression so they sought to minimize their use. Same with Robbins.
Are you somehow putting it to me that those same bolts, or the presence of them, somehow interpreted under the rules of trad also exclude the route itself from being either trad in the modern sense or a valid free climb in the sense of the 70s?
Is this the Messner argument?
Okay so Serenity Crack is a three ring circus now.
Nobody said trad or essentially free climbing had to be played out in private? Yes it's nice when it has more solitude, more adventure, and more commitment.
Dingus!
You are really really working me here. I don't mean to be a crybaby but this stuff actually hurts me, especially at this pace, and if you're just goofing around you need to let me know.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 07:38pm PT
|
Ya'll figured it out yet? Just 10 more minutes and your order will be ready sir ...
We've been having issues with the deep fryer. Tarness has his head stuck in it!
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 07:52pm PT
|
Dingus,
Let me see if I can come at what you are projecting here for the sake of others, which I presume is your tack. I don't really have a problem with that; it's happened a few times in the last thousand posts. I just can't do it rapidfire much longer because as you may know I use a voice assist typing program which requires a lot of editing.
Along with my informal polling of younger experienced climbers I've been also dipping into a pool of people who don't know as much.
For instance: I asked my massage therapist, whose husband was a climber.
"Can you tell me what trad means?". Her answer: "Isn't trad where you place gear and sport where you clip bolts?".
Believe me I know from the outside it takes time. Even from the inside it takes time apparently! … 1000 posts worth; not the least of which is because the definition has changed roughly over the last 15 years, making it even more confusing.
Did you get the piece written by Tommy Caldwell which I linked wherein he referred to these atrociously run out ground up routes in Switzerland as sport climbs? I was floored that he would miss such a thing and Warbler thinks he was tongue-in-cheek.
I do know however that most people just getting into climbing need things to be about that simple. And believe me I'm not castigating them for this position of susceptibility to confusion.
I just got off the phone with a friend who I climb with quite a lot and he told me that everybody he knew getting into climbing in the last 10 or 15 years simply thought: trad = gear and sport = bolts.
So yes, I can see where understanding how bolts fit into trad is confusing for some.
Roy
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 08:08pm PT
|
And no Dingus: I do not equate the Jardine traverse with its chipped holds to the bolts that protect a myriad of slab climbs the world over.
That The Nose goes free on the Jardine traverse is something of a travesty and I'm sure it's been covered ad nauseum right here on supertopo.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 08:15pm PT
|
Dingus,
Convience anchors are not specifically in the spirit of trad. But all of the short free climbs in Yosemite Valley and in The Canyonlands require them unless the climber desires to down aid the more difficult cracks to the ground so that they may go home. They are convenient to that degree, yes.
Other kinds of convenience anchors which may have been avoidable were frowned upon for the same reason that Robbins, Kamps, Higgins, et al. realized bolting in general should be minimized.
The current interpretation of the word trad, at least as defined by Patrick Compton and some of the young climbers in the Boulder area apparently, are trying to make some distinction about said things; to my mind this may make it even more confusing ... who's to say. Maybe the whole lexicon is trending toward overhaul for exactly these reasons. I've granted that throughout this thread. Let me know how you feel about it in the morning.
How's that?
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 08:43pm PT
|
And if you spend too much time working out the moves and hangdogging, I think you spoil your opportunity to ever do the route trad style.
By the old code of Classic Trad this is what "three strikes and you're out" was indicating. The idea of slobbering all over a route way above one's head was bad form, unsafe, especially on nuts ... and not really very good for learning and all kinds of things. The least of which yet most important to the high-end Classic Trad aspirant was that it's just bad style.
There was a point in the early 80s when we tried to do everything on-sight; all the way through the 90s I was climbing 5.11 trad without falling hardly ever. Very rare. That was the mastery to which we aspired. No pedestals, no looking down our noses toward others. We did this for ourselves. It felt right. Control, self-preservation, again: mastery.
Classic Trad, as Kevin just said, doesn't really encompass how Lynn Hill free climbed The Nose. But it does encompass how Yuji climbed the Salathe, which is exactly why I put that pair of ascents on the prior page. The pink pointing was marginal. But we did, when failing, often pull the rope and leave the gear and try to get it within three tries.
Some Modern Trad climbers won't pinkpoint at all: they always want to replace their gear! Good for them, they are extending something here. Obviously on a multi-pitch route this may become a luxury. This is another reason we learned to climb at a high standard without falling: so we could do high order trad ascents of long hard free climbs.
Lynn Hill free climbed The Nose, if by any trad standard, the MODERN one; meaning she used what was once and still is in some circles considered sport climbing tactics.
This whole thing about chipped holds is a completely independent topic and I think it's simply illogical to conflate it with drilling a bolt for protection.
Let's quickly address the post Brave Cowboy made a page ago now: cleaning loose rocks out of cracks or very loose flakes off of faces is not the same as chipping in order to create a hold. Although it may produce a hold it boils down to a matter of intent. I believe that topic has been covered at nauseum on other threads as well.
Thank you Kevin for the help. It was very timely!
Beer 30. Or maybe just a tall glass of water.
Cheers to you Dingus!
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 09:30pm PT
|
Dingus lands the big one:
Here's what I am getting at: those who 'get' trad think its a patently easy and obvious definition.
It was never very difficult for those of us who grew up under the free climbing ethos of the 70s. ... In the absence of sport climbing: and I believe this is key.
Please, consider the importance of that last bit in italics when trying to understand why this is such a hard thing to divine in the present day.
One could write a paper just on this aspect alone. Post # 1051 probably just won't cut it by itself, but it is likely the fulcrum of the struggle!
It certainly appears to have become even more difficult now that the meaning of trad has apparently stretched to include sport climbing tactics.
This is NOT about blaming. But one has to feel as though the veneer of this faceless struggle has just peeled away.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Apr 30, 2013 - 10:42pm PT
|
CLIMBING ETHICS
Climbing ethics define the behavior of climbers in an area that is shared with nonclimbers so that both may enjoy it. Climbing ethics is concerned with actions that alter or destroy the rock. Climbing style (form, behavior, actual manner in which a climb is done) is a different issue, and is left up to the climber. Thus, using pitons which scar the rock is an ethical issue because it encroaches upon other people's potential enjoyment of an area. Sieging and top-roping, however, are examples of poor style which have no ethical significance because the have no effect on others.
A comment about style concerning the definition of free climbing is in order at this point: a climb is free if, and only if, the equipment-nuts, pitons, slings, ropes- is used only to protect falls and is placed as one climbs. Any use of this type of equipment to rest, inspect, practice moves or place protection, is aid. Certainly everyone has the prerogative of doing a climb with aid. However, it is dishonest to claim a free ascent when such practices have been used, and unethical to report a new route as free when done with these techniques. It is unethical because such false claims will lead others into unsuspected and undeserved difficulties, and also will undermine the standards and credibility of the area as a whole.
The Shawangunks is a popular area close to large cities and is subject to great and ever-increasing population pressures. Beginners, hotshots, and every other kind of climber use the cliffs. Each has a right to use them and a corresponding obligation to maintain them in a state for all to enjoy. Thus, it would be just as bad to add protection to a bold climb to make it safe as it would to chop holds or remove protection from an easy climb to make it harder. Both kinds of climbs must be allowed because there are people who like each. Generally, it seems best to leave climbs the way they were found, especially since this is how they have been for years. In most cases, they remain as the first ascent party left them and as people expect to find them. The selfish practice of dragging climbs down to one's own level by destructive means is degrading.
Climbing ethics and what constitutes good form and behavior have been the subject of debate in climbing circles ever since people began to climb. These attitudes and opinions generally tend to focus on equipment and its applications. The prevailing opinion about crucial issues at the time of this writing is discussed under the categories of "Pitons and Bolts, Chalk, Direct Aid, and New Routes."
Pitons and Bolts. There is a strong feeling that pitons and bolts should be used only on new routes (and sparingly at that) and to replace old or worn out ones on established climbs.
Chalk. The practice of using chalk is well entrenched and almost universal. Studies show that it is most effective when used sparingly.
Direct Aid. Direct aid should be used when necessary on new routes and existing aid climbs. There should be no objection to aiding free climbs as long as the technique used does not scar the rock. One should not assume that a route is not free because the local guidebook lists it as an aid climb. One should inquire, as it may now be free.
New Routes. Here it is necessary to consider the future. Greedily snatching up new routes in bad style deprives future climbers of the opportunity to establish them in good style. Of course, it's a good idea to check to be sure that the proposed line hasn't already been done. The idea that climbers have special rights to the routes they have worked on has not held up, although most will respect a claim that is actively being worked on.
The first virtue of a climber is restraint. Nothing said in this section should ever preclude a concern for safety. If the climber cannot maintain the standard of a climb or upgrade it without endangering himself, perhaps he should not do the climb at all. If the climber needs an inordinate number of pitons or must resort to aid on a "free" climb, he might take a clearer look at his own capabilities
The restraint that a climber exercises in self-preservation, or the preservation of the rock, could well be extended to the delicate environment of the cliffs and the surrounding land. Climbing is only one facet of the land and its use, and the climber is a member of a larger community than that of his fellow climbers. Climbing cannot take place in isolation from general ecological concerns.
New growth and even major vegetation may easily be destroyed by the careless climber on his way to or from a climb--talus should be used when possible. Many of the more remote cliffs and areas of the Shawangunks harbor birds and other wildlife, and care must be excercised so as not to disturb them or frighten them away from their homes and nesting areas. Quiet behavior is desirable. Indiscriminate camping can only lead to further deterioration of the land, and all campers near the cliffs should restrict themselves to designated areas. The Mohonk and Minnewaska camping restrictions are determined by necessities imposed by conservation and forest fire dangers and should be duly respected. While the may be an imposition on some, it is a sacrifice that all those using the land must make. Quite obviously the alternatives are either increased regimentation or the closing of the area to climbers.
Climbers and campers must also realize that all items left behind--old slings, paper, clothing, cans, bottles, cigarette butts, roaches, toilet paper and related matter (outhouses are provided), nonbiodegradable soaps-- only serve to mar the beauty and attractiveness of the area. Such practices are inexcusable.
from Shawangunk Rock Climbs Richard C. Williams 1980
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 11:22pm PT
|
DMT,
After all this and you leave out:
3. Fast Women
4. Booze
...
???????
We need to talk.
|
|
Todd Eastman
climber
Bellingham, WA
|
|
|
Apr 30, 2013 - 11:24pm PT
|
Tarbuster, you are trying to define the fine line between art and sport!
Have fun!!!
The basic answers from folks you asked that simply said placing gear vs clipping bolts are the most useful public answer.
Your quest appears to be something deeper. Find the ring.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2013 - 11:39pm PT
|
Hahhahahahaa! Heh!
Pr'aps eKat needs to pluck the strings of a snappy lil' Haiku for us right about now ???
...er, um ... mebbe, sumpin' more along the lines of a Charles Bukowski
... or ... uh tasty Henry Miller style snacky-pooh...
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
I don't have this issue in my collection, perhaps someone does...
"The Aesthetics of Risk" Perspective on Traditional Style, Climbing 137, page 176 by Jeff Jackson
the earliest reference is
"Tricksters & Traditionalists," Feature on climbing styles Climbing 86, page 18 by Tom Higgins
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Tom Higgins wrote in Mountain 53, page 32:
"Yet, many members of the latest climbing generation admit that some of this progress has come by means of modifications of previously acceptable free-climbing styles, and it seems at least some new free styles are here to stay. To cite an example: rightly or wrongly, I chopped the bolts from a free-route in Tuolumne a few years ago, because they were all placed on rappel. My intention was to provide Tuolumne climbers, including myself, with the opportunity to climb the route in traditional style. These bolts were recently replaced, again on rappel. Perhaps the motive was spite, but, just as likely, it derived from a belief that creating routes on rappel is sometimes acceptable. Whatever the case, the lesson is clear: no free-climbing style will forever be held up as acceptable, and some styles once thought to be improper will not always be considered so. I have concluded that the debate about climbing style is therefore essentially useless if its objective is to persuade the majority of climbers to conform with certain free styles."
see the article in it's full: Reflections On Climbing Styles
|
|
wstmrnclmr
Trad climber
Bolinas, CA
|
|
For me Trad means climbing as close to onsite, ground up free soloing with the use of gear (read technology) to achieve that goal. And Warblers definition comes as close as any for me as definition. We seem to keep getting into style debates where there shouldn't be. The definition, as Warbler puts it is pretty straight forward and to get to Dingus' mention of the Bachar/Yerian, the climb is not within that definition. Nor is Lynn Hill's free ascent of the nose. They are something different and for a different thread.
As to the hardest trad climb under Warbler's definition I didn't get to put my meaningless two cents in......I'm still amazed by ratings and differences within the definition. 14d crack is a whole lot different then 11c slab apparently.....I keep bringing up Kurt Smith's "Burning down the house" as example but I guess I lack merit in the mention. Cracks are easy to protect and much safer and far less mentally taxing. A more physical exercise if you will. I will repeat again with risk of sounding stupid that I think Burning is the hardest trad climb put up under the Warbler definition. Put up ground up, on-site, no preview with the same rating as the B/Y and unrepeated! Why is it not rated 5.15? How come Honnold or anyone else hasn't climbed it? And who would deny what a grand adventure it would be to cast off on that journey? Is it beyond our grasp to accept it? I'm sure even Dingus would be proud to call the one who repeats that route and clips those bolts to be a flat out tradster. 5.11c/ apparently mentally unfathomable to today's "advanced" climbers.
But I digress.
Tar, there are kids out there who are climbing under the definition as proposed by your great thread.....I climb with them and they appreciate it. Few and far but there out there. It's not an "old guy, young guy" thing, it's simply a form of climbing. Your not old in mind. Fairly advanced I'd say just as some of the climbs from your time on the rock back then still are.
And to Ed's reference to Morals, and Ethics. Here today gone tomorrow. Isn't this thread, at this point simply trying to define a certain style for those who wish to partake? Moving on from debate because there really is no debate unless one keeps rehashing old ground? Good quote. It really is "useless" and Higgins brought it up back then.
Push it forward Tar! No more need to defend. Strike out man!
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
And to Ed's reference to Morals, and Ethics. Here today gone tomorrow. Isn't this thread, at this point simply trying to define a certain style for those who wish to partake?
Good point. I think the discussion of the last few pages largely concerns style. I share Warbler's expressions on this, but we are products of the same generation of climbers, so I would expect this.
The Dick WIlliams quote from Ed, however, goes to ethics, because it involves preserving the rock resource and the reality that what I do affects what others can do after me.
When the line gets grayer and finer, it also gets more idiosyncratic. To me, B-Y is, now, a trad climb, even though John acknowledged that its first ascent was not. That's because it was no trivial matter to stop, hook and drill. One cannot do that anywhere, and the spacing of the bolts differentiates it from a sport climb, whose only risk is injury to ego. Besides, yo-yoing on B-Y remains a risky proposition.
It's also interesting to observe how technology changes relative terror. When I started climbing in the late 1960's, hard slab climbs scared us less than hard OW's, because the latter were essentially unprotectable. The slabs were runout, but there was some protection, and you slid, so the forces weren't as severe. A fall to a ledge long enough to break an ankle on Coonyard would kill you on Twilight Zone. The bold, bald nature of leading cracks became a relic of the past with modern protection, and I doubt any of us who've lived the evolution of footwear doubt its effect on what we can climb.
All of this is to say that I don't think we can determine what is the hardest "trad" lead, because we cannot compare the technological constraints of yesterday with today. When the ST description of Pratt's lead of Twilight Zone compares it to an on-sight 5.13 with fatal groundfall possibilities, don't laugh. That lead may well have been as close to the edge of possibility then as Burning Down the House was when Kurt did it.
John
|
|
wstmrnclmr
Trad climber
Bolinas, CA
|
|
JEleazarian,
The Dick WIlliams quote from Ed, however, goes to ethics, because it involves preserving the rock resource and the reality that what I do affects what others can do after me.
This reflects my point exactly and that of Higgins (although I'm certainly not in the same camp as he when in it comes to the ability to express through writing) about the "useless" exercise of trying to maintain the ethos of the climbing community as a whole. Morals and Ethics are reflections of the majority of a society at any given time. And the majority of activities (like climbing) usually reflect those morals and ethics.
As I wrote in a response to Dingus (whose discussion regarded climbing and it's impacts on the environment and whose position I agreed with), I posited that trad was born of a time when environmental awareness was at a high point in this country and that the trad ethos reflected that, much like the Dick Williams quote reflected the ethos of his time.
Now the ethos is much different and perhaps the land grab, nee rock grab reflects the times as they are now and have been in the recent past. Corporate greed at an all time high. Blue collar giving way to high tech.
More people vying for less and less. The 1% controlling the interests of the other 99% or whatever.
And since the trad ethos appears to be in the minority, it may be that the best we can do is to stick to Tar's OP and come up with a definition of what trad is/was and leave it at that.
Edit: Right on Dingus
|
|
wstmrnclmr
Trad climber
Bolinas, CA
|
|
Ah Dingus...Man, grant me the strength to carry on lest I give up an perhaps take to the bottle.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
I think "previewing" has come up as an issue too, in many statements regarding style and ethics.
But what is the purpose of "rating" the history of the FFA? in fact, the FA done free is quite different then the FFA of a previously done aid route, as climbing the aid route allows for pre-inspection and move rehearsal in "good style" (repeating the route in the style of the FA).
My guess is that most climbers don't really care about the FA/FFA history, and come to a "free climb" with the intention of sending it free... modifying their style as they encounter challenges that were unanticipated from the information they received. This is why the issue of "topos" came up so soon in climbing style debates. In a world of perfect topos (we write under that banner, after all) then all challenges are disclosed upfront and there is no excuse to get on a climb that you can't send free.
Topos may not "bring the climb down" to the ability of a climber, but it matches that ability to the climb, when the information is correct.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 1, 2013 - 11:40am PT
|
Todd Eastman:
Your quest appears to be something deeper. Find the ring.
Western Climber:
Push it forward Tar! No more need to defend. Strike out man!
Thanks for the support and encouragement guys, yet I must say that if I, or we, haven't nailed it down by now I don't think I'm going to be able to elucidate much more. Maybe I should do some more reposting. In two prior posts I strove to describe the internal experience rendered by appealing to classical trad, somewhat independently from strict definitions, through showing as opposed to telling.
I suppose recap does serve some purpose. Maybe I'll do it just for contextual review.
Once the practical aspects of classic trad are demarcated it comes down to motive, feeling, and the resultant personal growth; to rest upon a somewhat kitschy and even war worn phrase. Yet these things are present in all kinds of human pursuits, climbing or otherwise, no matter what the style or mode. It should suffice to say that there's a particular flavor of those three things imbued by classical trad.
For example: it's snowing outside right now here in the mountains above Boulder. Most everyone downtown is pretty much: "oh gosh I'm so over it" ... they've had a taste of warm spring and they want it to be here to stay.
But one who lives in the mountains has become so resolved to accept the natural state of things, having become accustomed to a certain beauty in harsh diversity and rather than feeling put upon by the snows we simply turn toward the gentle conflagration of stellar crystals, whenever they come. We accept the natural state of things as much as possible and adapt, finding a certain satisfaction and grace within the process of acceptance.
That's the internal ecology of classical trad.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 1, 2013 - 11:50am PT
|
I'm going to have to agree with Warbler here that knowledge of first ascent tactics and even specifics related to the first ascent experience are quite useful; perhaps now more than ever given tactics seem to have expanded quite a bit with modern trad.
For example, Mari used to say: "Just knowing whose name is attached to a first ascent tells me quite a lot about what to expect". Some climbers are bold, some not so bold and this will at the least reflect the accuracy of the route’s rating as well as the nature of the commitment required to complete a successful ascent. There's all kinds of subjective stuff that we can glean from knowing the persons involved.
I only need to go back to the example of the ground up, hook placed bolts which we established on the west face of The Magician in The California Needles. On Liquid Sky, Tom Gilje upon doing a second ascent said to me: wow I don't know how you got that first protection bolt in off of the second belay! Even as tight as our community was at the time, he hadn't known that we used hooks.
Speaking of the practical need for reporting tactics specifically: the young man whom I interviewed two days ago, let's call him Anthony because that's his name, said that he really likes to know just what went down on the FA of a trad route; this even more so now given that modern trad encompasses so many tactics.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!