By Eric Engberg
Dec 13, 2012
| Red Tagger wrote: I agree with his philosophy but not his actions. If you can find some old Climbing mags with KN letters to the editor, he articulates some decent arguments but over time he just totally lost it and started smashing things.
+1. The philosophy was simple - don't alter the rock to do your climb. Climb it however you want - TR, lead with bunge-ed hooks as pro, solo, Whatever. Just when you are done leave it unaltered so the next person can have the same experience.
Things went downhill with the tactics he used to back up his beliefs. History is full of similar examples - sit-ins, protests etc. History (at least our revisionist version) puts it in a better light now - but I'm sure a lot of people were pissed that they didn't get their morning caffeine in the days after the Boston Tea Party - but - taxation without representation had to go - right?
All this talk about environmental and access issues in regard to fixed gear is just PC fluff for arguments sake. The fundamental issue is that if you alter the rock you are making a decision for every climber who comes after you. Making those decisions is just as egotistical as chopping bolts.
Before you write me off as just a crazy KN supporter - realize its not true. I climbed with him BITD - even a couple of FA's. But now I am old and chicken and like my bolts. I just think that before you place them or alter the rock that it is good to realize that the issues are actually fairly complex. Over a little hole in a big rock. | 
FLAG |
By CaptainMo
Administrator
Dec 13, 2012
| Eric - I tend to agree but much of the issue I now see with the stance is that that hole can be patched with glue and you'd almost never be able to see it again... no? so wouldn't that negate the changing of the rock argument? |
FLAG |
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 13, 2012
| CaptainMo wrote: Eric - I tend to agree but much of the issue I now see with the stance is that that hole can be patched with glue and you'd almost never be able to see it again... no? so wouldn't that negate the changing of the rock argument?
Maybe that's a question of aesthetics. For sure, that's very debatable, with merits on both sides. For me, I don't like the idea that the rock has a bunch of invisible holes in it - it just doesn't sit well with me. The same way I don't want to climb a route on which I know some holds are modified. |
FLAG |
By Eric Engberg
Dec 13, 2012
| CaptainMo wrote: Eric - I tend to agree but much of the issue I now see with the stance is that that hole can be patched with glue and you'd almost never be able to see it again... no? so wouldn't that negate the changing of the rock argument?
Sure. I think the technology and techniques are available to make bolts "disappear" (make things look more natural). But still someone has to make the proactive decision to do that and getting a consensus would be hard - after all at least 1 person thought the right thing to do was place the bolt in the first place. Simpler to have an arbitrary rule of never altering the rock in the first place.
Realize that I am partly arguing for the sake of arguing and don't fully believe this 100%. I think it's pretty silly to get riled about a hole in the rock. The rock WILL be altered as soon as it's climbed no matter how pristine you try and leave it. I believe a little more strongly in the rights of the first ascentionist as having some clout - generally against retrobolting. I think part of KN's frustration was that he wasn't able to go around and grab all the FA's in his style - some cause he wasn't good enough but a lot just because there were too many.
There are a lot more important things to spend energy on. just think if KN had worked for world peace - another Mother Teresa. |
FLAG |
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 13, 2012
| chufftard wrote: so now bolt holes are same as chipping? viva la tradiban!
Sure, you can turn this into that kind of flame war, if you like. I was referring more to the aesthetics of knowing something is unnatural. There was a really awesome article about the value of a painting when you know it's forged, made by a child, etc. Or the value of a shirt that was worn by Matt Damon, and again when you find out that Matt never wore it (or it was Matt Damon, used car salesman). I will keep wracking my brain and try to find that article for you. |
FLAG |
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Dec 13, 2012
| for someone who cared so much about the aestic qualities of rock wonder how KN justified bashing holds with a crowbar... |
FLAG |
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Dec 13, 2012
| Also KN pretty much turned the rock on Dol Goldur white from the amount of chalk 10,000 repeats of that route took.
Id say the amount of chalk marks on it is far more ugly than a few bolts...
specially when your whole philosophy is keeping rock in its natural condition. |
FLAG |
By Eric Engberg
Dec 13, 2012
| chufftard wrote: so now bolt holes are same as chipping? viva la tradiban!
What part of "altering the rock" don't you understand? |
FLAG |
By CaptainMo
Administrator
Dec 13, 2012
| superkick wrote: for someone who cared so much about the aestic qualities of rock wonder how KN justified bashing holds with a crowbar...
“Once I chop a route, it will remain chopped, no matter how many times I have to return to keep it that way. Until the bolting stops, apparently the cliffs will have to be destroyed to save them” - Ken Nichols Climbing Magazine June/July 1991 |
FLAG |
By Mark Lewis
From Salt Lake City, Utah
Dec 13, 2012
| zenetopia wrote: "I agree with KN's philosophy but I think it's obvious that his actions have done his cause a disservice. Had he taken more time to educate people on that philosophy I think he may have had better luck. If some sporto were to bolt a climb I've done on gear I wouldn't be offended, I'd be flattered, and I would be sure to remind everyone who clips their way up it what a big fucking pussy they are, good-naturedly of course. So as long as they can handle that and not let their ego interfere, I say godspeed." No, this is, actually...Red Tagger, wow...nice job man...you're a piece of work, really.
I think egotistical is spot on actually; given to talking about oneself (take a look back through this thread history specifically), boastful, opinionated. It may be just who you are, but be aware that your spray does come across in such a manner – an egotist by definition. For better or worse the term is apropos. Usually your posts are written in a different style, but denigrating someone for pointing out how you’re acting in this thread only reinforces their original observations. |
FLAG |
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 13, 2012
| Tom Mulholland wrote: I will keep wracking my brain and try to find that article for you.
Okay, it wasn't an article, but it's even better. It's a TED talk (without a lot of pictures, so you can just listen to it at work too).
www.ted.com/talks/paul_bloom_the_origins_of_pleasure.html
CaptainMo wrote: “Once I chop a route, it will remain chopped, no matter how many times I have to return to keep it that way. Until the bolting stops, apparently the cliffs will have to be destroyed to save them” - Ken Nichols Climbing Magazine June/July 1991
That's really messed up. |
FLAG |
By Trad Nanny
Dec 13, 2012
| Mark Lewis wrote: I think egotistical is spot on actually; given to talking about oneself (take a look back through this thread history specifically), boastful, opinionated. It may be just who you are, but be aware that your spray does come across in such a manner – an egotist by definition. For better or worse the term is apropos. Usually your posts are written in a different style, but denigrating someone for pointing out how you’re acting in this thread only reinforces their original observations.
Sure, if you want to argue semantics, but stating an opinion isn't inherently egotistical. Perhaps the tongue in cheek comments aren't coming off as strong as I would like. I've presented my opinion along with my line of reasoning and people can take that or leave it. I know I have thoroughly enjoyed my style of climbing and I'm simply suggesting that others try it. If it's not for them that's fine.
Besides, I'm not really concerned about what someone thinks about me on the internet.
Thinking about the OP again...Austin said "why would climbers rather toprope routes (that can't go on gear and that COULD be bolted and led)" I think those climbers he's referring to simply don't see a difference between TR and leading on bolts. That would be my stance as well and I've explained why previously. Climbing is climbing and it's sad that people get so wrapped up in how they do something.
Among my circle of friends we give each other shit for everything but we don't take it too seriously and when someone calls me a pussy or whatever for not leading something or not taking the jump, etc I just smile and laugh because I don't have anything to prove. Frankly I enjoy the shit-talking it makes me think "Yea, I SHOULD sack up and do it!", it's good motivation. Free yourself from the oppression of others and you shall be rewarded. |
FLAG |
By Fall Guy
Dec 13, 2012
| damn, I think this thread needs some of Killis' porn
have you learned enough yet Austin?
BTW, I once brushed lichen off the rock and even cleaned the dirt and grass out of a crack so I could stick cams into it. it was (t)rad. |
FLAG |
By Fall Guy
Dec 13, 2012
| chufftard wrote: yep, trad fascist ninja, you don't sound egotistical or patronizing at all.
trad ninja, ahh yes. thanks chuffer, I knew I had read his writing before |
FLAG |
By Trad Nanny
Dec 13, 2012
| chufftard wrote: yep, trad fascist ninja, you don't sound egotistical or patronizing at all.
Oh Chuffy, you turn me on when you get sarcastic. To pinch your love handles and shake it all like a bowl full of jelly would bring me great joy!
I would change my handle to "Ego Climber" but I'm not allowed a name change for another month :( |
FLAG |
By J Q
Dec 13, 2012
| Tom Mulholland wrote: I was referring more to the aesthetics of knowing something is unnatural. .
Natural? WTF??? What is natural? Is it the Cams, the holes in the rock, your climbing shoes, or your biners that are natural? How about your car and highway? WTF is does natural mean anyway? Either it is all natural because it comes from the earth, or none of it is natural because we created it all. That is how argument works. You cannot arbitrarily denounce something as "unnatural" because of your opinion. I say this to you because I think you understand the idea of "reason". I would not bother with the ninny fascist.
Time is relative. Word. |
FLAG |
By Unassigned User
Dec 13, 2012
| Jonhy Q wrote: Natural? WTF??? What is natural? Is it the Cams, the holes in the rock, your climbing shoes, or your biners that are natural? How about your car and highway? WTF is does natural mean anyway? Either it is all natural because it comes from the earth, or none of it is natural because we created it all. That is how argument works. You cannot arbitrarily denounce something as "unnatural" because of your opinion. I say this to you because I think you understand the idea of "reason". I would not bother with the ninny fascist. Time is relative. Word.
well said
the tradiban better stop driving on the highways due to the poor ethical use of explosives |
FLAG |
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 13, 2012
| Jonhy Q wrote: WTF is does natural mean anyway?...Time is relative. Word.
Whoa, this is getting a little too heavy. I better have some beer and get back to you later. |
FLAG |
By Brian
From North Kingstown, RI
Dec 13, 2012
| quote=CaptainMo
I would contend that's the problem with the concept of consensus. . . There is I would say a consensus against bolting previous lead trad climbs. I think there is likely a wider array of minds with regards to bolting lines lead on tied hooks (a lot are now TR lines). From my experience all of the developers I've met, and I know most of them in the state, don't have a problem on this.
quote=thefish
1. There aren't that many people in CT that actually bother to bolt climbs.
2. nobody is talking about bolting anything that's been done on gear.
Morgan, thefish: I agree that there is a lack of consensus amoung the bolters in CT. There needs to be an agreed on bolting policy. (Good luck with that. :-) You both say that routes shouldn't be bolted that were led on gear. I agree but wasn't that done at Firewall? Doesn't Fire Cracker have a bolt on it? (I know it wasn't either you who bolted there.) Fire Cracker is a recorded lead that was led on gear without the use of hooks. I am no Ken fan but at least he was up front about the use of hooks putting a "H" next to the climbs that hooks were used on in his book "Hooked on Traprock." I bolt in CT (but not on routes that were led on gear). So at least we have a consensus of the three of us.
Brian |
FLAG |
By Unassigned User
Dec 13, 2012
| Hi Brian,
Personally I could care less about who bolts what in CT. After being held hostage by a lunatic for 30 years I say the more bolts the better.
Will I bolt lines that were led on gear? nope
There are no rules..
There is no governing body...
If someone doesn't like it then are free to chop it....
Did the fire wall get chopped yet? I talked to one of the guys that did the harder lines last week and he said it hadn't last time he checked. |
FLAG |
By Fall Guy
Dec 13, 2012
| Brian wrote: Doesn't Fire Cracker have a bolt on it? (I know it wasn't either you who bolted there.) Fire Cracker is a recorded lead that was led on gear without the use of hooks.
That is a route? really? have you done it on gear? The bolted route is about 4 ft to the right of that choss line you speak of. I'll meet you there one day and you can show me the line you speak of. I would love to see the placements that I missed. I've done it 10x and have not seen one spot that would take any gear. |
FLAG |
By Glbj
Dec 14, 2012
| bolts turn a crag into a fucking amusement park ! just stirring the pot! |
FLAG |
By Brian
From North Kingstown, RI
Dec 14, 2012
| TRmasta wrote: That is a route? really? have you done it on gear? The bolted route is about 4 ft to the right of that choss line you speak of. I'll meet you there one day and you can show me the line you speak of. I would love to see the placements that I missed. I've done it 10x and have not seen one spot that would take any gear.
I will check the line in Fasulo's book and the description in Nichols book against where the bolts are but I'm pretty sure it is the same line. See: www.mountainproject.com/v/107350452
There are a lot of "trad leads" in CT that could more accurately be described as a free-solo with gear. It can be argued that these certainly deserve bolts to make them safe but it can also be argued that it is nonetheless an established trad lead and the FA should be consulted before bolting. Maybe some day there will be an agreed upon bolting policy in CT. (I'm not holding my breath. :-) |
FLAG |
By CaptainMo
Administrator
Dec 14, 2012
| Brian wrote: quote=CaptainMo I would contend that's the problem with the concept of consensus. . . There is I would say a consensus against bolting previous lead trad climbs. I think there is likely a wider array of minds with regards to bolting lines lead on tied hooks (a lot are now TR lines). From my experience all of the developers I've met, and I know most of them in the state, don't have a problem on this. quote=thefish 1. There aren't that many people in CT that actually bother to bolt climbs. 2. nobody is talking about bolting anything that's been done on gear. Morgan, thefish: I agree that there is a lack of consensus amoung the bolters in CT. There needs to be an agreed on bolting policy. (Good luck with that. :-) You both say that routes shouldn't be bolted that were led on gear. I agree but wasn't that done at Firewall? Doesn't Fire Cracker have a bolt on it? (I know it wasn't either you who bolted there.) Fire Cracker is a recorded lead that was led on gear without the use of hooks. I am no Ken fan but at least he was up front about the use of hooks putting a "H" next to the climbs that hooks were used on in his book "Hooked on Traprock." I bolt in CT (but not on routes that were led on gear). So at least we have a consensus of the three of us. Brian
I actually disagree with you on this one Brian - I think there is actually a like mindedness, dare I say consensus, among the bolters in the state. I know you continually point to Burnt Beyond Recognition and I think that route was bolted in poor style but that is really the ONLY route and it is agreed upon by most all now that that was maybe a bad decision in the climbing world, or at the very least permission from the FA should have been gotten before the bolts went in. That said the bolters had permission from the town to do it. It's also my understanding that the FAist was made aware of the bolts and doesn't care about them and is fine with them. Not to mention the route is STILL spicy as hell AND is a MIXED route now not a sport route. The other example you proivided, Fire Cracker is similar but a slightly different line (esp if you go by the spacing examples in Hooked).
The RMF is also going to be coming up with a stated policy on bolting in CT. I'm a member on the committee that will be working on it... I think a lot of the policy is going to come down to how the RMF board decides to deal with 'permission' and what's acceptable (verbal, written, etc). The ground rules are pretty simple and we've covered them here. |
FLAG |
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Dec 14, 2012
| Chopping the bolts at firewall would actually be considered a jailable offense.
They had permission from the town to put them in. |
FLAG |
|
RSS Feed
