Forums: Climbing Disciplines: Big Wall and Aid Climbing:
Restoring Zodiac
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Big Wall and Aid Climbing

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


vulgarian


Mar 4, 2003, 12:44 PM
Post #26 of 27 (2725 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 12, 2002
Posts: 381

Restoring Zodiac [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

This is an interesting question. I find myself wishing it were left or returned to it's original state. Here are my reasons.

First - By adding measures of safety (bolts) to the route, it has been diluted of its original sack factor thus reducing the resultant "adventure" of the route. This could be tantamount to thinking you are on a great backcountry adventure in the wilds of Alaska and then stumble upon a two lane logging road - the resultant disallusionment (to me) would ruin an important part of the trip for me. Perhaps a better example is that I would like to lead "The Edge" in Taquitz a 5.11 with a horrendous 50+ foot runout next to a rope slicing arete. It is said to be one of the most psychologically demanding climbs in So. Cal. This is something, to me, which must be earned If a bolt or two were thrown in somewhere in the runout of this climb - it would then dilute the meaning of the whole ascent.

Second- Where does one draw the line. I personally can't stand the sight of the hand rail on Half-Dome. To me, the addition of bolts to any fu*king climb outside of the first ascent parties original climb is a measure to level the playing field for people WHO HAVEN'T EARNED THE RIGHT TO CLIMB IT. I don't (currently) have the sack to lead "The Edge" even though it is within my technical ability. Therefore I should only be able to admire Tobin's ascent from the ground until I do.

Note: I noticed on a photo that was posted on the home page that a climber was doing a climb at a local crag here in Riverside. That climb was bolted with two bolts. At least from my view (that shown in the picture) this should have been an off-the-deck boulder problem. (I know, I don't have all the information, but I am using this as an example of the proclivity of the new generation of rockclimbers to protect the psychological factor right out of a climb.)


Drew


vulgarian


Mar 4, 2003, 12:52 PM
Post #27 of 27 (2725 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 12, 2002
Posts: 381

Restoring Zodiac [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

In reply to:
I myself have really stuggled with this topic over the years. I mean, if you "crave fear" like elcapadic, why not just lead the pitch on your gear and skip the bolts? Why not sabotage your gear for that matter? It will be scarier and harder.



I also realize that over-bolting is numbing aestetically, whether on sport or aid.



I think that we need to realize that climbing a rock invariably alters the rock. You chalk it, you break a hold, you bang it wider, you bolt it. I have often seen climbers succumbing to a school of thought much to prevalent in today's culture--the thought that "natural" is better. I have been told that eating milk is bad because it's unnatural (and I'm veggie!), and that bolting is wrong because it is unnatural. Well, news flash. Climbing is unnatural!



The real dilemma in my eyes is that we as climbers practice minimum impact. The question then arises: How much impact does a bolt cause? Anybody is free not to clip it. Of course, by the same logic, one could turn the right side of El Cap into Mt. Rushmore and tell people who don't like it "not to look at it."



I see things this way. Aid climbing is supposed to be sketch. No one expects safety on a big wall, and no one has a right to climb a wall. This means most wall bolts (such as those on Zodiac) can go.



Free climbing is the domain of the masses. Putting up a 2-bolt 5.7 seems silly to me. The people who could enjoy the route most are not going to enjoy it because it's too run-out. Putting up a 2-bolt 5.12 is equally silly because no one will ever do it. To establish a line and then claim a memoratoriam on it by precedent is ridiculous. No one owns the rock. The "trad ethic" in places like Whitesides, NC and Tuolumne has always confused me. Climbing doesn't matter when you are dead. Can we overcome fear without putting ourselves in life-threatening situations? I am not sure. As I see it now, big egos drive the numbers game more than big balls. What gives?



I'd have wandered far and wide, and I feel the need to sum things up. If Zodiac was cleaned from top to bottom, the route would be erased and everybody would be pissed. If Zodiac was bolted from top to bottom, the route would be a joke and everybody would be pissed. Nobody least of all Charlie Porter owns the Zodiac. It is a public resource, and should be managed as such--by consensus.



Cheers,

Dirk



[ This Message was edited by: dirko on 2003-02-09 19:24 ]

[ This Message was edited by: dirko on 2003-02-09 19:25 ]

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Disciplines : Big Wall and Aid Climbing

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook