|
|
|
|
vram1974
Dec 8, 2003, 6:03 PM
Post #1 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2003
Posts: 113
|
This has probably been discussed before, but at $3 an hour at an internet cafe I don't have the time to do some kind of exhaustive search on the subject.
Anyway, I was reading an old "Climbing" article about the history of the Nose, and much of it comes with its share of controversy. From Warren Hardings fixed ropes and excessive bolting to Lynn Hills use of artificial holds in old pin scars, there has been the gummut of ethics run.
One such story held my interest when I read that Ray Jardine chiselled features into one of the more blanker sections of rock which eventually produced a 5.11d free version.
How does the community feel about glorifying "pioneers" like Ray Jardine, while giving Fred Rhouling, Barnabe Fernandez, and others the shaft for similar acts? If the ends justifies the means: 5.13+ free version of the Nose, does that mean I can chip my new project down at the Niagara Glen?
(That last remark was sarcasm for those of you with your detectors turned off)
|
|
|
|
|
robgordon
Dec 8, 2003, 8:41 PM
Post #2 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2003
Posts: 543
|
In reply to: One such story held my interest when I read that Ray Jardine chiselled features into one of the more blanker sections of rock which eventually produced a 5.11d free version.
Did the article actually describe the section of rock as "more blanker"?
If so, that sounds pretty blanker to me and I would have to say yes.
|
|
|
|
|
katydid
Dec 8, 2003, 8:44 PM
Post #3 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2002
Posts: 3212
|
katydid moved this thread from Community to Climbing History & Trivia.
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Dec 8, 2003, 9:02 PM
Post #4 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
I thought that it had been said that the Jardine Traverse may have been freeable without the chiseled holds? I don't think anyone thought that what he did was good or visionary. He has even said that it was wrong. The fact is, however, that the chiseled holds exist, and that the route was done using those holds, and that the accomplishment is unparalleled even with the holds. Without the holds it would have been even bigger. My hunch is that if Lynn Hill had to do a penji over to those cracks (the Jardine Traverse is about 40 ft. long, if that), we'd still be celebrating her accomplishment. Repeats of El Nino are still a big story and that's like the 8th free route up the captain on a non-historically famous line and it includes a penji.
|
|
|
|
|
redpoint73
Dec 8, 2003, 9:25 PM
Post #5 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2002
Posts: 1717
|
In reply to: I thought that it had been said that the Jardine Traverse may have been freeable without the chiseled holds? I don't think anyone thought that what he did was good or visionary. He has even said that it was wrong.
Thats the beauty of hindsight. Most climbers didn't think that Friends were "good or visinionary" either when Jardine first created them. Viewed through the eyes of a climber in the year 2003, chiseling the holds seems foolish. But at the time, Jardine obviously thought that it was a good idea. Or else he wouldn't have toiled for so many hours and days doing it.
I believe the article states that he did it in order to create a traverse that most mortal climbers can do. This is not completely unlike bolting a seldom repeated "X" rated route, so that more people can climb it. Bolting was scorned at one time as well. Bolting is commonly accepted in most areas now. Chiseling is not. But Jardine could not have known at the time what types of rock modification would be later accepted; or what ethics would be practiced today.
Thats why they are called "pioneers". Sometimes a pioneer will do something good, sometimes not-so-good. They have no way of knowing the answer when they do it. Only time can tell.
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Dec 8, 2003, 9:30 PM
Post #6 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
In reply to: I believe the article states that he did it in order to create a traverse that most mortal climbers can do. This is not completely unlike bolting a seldom repeated "X" rated route, so that more people can climb it. Bolting was scorned at one time as well. Bolting is commonly accepted in most areas now. Chiseling is not. But Jardine could not have known at the time what types of rock modification would be later accepted; or what ethics would be practiced today.
Here's a difference though...Adding bolts to someone else's X route is almost always controversial if the FA did not agree with the added bolts. The Nose was neither Jardine's FA nor FFA. Granted there are a lot of other bolts that are now seen as "bad style" but remain because we've gotten used to them being there (i.e. the 5.11 A0 variation near the top that the speed climbers use.)
|
|
|
|
|
dsafanda
Dec 8, 2003, 10:24 PM
Post #7 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2002
Posts: 1025
|
In reply to: artificial holds in old pin scars
Welcome to Yosemite. You can either enjoy the magnificent routes that can now be free climbed or aided clean as the result of old pin scars or take a stand for yourself and avoid climbing these classics. It's a pretty easy decision for most of us.
If your point is that the history of climbing in Yosemite has sometimes included episodes that were less than ideal in terms of style or ethics... I think everyone already knows that. Yosemite has long been at the center of the evolution of climbing. It stands to reason that any evolutionary process will include oddities, dead ends and mistakes(for lack of a better word) of some sort. It's a normal and healthy process that ultimatley has resulted in the thoughtful and respectful ethics that most climbers have today.
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Dec 9, 2003, 4:54 AM
Post #8 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
dsafanda speaks for me on this:
Also: as I said a few days before you posted this question of RJ chipping holds on El-Cap (nov 13th):
"BTW, I'm just happy you didn't bring up that chipping holds on El Cap thing again as well. "
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=44142
sighhhhh: well here we go again.......
Bill :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Dec 10, 2003, 2:06 AM
Post #9 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
In reply to: Here's a difference though.... The Nose was neither Jardine's FA nor FFA.
...and the chipped holds weren't on THE NOSE route... they were on "The Grape Race", which WAS Jardine's route (or you could say "intended" route). He didn't require permission.
The problem with people chipping these days, is that the consensus has been reached: "chipping is bad". Jardine and the like didn't have such a well defined consensus.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 10, 2003, 10:28 PM
Post #10 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Thats the beauty of hindsight. Most climbers didn't think that Friends were "good or visinionary" either when Jardine first created them.
It's funny, that visionary thing. A person can be dead wrong 99 times out of a hundred. But get just one big thing right? VISIONARY! Doesn't seem fair to those of us who bat 1000, but that's the value of getting it right just once. I'd say he did that in spades with Friends. That doesn't mean all his other bs is visionary though.
In reply to: Viewed through the eyes of a climber in the year 2003, chiseling the holds seems foolish. But at the time, Jardine obviously thought that it was a good idea. Or else he wouldn't have toiled for so many hours and days doing it.
Huh? You're saying the Valley locals thought it was all copecetic he was up there chiseling holds? That Jardine somehow didn't know chiseling was not acceptable to his peers? You go on to suggest:
In reply to: But Jardine could not have known at the time what types of rock modification would be later accepted; or what ethics would be practiced today.
Jardine knew good and doggamned well that chiseling was not acceptable to his peers and he did it anyway. He did it because he wanted to. Future Smuture, he may as well have carved his initials into the stone.
For context, prior to Jardine's chisel work, Henry Barber and Keith Bell had freed 75% of the route back in 73. Bachar, Kauk and Bard later freed all but 400 feet. All this before Jardine did the deed in 81.
You danced around it and another poster said it outright. To suggest that 1981 climbers condoned or even pretended to condone chipping, or had no firm beliefs on the topic and were just awaiting a leader, just doesn't seem supported by the facts. Those dudes had pretty rabid ethics back then, much stouter than now.
I'd go so far as to say that chipping is far more condoned today than ever before. But that's just me.
And so far no one has eliminated the Jardine Traverse. Ever looked at it? Oh my god...
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 11, 2003, 2:13 AM
Post #11 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: Thats the beauty of hindsight. Most climbers didn't think that Friends were "good or visinionary" either when Jardine first created them. It's funny, that visionary thing. A person can be dead wrong 99 times out of a hundred. But get just one big thing right? VISIONARY! Doesn't seem fair to those of us who bat 1000, but that's the value of getting it right just once. I'd say he did that in spades with Friends. That doesn't mean all his other bs is visionary though. In reply to: Viewed through the eyes of a climber in the year 2003, chiseling the holds seems foolish. But at the time, Jardine obviously thought that it was a good idea. Or else he wouldn't have toiled for so many hours and days doing it. Huh? You're saying the Valley locals thought it was all copecetic he was up there chiseling holds? That Jardine somehow didn't know chiseling was not acceptable to his peers? You go on to suggest: In reply to: But Jardine could not have known at the time what types of rock modification would be later accepted; or what ethics would be practiced today. Jardine knew good and doggamned well that chiseling was not acceptable to his peers and he did it anyway. He did it because he wanted to. Future Smuture, he may as well have carved his initials into the stone. For context, prior to Jardine's chisel work, Henry Barber and Keith Bell had freed 75% of the route back in 73. Bachar, Kauk and Bard later freed all but 400 feet. All this before Jardine did the deed in 81. You danced around it and another poster said it outright. To suggest that 1981 climbers condoned or even pretended to condone chipping, or had no firm beliefs on the topic and were just awaiting a leader, just doesn't seem supported by the facts. Those dudes had pretty rabid ethics back then, much stouter than now. I'd go so far as to say that chipping is far more condoned today than ever before. But that's just me. And so far no one has eliminated the Jardine Traverse. Ever looked at it? Oh my god... DMT
Dingus,
I basically agree with you. But, there are certainly some "gray areas" perhaps particularly in Yosemite where heavily traveled aid routes went free only because the frequently used pin placements eventually left scars of sufficient size to accommodate flared jams that could be free climbed. Serenity Crack comes to mind. So, is Serenity Crack etal also an abomination of manufactured holds?
I don't really disagree with you if you feel that it is--my point is more that you never hear people screaming about this type of "chiseling" or hold altering. Perhaps this is where the concept of "intent" enters in.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
keinangst
Dec 11, 2003, 3:24 AM
Post #12 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2003
Posts: 1408
|
In reply to: Did the article actually describe the section of rock as "more blanker"?
"How much more blanker could this section get? The answer is none. None more blanker."
Name that paraphrase!
|
|
|
|
|
studs
Dec 11, 2003, 12:07 PM
Post #13 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2003
Posts: 103
|
At the time of the crime,Jardine and his partners claimed up and down that the holds were natural.Jardine was a liar .Ya, he had a vision.He knew how pathetic this sport would become.
|
|
|
|
|
fjielgeit
Dec 14, 2003, 4:11 PM
Post #14 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 37
|
Re: Jardine and his Nose, I know Dan Bolster was his partner for some of these climbing adventures.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 15, 2003, 2:29 PM
Post #15 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: --my point is more that you never hear people screaming about this type of "chiseling" or hold altering. Perhaps this is where the concept of "intent" enters in.Curt
It's my point too Curt... that chipping is far more condoned today than at really any point in the past.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
thinksinpictures
Dec 15, 2003, 2:38 PM
Post #16 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2003
Posts: 447
|
In reply to: "How much more blanker could this section get? The answer is none. None more blanker." Name that paraphrase!
Spinal Tap: "How much more black could this be? And the answer is ‘None. None... more black.'"
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 17, 2003, 3:34 PM
Post #17 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: "How much more blanker could this section get? The answer is none. None more blanker." Name that paraphrase! Spinal Tap: "How much more black could this be? And the answer is ‘None. None... more black.'"
This one goes to 11.
(Why do this? For sex, drugs and rock & roll. Huh? Give one of them up? Well I could do without the rock & roll.)
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Dec 18, 2003, 3:26 PM
Post #18 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
Dingus, I think you need to un-burry your heels for a second, and listen to what we are saying.
I agree with you that ethics in general were more firm "back in the day", however, I am arguing that the ethics regarding chipping were not so firm.
I don't think Jardine's actions were "good" or "right", but I can see how a misquided person could come to the logical conclusion that chiseling holds was OK. Here's how:
-Pitons were an acceptable tool, which had the side-effect of permanently changing the rock. Numerous routes were freed as a result of this.
-Bridwell himself realized that the actual "pinning" was merely a formality. It would happen eventually, so why not speed up the process?He did so when he purposely widened jams on Freestone.
-At some point, it was considered acceptable to chisel copperhead and hook placements. I don't know when this came to pass, so perhaps it is irrelevant to this discussion. However, I don't see the difference between an "enhanced head" and an "enhanced crimp"...perhaps someone could explain it to me.
In light of those 3 points, I can see how a person would conclude that the "next logical step" is manufacturing face holds for free climbing. It is obvious to us now that manufacturing holds is wrong, but I think it was not so obvious to Jardine.
I think that FOR HIM, chiseling holds was no more of a leap into the unknown as it was to hang on the rope to rehearse moves...a practice that is fully acceptable now. So you see, some things were accepted and some were not. It is unfortunate for us that one of his "visionary" acts resulted in permanent damage to our greatest monument.
|
|
|
|
|
dsafanda
Dec 18, 2003, 3:32 PM
Post #19 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2002
Posts: 1025
|
In reply to: it was considered acceptable to chisel copperhead and hook placements.
Really? I know that it was perhaps fairly common place at one point time but was it ever looked upon as an acceptable practice by the climbing community at large? My impression was that it was quite contraversial and frowned upon by most. I wasn't there. I'm just asking.
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Dec 22, 2003, 5:39 AM
Post #20 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
...I don't accept chiseled aid placements, but aid climbers do...wander over to the Aid Climbing Forum if you disagree.
Believe it or not, there are aid climbers out there who think a chiseled copperhead is better style than a bolt or a rivet. I have had a number of arguments with these people on Supertopo.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 22, 2003, 4:38 PM
Post #21 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I think that FOR HIM, chiseling holds was no more of a leap into the unknown as it was to hang on the rope to rehearse moves...
For HIM I agree with your point entirely. My impression of the man is he doesn't really care all that much about what others think about the things he did. The interviews I've read and his books too, all give me the impression that Ray Jardine answers only to Ray Jardine. We're all just bit players in his grand act.
But HE KNEW chipping was verboten when he did the deed and he admitted such in that interview when he proposed a mid 5.10 bolt on hold climb up the prow of El Cap. Can't undo what was done I'm afraid, whether chipping has become accepted or not.
Lastly, citing Bridwell in an ethics discussion is the realm of Sympathy for the Devil. Ever wonder how the bolts got in on Wheat Thin?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
rockitjeff
Feb 4, 2004, 3:42 AM
Post #22 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2002
Posts: 143
|
..thought I’d dust off this oldie- moldy thread…
as I recall, once Jardine wielded his chisel, he was essentially hounded out of the Valley. Ostracized. Never to return, either.
|
|
|
|
|
dee
Feb 5, 2004, 8:54 PM
Post #23 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 45
|
On one of my first trips to Yosemite ('74) we climbed THE "Outer Limits" which was widely accepted as a classic among classics (after the "Brave New World " article ). It was common knowledge then that the finger holds on the second pitch traverse had been modified by being pinned out. As well there was a foothold that was said to be chiseled (right at the critical move) by the FA party. This chiseling never got the bad response that Jardine's actions did. Why? One move as opposed to many? Local vs. outsider? I still don't understand.
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Feb 5, 2004, 9:04 PM
Post #24 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
In reply to: On one of my first trips to Yosemite ('74) we climbed THE "Outer Limits" which was widely accepted as a classic among classics (after the "Brave New World " article ). It was common knowledge then that the finger holds on the second pitch traverse had been modified by being pinned out. As well there was a foothold that was said to be chiseled (right at the critical move) by the FA party. This chiseling never got the bad response that Jardine's actions did. Why? One move as opposed to many? Local vs. outsider? I still don't understand.
Maybe it has to do with Outer Limits being a less significant stretch of rock to most than the Nose?
It probably also has something to do with a lot of people at the time seeing Jardine as someone who was dragging the standards for boldness and good style down (cams, hangdogging, etc.) and Bridwell as being someone who on the whole was seen as elevating those things.
You were there....what do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Feb 5, 2004, 9:13 PM
Post #25 of 27
(15795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
The Valley locals have a long and glorious history of holding outsiders to a higher standard than they hold themselves.
Examples:
-Bridwell can chip, Jardine can't
-Harding can siege El Cap, Cooper and Baldwin can't
-Burke can spend 270+days on the Nose, Skinner and Piana get crap for 40 on the Salathe
and the latest...
-Slackliners can put bolts all over the Rostrum, but if you add a bolt to a belay, you are the antichrist
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
