|
reprieve
Apr 14, 2004, 5:13 PM
Post #26 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 24, 2004
Posts: 604
|
In reply to: There is no justification for that kind of risk. None whatsoever. So I don't try.
I don't believe you. I think you have plenty of justification for taking your risks, just like we all do. The justification for risk is inherent in why we love what we do. Most people probably don't understand it, and maybe that's what you meant...but I think that each climber has his/her reasons that make the risk worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
fargoan
Apr 14, 2004, 5:20 PM
Post #27 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 110
|
In reply to: Amber was far from being a compentent big-wall climber. You just don't get it, do you?
i'm not sure i do. what is "it?" and where can i find "it?" is it cheap? do they have "it" at rei?
i'd like to know how many people you think are "competent big-wall climbers" when they get on their first wall. if you think "none," maybe we should stop allowing new big-wall climbers?
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
Apr 14, 2004, 5:26 PM
Post #28 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
In reply to: In reply to: There is no justification for that kind of risk. None whatsoever. So I don't try. I don't believe you. I think you have plenty of justification for taking your risks, just like we all do. The justification for risk is inherent in why we love what we do. Most people probably don't understand it, and maybe that's what you meant...but I think that each climber has his/her reasons that make the risk worth it.
Climbers tend to be rather selfish individuals. As would be expected, every time we are on lead, we are battling with personal demons, for personal gain up a wall.
It is too easy for our selfishness to get involved with our risk assessment and cause us to make poor choices.
Many climbers would use dingus's argument to keep from going to war, or running into a burning house to rescue a granny, but their judgement becomes distorted when they are looking at a difficult climbing objective.
Suddenly they are willing to put themselves in a previously unacceptable level of risk. There is no real justification for it either.
I think that's what dingus is saying.
"Is the risk worth it?"
In a persons final moments, as images of their family pass before their eyes moments before impact, Not a one is saying to themselves, for THIS climb...It was worth it.
It's not. While some things may be worth dying for, climbing ain't one of them.
|
|
|
|
|
reprieve
Apr 14, 2004, 5:30 PM
Post #29 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 24, 2004
Posts: 604
|
I don't think I have enough experience to comment on this topic...so if my previous remarks are mistaken, pay them no heed.
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Apr 14, 2004, 5:36 PM
Post #30 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
In reply to: i'd like to know how many people you think are "competent big-wall climbers" when they get on their first wall. if you think "none," maybe we should stop allowing new big-wall climbers?
it is fair to say amber isn't a competent multipitch trad climber, much less a big wall climber. it is madness to get on a big wall if you cannot lead a grade III trad climb smoothly.
|
|
|
|
|
fargoan
Apr 14, 2004, 5:43 PM
Post #31 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 110
|
In reply to: "Is the risk worth it?" In a persons final moments, as images of their family pass before their eyes moments before impact, Not a one is saying to themselves, for THIS climb...It was worth it. It's not. While some things may be worth dying for, climbing ain't one of them.
I don't know why this thread has me so wrapped up, but it does.
Seriously, though, how many times has anybody encountered a position, on a climb, where the thought when through their mind: "Is this risk worth potentially dying for." Sure, there's been once or twice where I've pulled moves above dodgy gear protecting a factor two onto the belay, where I've said "I'll be pretty f---ed if I come off here," but the nature of climbing doesn't involve thoughts of death while you are climbing. It's distracting from the business at hand. As the risks get greater (ie trad, aid, alpine) everyone has to make decisions on the ground, before you get started, that climbing is worth the potential risks, and believe in the philosophy and inherent risks involved.
This is what I compare it to, and which has gotten me so riled up. How different is getting on lead than joining the National Guard? If you die, doing anything, then you could argue that doing that thing isn't worth it. But you never know until you're dead.
So does that mean because there is a real risk of death involved, you shouldn't do something?
|
|
|
|
|
sarcat
Apr 14, 2004, 5:45 PM
Post #32 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 1560
|
Come on! How hard is it? I'll probably die tomorrow.
On the serious side. People MUST be able to attempt and achive things greater than themself or we'd still be in the stone age. BUT... doing something just for the acknowledgement of others is foolish when death is the final possiblity.
As for AMBER way to go for trying someing that pushed your limit....
As for AMBER don't be so foolish and to do something beyond your capabilities and deprive us of the best looking climbing betty on this site.
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
Apr 14, 2004, 5:51 PM
Post #33 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
fargoan,
Yes, it means you should not do something. If you have a family at home who loves and needs you, then you need to weigh their needs against your own personal enjoyment.
There is absolutely no way a rational person would think otherwise.
BUT, as climbers, we are inherently selfish, and 9 times out of 10 will put our personal enjoyment above the actual assessment of risks and consequences. Perhaps a little bit of rationality is pushed aside when we are staring slackjawed at a beautiful multipitch line.
The simple fact is, however, (and this is not an argument against you f) people really don't have the right to cast the first stone at Amber's decision making without first taking a good long look at their own motivations, and what they have to loose if the bite the big one.
I think this is an excellent point to raise, but it will probably be completely read over and ignored. :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
fargoan
Apr 14, 2004, 5:54 PM
Post #34 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 110
|
In reply to: it is fair to say amber isn't a competent multipitch trad climber, much less a big wall climber. it is madness to get on a big wall if you cannot lead a grade III trad climb smoothly.
and i wouldn't disgree with you. i am trying to keep this on a broader level, about pushing limits, and away from amber specifically.
i guess the point that i am trying to make is that "you never know until you know." but you can't fault people for wanting to find out.
is it worth it to find out? even if it means putting yourself in harm's (death's?) way? that's another question, for people to answer themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
ricardol
Apr 14, 2004, 5:55 PM
Post #35 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1050
|
my $0.02 ..
I can't judge amber's ambition.. but i think that you can judge her judgement.
Like amber, i had plenty of people tell me that i was nuts for trying to solo zodiac back in september .. in fact i even had someone tell me that they gave me about a 5% chance of summitting, and a less than 50% chance of survival ..
.. had i died or had an accident, i think it would have been right to have judged me on my poor judgement about my own proficiency on a big wall.. (btw -- when i started up my fixed ropes .. i didn't have any doubts i would either summit, or die)
.. i think amber screwed up in judging her own proficiency ... (i read her post about what happened, and it seems like she was not quite prepared for the level of game she was playing -- not having a headlamp with her .. trouble cleaning pieces .. bonking .. etc..) ..
.. so my $0.02 is that you can't really judge someone else's ambitions, because until they try, you dont know what they are capable of .. (the only people that thought i could summit zodiac were Pete Zabrok and Dave Turner .. maybe valleygirl, but i'm not sure she thought i would...
-- ricardo
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Apr 14, 2004, 5:59 PM
Post #36 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
I haven't really replied too much to threads dealing with Amber's accident, but I think I'll use this thread to kind of put a few of observations on the table.
First off, I completely agree with atg200.
Like Andrew, I have climbed with Amber very frequently. Unlike Andrew, these were mostly single pitch trad and sport lines in Texas and Oklahoma. In many ways I still consider myself a n00b, and I was far from any sort of mentor to Amber; HOWEVER, after her accident I began to second guess myself. I've encouraged her to do bigger stuff, perhaps I enabled her to get in over her head by not warning her as flamer or andrew did, and I certainly have never been critical of her. Had Amber been seriously injured or killed on Moonlight, it is guaranteed that I would be racked with guilt right now for not warning her.
climbing and risk are inseparable. Recklessness, however, should not enter into the equation. Good climbers balance risk with judgement and skills based upon their experience. I'm still learning this balance, and would be the classic example of dingus's hypocrite if I went any futher in commenting upon Amber's situation. I went out on a limb the day before yesterday, ventured beyond a bad placement on a climb near my limit, screwed up, and took a twenty foot grounder. I went too far out of the balance, and paid for it luckily only with a skinned elbow.
Finally, although it has been said before and much more honestly and straightforward by the likes of kodos, I'll make this point. Websites like this make it possible for people with Amber's ambition to bypass the traditional climbing apprenticeship under a mentor.
caveat emptor.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Apr 14, 2004, 6:11 PM
Post #37 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: This is what I compare it to, and which has gotten me so riled up. How different is getting on lead than joining the National Guard? If you die, doing anything, then you could argue that doing that thing isn't worth it. But you never know until you're dead. So does that mean because there is a real risk of death involved, you shouldn't do something?
Some people join the National Guard to defend their country (they really do). They justify their assumption of the risk by defending the greater whole, one for the many. Others do it for education, to escape some terrible economic situation, etc.
Tell me, when you're sketching above that factor two fall, are you reassuring yourself that you're doing it for the good of the many?
Course not. You're doing it for the reasons of one. Climbing is inherently selfish in that sense, and yet, the assumption of risk often involves others (such as my family). They gain nothing from my death aside from an insurance check. How do I justify my risk to my family? That it makes me feel good (climbing is far too complex a thing to say this anyway)?
I don't justity it. I can't. It simply IS.
Do I think about death when climbing? Hmmm. Yes, there have been times when my mortality was so close that not thinking about death would have been incredibly stupid.
You ever leapt off a cornice onto a snow slope of unknown stability?
Ever all out dynoed when a grounder would have been terribly bad news?
Do you free solo or 3rd class some?
Walk around on a ledge unsecured?
Do you ever purposely run it out just because the climbing is so easy?
Ever had to run for the border to escape lightning?
Ever had a big rock smash you on your helmet?
Ever been crushed by a boulder?
Ever pitched off on a running belay snow climb?
Ever started an avalanche?
Ever had a swallow fly past your ear at 100 mph?
Ever been shot at while climbing?
Ever had a beer bottle smash into the rock right next to you when you were free soloing?
There are so many ways to get the chop and many of them require NO MISTAKES whatsoever to occur. Just bad luck or timing.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
jason1
Apr 14, 2004, 6:12 PM
Post #38 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2002
Posts: 158
|
i really can't speak about the situation as i know neither amber or the situation... what i can say is...
1)thank god amber is ok....
2)sometime it takes more courage to go down rather than up...
3)judge not lest ye be judged...
|
|
|
|
|
fargoan
Apr 14, 2004, 6:15 PM
Post #39 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 110
|
In reply to: fargoan, Yes, it means you should not do something. If you have a family at home who loves and needs you, then you need to weigh their needs against your own personal enjoyment. There is absolutely no way a rational person would think otherwise. BUT, as climbers, we are inherently selfish, and 9 times out of 10 will put our personal enjoyment above the actual assessment of risks and consequences. Perhaps a little bit of rationality is pushed aside when we are staring slackjawed at a beautiful multipitch line. The simple fact is, however, (and this is not an argument against you f) people really don't have the right to cast the first stone at Amber's decision making without first taking a good long look at their own motivations, and what they have to loose if the bite the big one. I think this is an excellent point to raise, but it will probably be completely read over and ignored. :lol:
travis,
so, when it comes to responsibilities (ie family--- i'm going to have a hard time arguing this, but i'll try anyway) where is the line? is there a line? between risk (to one's family/responsibily) and reward (living life as on their own terms)? i mean, let's say that i am a surgeon. my personal enjoyment comes from being a surgeon, and like most (young)surgeons, i work 70 hours a week. am i am unable to provide my family's "needs and love" by the fact that I am never there-- as frequently happens in doctors' families-- should I quit? and, in principle, is this any different than the climbing situation?
I'm not sure that there is. Of course, medicine benefits others in society, and climbing benefits only the individual, but in terms of "the family," I don't see a difference... do you agree? Should we give up our career passions as well, if they conflict with our family's "needs?"
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Apr 14, 2004, 6:15 PM
Post #40 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Finally, although it has been said before and much more honestly and straightforward by the likes of kodos, I'll make this point. Websites like this make it possible for people with Amber's ambition to bypass the traditional climbing apprenticeship under a mentor. caveat emptor.
Funny that you finish with 'buyer beware.' First you lay blame at the doorstep on an internet forum, then you say beware.
No.
This site and the people who supposedly encouraged her hold NO RESPONSIBILITY WHATSOEVER. It is not their risk to assume. It is hers, lock stock and barrel, from cradle to grave.
Her life. Her decision. Period.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Apr 14, 2004, 6:18 PM
Post #41 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
The debate between Trav and Fargo is an interesting one.
Is ANYTHING worth dying for when you're in the throes of dying? Probably not. BUT, if something contributes the greater sum of happiness in the world, is it worth the moment of truth?
I always say that if I die today, I die happy because I make a point to live my life to the fullest and make decisions I won't regret overall. Consequenly, climbing is a huge part of that. I used to be very unfocused about wha I wanted out of life and what was fun to me, and climbing has provided an outlet that in turn changed my outlook around. If I die tomorrow on a climb, was that climb worth it? Yes, because the happiness of my life which was built up partially by climbing, and by chosing to climb that particular route made me happy up until that point.
Looking at life as a series of snapshots will get you nowhere. It is a sum of parts, and if, in the end, you can agree that it was mostly good - and your choices were unregrettable, then awesome.
This whole argument comes out of the parental aspect, which is certianly something I am unable to understand fully as I am a swingin' single, but the point is still there: IF, as a happy parent, you made your children happy and inspired, and you die making yourself happy and passing that on, then your child will have memories and inspirations of a happy parent. OR, you could be a work slave, doing what you feel you NEED to do, but unhappy, and your kids will see that and will that make them happy? As the progeny of such parents, I say no. There's a reason I live the way i do, and my parents' example has no small part in that.
|
|
|
|
|
wannabe
Apr 14, 2004, 6:19 PM
Post #42 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2004
Posts: 483
|
I won't judge Amber, but I am a hypocrite. :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
fargoan
Apr 14, 2004, 6:22 PM
Post #43 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 110
|
In reply to: The simple fact is, however, (and this is not an argument against you f) people really don't have the right to cast the first stone at Amber's decision making without first taking a good long look at their own motivations, and what they have to loose if the bite the big one. I think this is an excellent point to raise, but it will probably be completely read over and ignored. :lol:
Completely. Doesn't that always happen though?? ;) Jonathan
PS-- Lest I come across as a total a--, I do believe that it's very important to understand responsibility to your family and to those who consider you important in their lives. Anyone who has seriously faced death says this. But I do think that there is a line, somewhere, of individuality which can never be given up: it's just who you are. (edit typo)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Apr 14, 2004, 6:43 PM
Post #45 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I won't judge Amber, but I am a hypocrite. :shock:
Me too. There are worse crimes after all (like jay walking and parking violations).
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
fargoan
Apr 14, 2004, 6:57 PM
Post #46 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 110
|
In reply to: Ever had to run for the border to escape lightning?
you mean, like taco bell? the best lightening protection is a baja gordita. check out the gear review...
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Apr 14, 2004, 7:07 PM
Post #47 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: For what it's worth, While I'll never roll the dice that wildly again and would never encourage anyone to take the level of risks that I did, I will say this: More good has come of my accident than bad.
That's an oversimplification, don't you think? If things had gone a little worse, you'd be splattered all over the base of the route and I'd be trying to figure out how to get in touch with your son and your mother to tell them that you'd died from a 600' fall. And how I'd thought it was a fine idea to jump on the wall, and you'd put in a steady and safe lead, and had been doing fine, right up until you zipped off the end of the rope.
Of course if things had gone a little better we could easily have been on Party Ledge thinking about the best course of action (bail or punch it out). So we inhabit a gray area where calculations are messy and judgements arbitrary, and I wonder how to come to the conclusion that "humble, injured, aware" is better than "reckless, successful, healthy"? Obviously that's a biased presentation but, guess what, I'm biased. :-)
You grew up, quick fast in a hurry, and that's a Good Thing. Still, I'd rather us have topped out without incident... maybe I'm just being selfish here.... but while less dramatic, it would have been a more satisfying outcome for the weekend ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
aikibujin
Apr 14, 2004, 7:12 PM
Post #48 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 408
|
In reply to: i mean, let's say that i am a surgeon. my personal enjoyment comes from being a surgeon, and like most (young)surgeons, i work 70 hours a week. am i am unable to provide my family's "needs and love" by the fact that I am never there-- as frequently happens in doctors' families-- should I quit? and, in principle, is this any different than the climbing situation? I'm not sure that there is. Of course, medicine benefits others in society, and climbing benefits only the individual, but in terms of "the family," I don't see a difference... do you agree? Should we give up our career passions as well, if they conflict with our family's "needs?"
I don't agree. In terms of family, being a surgeon and being a climber differ in the risk levels. While being a surgeon you may be working 70-80 hours a week, but even if you can only spend one minute with your family every week, your family may take comfort in the fact that you're still alive. But as a climber, there is always that risk of something going wrong on a climb and you end up dead. When I was a kid, my dad was working overseas, so I didn't see him months at a time. But I know I would eventually see him in the future. That's very different than knowning your parent is dead and you won't see him/her again, ever.
A closer analogy you can draw on climbers are probably soldiers. Both have the risk of dying in pursuing their passion. Actually, a soldier's family has it much worse than a climber's. Generally a climber still have a lot of time to spend with his/her family on weekdays, and only on weekends they are away to climb. While a soldier may be gone for months even years at a time, always with the risk of never coming back alive. When we hear about the death of a soldier our hearts automatically go out to the family, why? Because long after the soldier felt the last bit of pain the family is still suffering.
Should we all just give up climbing and take care of our families? No. I think it's a very personal choice. Some people dedicate their whole lives to climbing, so they stay single, much like the "warrior monks" - career soldiers who dedicate their lives to the military. There are also climbers who gave up climbing to be closer to their family. And then there are climbers who choose to have both. It is our own choice. Personally, I think the more risk someone is willing to take, the more reason that person should dedicate their life only to their passion.
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
Apr 14, 2004, 7:13 PM
Post #49 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
In reply to: travis, so, when it comes to responsibilities (ie family--- i'm going to have a hard time arguing this, but i'll try anyway) where is the line? is there a line? between risk (to one's family/responsibily) and reward (living life as on their own terms)? i mean, let's say that i am a surgeon. my personal enjoyment comes from being a surgeon, and like most (young)surgeons, i work 70 hours a week. am i am unable to provide my family's "needs and love" by the fact that I am never there-- as frequently happens in doctors' families-- should I quit? and, in principle, is this any different than the climbing situation? I'm not sure that there is. Of course, medicine benefits others in society, and climbing benefits only the individual, but in terms of "the family," I don't see a difference... do you agree? Should we give up our career passions as well, if they conflict with our family's "needs?"
Damn, I keep on reading this and I"m having a hard time putting together another argument.
While it's a little far fetched to say that having a workaholic surgeon father is just as bad as not having a father at all, you still make a valid point.
Last weekend I was climbing with bumblie. Nothing big and scary, just a little NC 4 pitch with a couple interesting moves. A thought occured to me as I was leading up from a manky belay. If I blew it, and we both crashed on down 300' to the ground, it really wouldn't be worth it.
Of course, as soon as I've got the time, I"ll be right back over there doing it again, but I think this really just shows how climbing can warp our judgement to put ourselves in a position of danger that we would not do in normal everyday horizontal life.
We condition ourselves to deal with the fear, and in the process, we also push aside the consequences. After the fact, the actual danger we put ourselves in seems surreal, yet at the same time vivid.
I think the whole act of becoming a good climber involves disassociating yourself from the risk. This is so intergal to the process that I'd say EVERY multipitch climber goes through it at some point. And it skews our perspectivce for the worse.
...
If I had the choice of having a workaholic father, or a dead father, I'd always choose having a dad. At least the workaholic is doing something for his family. He's putting food on the table, and supplying them the means to live.
A father that dies climbing, died doing something strictly for himself. It's kinf of arrogant to assume that his happy go lucky climbing lifestyle actually had such a positive effect on his children that his death was preferable to having a dad that works through the weekends sometimes.
I mean, where do climbers spend their free weekends if they have the choice? It ain't at home chucking baseballs.
(this post is longer than it needs to be. Sorry you're having to wade through my drivel to get to the heart of my argument, hahahaha)
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Apr 14, 2004, 7:20 PM
Post #50 of 140
(13836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Dude, Travis,
Have you not read A Prayer for Owen Meany or watched "Simon Birch?" Chucking baseballs kills!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
