Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
guyman
Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
eKat.... nice story, all true.
I felt sorry for the few climbers who also worked for the company. They had a hard time walking the line, making sure their boss didn't see them hanging with the long hairs.
And it cracks me up when folks say that they were "excluded" from the group.... from what I know everybody was included, as long as you were not some sort of NARC, LEO type. All that was needed was the ability to climb and not be a crybaby.
So the LA show is a sell out, as well as some of the San Diego dates, Im going to get some for Bishop... 11/8
Very happy to see the interest, I hope the Sender folks make a ton of $$$ and make a part dux.... "Lycra Unleashed"
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 2, 2014 - 05:35pm PT
|
I don't want you to be sophisticated... "like Tom"
but we could approach the real issues that we are involved in concerning the Valley on a much more sophisticated level, and not all of us, but enough to help out.
I know that Largo believes that he had an inclusive vision for climbing and climbers, obviously any of us who hang around that crowd long enough comes to love the diversity of characters, from Chongo to Robbins (and back again). We're all over the map.
But perhaps "Valley Uprising" was "just" a documentary. If true, then the focus on the "climbers as rebels" wasn't a very pertinent perspective, in my opinion. What were the climbers rebelling against?
The only thing they actually resisted was gravity.
Otherwise, they acted, largely, like adolescent males have acted throughout history and beyond. No disrespect meant in that.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
What were the climbers rebelling against?
Sterile environments .....
|
|
SC seagoat
Trad climber
Santa Cruz, or In What Time Zone Am I?
|
|
Dean, in my opinion, is one of the modern standard bearers of what I see as the true spirit of Valley climbing I haven't been able to move past Dean's assault on Delicate Arch. Hopefully that will not be the visionary ethic that young climbers embrace.
Susan
|
|
nah000
climber
canuckistan
|
|
comments inserted into Ed Hartouni's writing below:
But perhaps "Valley Uprising" was "just" a documentary. If true, then the focus on the "climbers as rebels" wasn't a very pertinent perspective, in my opinion. What were the climbers rebelling against?
structure. [which structure/s, is/are dependent on the individual]
The only thing they actually resisted was gravity.
exploratory lifestyles were created that had [at least for a time] nothing to do with straight line paths towards the status quo of a wife/husband, 2.3 kids and a house with a white picket fence. in resisting systemic structures, opting out and controlling oneself is as much an act of resistance as attempting to manifest change via control of the controllers...
Otherwise, they acted, largely, like adolescent males have acted throughout history and beyond. No disrespect meant in that.
your analysis is usually spot on, but you are missing the boat with the above. there is a depth to the intentionally rebellious actions of many nomadic and lifestyle climbers that goes beyond the largely unconsciously driven and directionless adolescent version.
that said, the question as to whether "rebellion" is/was the major driver behind the valley narrative is a worthy one... otoh, to say that the only resistance successfully made was to gravity is to lack understanding of the drivers behind the actions of many full-time nomadic climbers... regardless of whether they made/make the valley their central base...
|
|
clinker
Trad climber
Santa Cruz, California
|
|
"Special" as used by Ed implies a kind of "I'm better than you" attitude, for so and so reasons - and you'd have to talk to Ed per where that comes from.
What if Ed was teased and called "Special Ed"? He might have an aversion to the word special. We should be sensitive.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
Brujò de la Playa
|
|
apologies to Paul Simon.
"the words of the prophets are written on the valley's [sick] walls"
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 2, 2014 - 09:11pm PT
|
no problem with teasing... and Largo is just being Largo in his argument style.
I thought that I constructed a careful argument that defined what I meant by special, which has to do with privilege.
Largo chose to say what he meant when he was interviewed, but the fact is that his statements were a part of an overall narrative in the movie, and the clips that were used in that narrative promotes the idea of "privilege." The only exception was Honnold's statements.
I don't think this is taking "pot shots" and I don't quite know what it is about my post that would lead Largo to think so...
My main point was that a lot more was going on than just the ideas promulgated by the climber protagonists. As history, many things have changed in the Valley, wouldn't it be interesting to try to understand what actually happened? If you want to say that the Rangers have the upper hand now, wouldn't it be interesting to try to figure out why?
Maybe it isn't entertaining.
The climbers in the Valley, by and large, could have easily chosen other paths for their lives. For the most part they came from middle class families, many of whom continued to support them in their "dirtbag" existence in the Valley.
That doesn't take anything away from what they achieved in climbing. But even the debate over whether or not climbing is "a sport" (which is sure to be taken up here) seems telling. The contributions of Largo and Bachar in terms of the efficacy of athletic training to push the climbing into more difficult realms seems to indicate that it has something to do with sport... especially taking the non-essential nature of most sports, climbing too.
Largo's tid bit attribution of the comment regarding the rangers is very interesting, too bad it wasn't in the video, it adds to the historic textures.
I also don't understand the rejection of the idea that the Valley scene isn't essentially an adolescent male experience, and one that is not unique in the sense that becoming independent and finding your way in the world is a relatively common story. One could have been going off to the Crusades in the Levant or on a spirit quest in the pre-colombian western desert, or any number of similar "coming of age" exploit. All very powerful, very spiritual, and pretty common.
Reconciling the preponderance of male exploits to female exploits is a consequence of such a view.
Casting what happened in the Valley, over the ages, in a larger perspective takes nothing away from all that did happen. And certainly it was a formative experience for the participants (I was not one). But history is not written by the participants precisely because they have a very narrow perspective.
What surprised in the viewing of "Valley Uprising"? really very little. Maybe I'm wrong here, but the movie didn't even rise to the level of historic perspective we've been honored to engage here in the STForum (even with all it's problems).
That's not a pot-shot, it is a criticism.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
Brujò de la Playa
|
|
White punks on dope
The climbers in the Valley, by and large, could have easily chosen other paths for their lives. For the most part they came from middle class families, many of whom continued to support them in their "dirtbag" existence in the Valley.
|
|
nah000
climber
canuckistan
|
|
Ed Hartouni wrote:
I also don't understand the rejection of the idea that the Valley scene isn't essentially an adolescent male experience, and one that is not unique in the sense that becoming independent and finding your way in the world is a relatively common story. One could have been going off to the Crusades in the Levant or on a spirit quest in the pre-colombian western desert, or any number of similar "coming of age" exploit. All very powerful, very spiritual, and pretty common.
i don't think anyone's rejecting that it is/was primarily driven by adolescent male rebellion... this is essentially just an objective fact... the issue is with what originally prefaced that objective statement: "What were they rebelling against" and "The only thing they actually resisted was gravity."
these statements are diametrically opposed to "All very powerful, very spiritual..."
ie. adolescent male rebellion can be the root of something powerful, revolutionary, etc. or it can be [and, imo, more often is] mindless, fruitless, etc...
depending on the post, it seems to me that you have argued both...
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
When I told a shuttle bus driver I thought Yosemite beautiful he replied, "You would have to be dead to not love Yosemite."
|
|
CCT
Trad climber
|
|
Okay, this is just a layperson's perspective, so bear with me.
The general feeling from the little crew I watched it with, is that overall it was a good movie. It was fun way to learn about the history of rock climbing in Yosemite, and the visuals were entertaining. It flowed smoothly. I especially liked how it humanized Robbins and Harding, by presenting them in relation to, and in competition with, each other. The only part that didn't really flow, to me, was the bit on base jumping at the end. Unless your name is Dean Potter, base jumping and climbing are distinct sports.
As a weekend warrior, it was interesting to learn about the tension between the rangers and the climbers. I've always perceived the park service as remarkably supportive, especially "climber coffee," YOSAR, those little carabiner signs they've added to popular use trails, and the permission to add bolts. But I suppose the time limits would be a bummer if I wanted to live in the Valley and climb full-time. And I know it's hard for the foreign nationals who scrimp and save for their one summer in the Valley. It seems like there should be a way to compromise. Alex Honnold definitely came across as having the best attitude about it. Climbers aren't the only people in the Valley, and we need to remember that.
As for the points above, about early climbers being primarily adolescent males who had their peak life experiences in the Valley, at the same age as many of their peers were going to college, or to war, or getting married..well, I think we already knew that. It shows up in the vehemence with which climbers defend their traditions. Any intense bonding experience, especially at that age, is going to seem like the most important thing in the world. In a way, it is unfortunate that climbers of today can't have that experience in the Valley. But luckily, there are other places and other sports where that opportunity still exists.
To the team who made the film - thanks!
EDIT: I've just read the rest of the comments in the thread, and maybe I understand now why they included base jumping! Because except for that, most climbers in the Valley aren't really "rebels" anymore. Most of us follow the rules and the traditions, and are pretty happy to do so. Take out the base jumping, and that strand of the film just kind of fizzles out.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
I was only familiar with Camp 4 in the '60's and based on that experience, I see it as more of a generational evolution. When I left in 1969, "Bridwell and his boys" were seen with admiration and bemusement by the older climbers and the certain sense that they were a very different group.
Other than Harding and Kor, the top climbers in the '60's were college educated and middle class. The chief motivations were self discovery and an exploration of just what the human body was capable of on virgin rock. Toward the end of the '60's, thanks to the Vietnam War, escape from the system but especially the draft, became a greater theme. Even those who were drafted and served, wished to free themselves of that perceived stigma and hanging out in Camp 4 was one way to do it.
We did not yet see ourselves as enemies of either the Park Service or the Curry Company though we had already observed that the Curry Company had co-opted the rangers. We also understood why in terms of middle class norms, and found the cat and mouse use of the showers as another amusing game. The '60's climbers also contained many nerds who believed one had to be celibate to do hard climbs (probably just a cover for their own social ineptitude) so it is interesting to hear about later escapades in the girls' dorms. As for drugs, the '60's climbers were the pioneers of that as well, but spent three times as much energy analyzing what it all meant than actually doing them.
Hard climbing in the '60's was seen as a transitory passion by most, and financial success and respectability was still the final goal. Harding and Kor for all their non conformity, still earned a living and paid their taxes while climbing. Chinouard was one of the biggest social rebels in those early days and look where he ended up.
Perhaps then, the climbing scene mirrors American society more than many climbers would like to admit. Gentle rebellion followed by full on, in your face rebellion, followed again by a more gentle form. It seems to me that in the long run, Tom Frost and Alex Honnold might be bookends on either side of a short wild period provoked by the Vietnam War and the drug scene of the 1960's which only became full blown after that decade was over. American society and climbers are both probably a lot more conservative than they self perceive.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
Ed,
you have made the big mistake of extrapolating what John Long meant when he was interviewed. Yes, we all heard those words too but, we have no idea about how much of what he said on the special-ness of climbers was edited from his interview by the producers. You make yur case from clipped sound bites -- some historian?
How little we know about what goes on in someone else head. Those speakers edit their thoughts when they speak to us.
Needless to say I like your effort.
|
|
steveA
Trad climber
Wolfeboro, NH
|
|
Jan,
That was spot on!
|
|
katiebird
climber
yosemite
|
|
Nice Ed - thanks for the educational review.
|
|
clinker
Trad climber
Santa Cruz, California
|
|
relationship with the terrain
Warbler,
To describe this "relationship" could fill many volumes, at least in my own personal experience. I do not have the time today, to begin to explain this connection, but to say...
I belong to the wild places and the wilderness belongs to me.
The New Native American.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
I left the Valley the day before it debuted but then caught it the next weekend back home. I thought it was entertaining and well told. For an east coast audience, many of whom hadn't made the pilgrimage to spend their time in the Sierras as I had, it seemed to strike a chord and I heard a lot of impressed muttering at events or people that most of the people on this forum just assume is generally known information. Obviously simplified and compressed, they did manage to convey the story of climbing in the Valley in a reasonably accurate manner and in a way that a non-climber could understand without causing pain to those who understand how it was actually done. Beautifully shot with a lot of creativity in the visual storytelling. I found myself saying "well that's not quite right" a couple of times but it was never so much that it ruined the movie or even the segment. Well worth a watch for anyone, even if it's mostly old news for many of us. Seeing a lot of the old photos and film footage alone is worth it.
|
|
MisterE
Gym climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
The whole issue of "rebellious behavior" by climbers requires further consideration.
If you are an average Joe, or anyone not involved in the "climbing lifestyle" of the times the actions such as: "vulturing" food from the restuarants/Deli/Cafe, illegal camping, smoking pot, etc may seem quite rebellious.
Rebelling against societal norms is not necessarily a bad thing (well behaved people rarely make history, to borrow a phrase), but saying it was not rebellious seems like being in a bit of denial.
I guess it all comes down to how one defines "rebellious" - this doesn't seem too far from the mark:
Free Dictionary:
re•bel•lious (rɪˈbɛl yəs)
adj.
1. defying or resisting some established authority, government, or tradition.
2. pertaining to or characteristic of rebels or rebellion.
3. (of things or animals) resisting management or treatment; refractory.
Great discussions and points here.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!