Just caught this on Facebook this morning and it's well worth a read. Climbers are always debating whether risk is worth it but I wonder if we really get down to the heart of the problem, which is why are we actually climbing?
There is a situation on Broad Peak right now where the first winter ascent of this 8000er has been marred by the likely demise of two members of the team. Read Simone Moro's take on it and ask whether his final claim makes sense:
"Man wants to be where his thoughts drive him. On the moon, Mars, Venus, in the oceans, caves, abysses, deserts and mountains. This is what winter mountaineering is all about. The desire to be and go where man has not yet succeeded, and it is because of this that one day Nanga Parbat and K2 will also be attempted, and climbed, in winter."
At what point does this drive to "succeed" ultimately become self-defeating?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Interesting post Peter though I'm afraid I don't have an answer to you last question. Though I've been thinking about this deeply lately.
Why do we climb? Such a cliche question, if I've heard a great answer I'm struggling to recall it now.
Cole
I can understand risky climbing for instrinsic reasons but the situation for "professional" climbers has changed in the past decade or so, especially as the frontier of what's new has become so arbitrary and contrived.
As arbitrary and contrived as bouldering maybe...?
Post a Comment