An unpopular take on The Alpinist

Cherokee Nunes wrote:

If I may suggest, and its a suggestion only - let the dead rest. Stop trying to forensically diagnose the man. 

I say, celebrate him! Celebrate the irrational urge we all have to climb dangerous things. Celebrate his ability to go so far beyond what any of us could do. Celebrate what he did.

Beautiful youth! Beautiful man. Beautiful accomplishments. Sometimes the flame that burns brightest, burns the fastest. Tell his tale around the campfires. By telling his stories we breathe life into his legend and he lives on in our stories.

Do we celebrate the guy who can do more Heroin than anyone? It's a live style choice. Just takes discipline to build up your strength/tolerance and not die.

How about a base jumper who starts jumping off bigger and bigger things with a rope to experience more and more free-fall....

Dan O's death was just as inevitable as Marc's. Ueli Steck? Who knew that it was absolutely certain that speed soloing 8000M peaks would eventually end badly. Everyone. And yet most of us still enabled him. THAT is the discussion this community should be having. WHY? When someone's brain is addicted to the thrill they need INTERVENTION. The drug has overtaken them. Why do the loudest voices in this community enable them instead and shout down those asking questions?

Let's celebrate the ALIVE people all around us that are trying to make the world a better place. One child reading to one of Honnold's lights is a real legacy impacting others positively. Shows me the kid has some real chops. You don't win Oscars for it but it is so much more meaningful to be helping others, imo, instead of wanking on some pebble (no matter how tall).

The ideal should be to not enable adrenaline addicts for profit and entertainment. Climbing, among purely personal benefits, should also be about getting in touch with the outdoor world and getting a healthier body and mind to help battle mood/eating disorders and addiction (like many youth programs strive to do). Not to build one's tolerance for risk to incredibly unhealthy levels to incredibly predictable results.

Until the moment of the Big Bang until (essentially) ~ now it took 14 billion years to make Marc Andre. 14 billion years of stars making the elements required and for us to crawl out of the ooze on planet Earth. And in an instant that precious and rare life was thrown away for nothing. Addicted Conquistadors of the Useless promoted for our entertainment.

I'll mourn like I mourn for all the addicts created for someone's profit.

Talk about bringing things back from the dead, this thread.

I generally agree with Hillbilly, I think this film is one of the worst climbing films I've ever seen, especially the part about the producers desperately trying to get him on camera when he flaked so they could make money on his reckless climbing, and his mother throwing up her hands. It seemed like the very typical story of the fatherless or abusive father rock climber doing self-therapy in the mountains. I say that as one of those people myself, who has done some at least some modicum of recovery from my past.

It really highlights the romance of "dying doing what you love" that people love to buy into, and the stark contrast of that with the things that really matter. 

It's the difference between Alex Honnold and Austin Howell. Alex Honnold is a calculated machine who does what he does as a celebration of human achievement. I never followed "The Soloist" on instagram because it was obvious he was filling a depressive void with instagram likes and cheap thrills, yet he was encouraged over and over in the comments to keep on trucking and ignore the haters because the only thing that matters is doing whatever destructive thing you like to do, as long as it makes you "happy." I think the drug-addict analogy is very apt. Cloaking major depression in a habit which practiced recklessly will lead to your death. In a sense, like encouraging an addict to use more heroin if it makes them happy, encouraging Austin Howell, or encouraging Marc Andre Leclerc to keep driving harder(especially for profit) bears you some responsibility. I don't think either of them ever received any guidance or practicable life advice. They're both alive in the arms of God now.

Alex Honnold seems to have read a lot of classic literature imbued with wisdom and he has a loving mother, and I think that's informed his thought process more wholly in terms of risk and what matters in life.

I say this all the time, but no mountain is ever going to love you back and you can only climb so many before you get to the top and realize there isn't anything up there. Topping out an X-rated 5.12 is great, but getting back to the ground, kissing my wife, having my son smile up at me, and then tossing him in the leaves and listening to the laughter of new life is a dopamine hit like you wouldn't imagine.

Eric Marx wrote:

Talk about bringing things back from the dead, this thread.

I generally agree with Hillbilly, I think this film is one of the worst climbing films I've ever seen, especially the part about the producers desperately trying to get him on camera when he flaked so they could make money on his reckless climbing, and his mother throwing up her hands. It seemed like the very typical story of the fatherless or abusive father rock climber doing self-therapy in the mountains. I say that as one of those people myself, who has done some at least some modicum of recovery from my past.

It really highlights the romance of "dying doing what you love" that people love to buy into, and the stark contrast of that with the things that really matter. 

It's the difference between Alex Honnold and Austin Howell. Alex Honnold is a calculated machine who does what he does as a celebration of human achievement. I never followed "The Soloist" on instagram because it was obvious he was filling a depressive void with instagram likes and cheap thrills, yet he was encouraged over and over in the comments to keep on trucking and ignore the haters because the only thing that matters is doing whatever destructive thing you like to do, as long as it makes you "happy." I think the drug-addict analogy is very apt. Cloaking major depression in a habit which practiced recklessly will lead to your death. In a sense, like encouraging an addict to use more heroin if it makes them happy, encouraging Austin Howell, or encouraging Marc Andre Leclerc to keep driving harder(especially for profit) bears you some responsibility. I don't think either of them ever received any guidance or practicable life advice. They're both alive in the arms of God now.

Alex Honnold seems to have read a lot of classic literature imbued with wisdom and he has a loving mother, and I think that's informed his thought process more wholly in terms of risk and what matters in life.

I say this all the time, but no mountain is ever going to love you back and you can only climb so many before you get to the top and realize there isn't anything up there. Topping out an X-rated 5.12 is great, but getting back to the ground, kissing my wife, having my son smile up at me, and then tossing him in the leaves and listening to the laughter of new life is a dopamine hit like you wouldn't imagine.

The “victors” write the history like the living are want to do with the dead. Feels good though, eh.

No, it's all conjecture, but at least it's an informed opinion based on everything that's still on Howell's IG, or the Alpinist movie itself, and many articles written about Marc Andre. I'm not just pulling opinions out of my ass because I feel like it.

well I will pull an opinion out of my ass.  doing FA's in some of those ranges in AK seems like  a 50/50 proposition...  Avalanches don't give a shit how smooth and gifted a climber is. 

Eric Marx wrote:

They're both alive in the arms of God now.

If you feel that way, you should be happy for them, right? Because they’re “in a better place”, right? And they’re free from their destructive demons, right? 

I wonder why every thread turns into a dogpile on me when I simply share my worldview. It's very odd.

Bale, tell me you don't understand anything about Christian theology without telling me.

It's an informed opinion. I, personally, wasn't critical of Alex Honnold when he was first coming around because something about his approach seemed different to me. He didn't(and doesn't) seem to be depressed, but maybe he was and is good at hiding it. It's very obvious that both Howell and Leclerc were suffering. I think you're putting blinders on if you deny that.

Mostly, I document the trad I do because it seemed like such an unapproachable objective when I was first walking around the storied halls of the Gunks. Once I brought it "down to earth" and began the process of headpointing, I wanted to share that with people. I say this outrightly in many of my videos. I wanted to build the gunks scene and I'm glad to say headpointing has exploded. 5 years ago I was like one of three people on the workout wall trying to lead stuff, and now it's almost every day, coincidentally in the last year-ish after I created the channel and demystified the process for your average chuffer(people like me). There was a small scene before that, but it's grown exponentially. If I wanted youtube fame I'd make indoor bouldering videos lol. If I wanted followers I wouldn't be an open deeply traditional and conservative Christian in a climbing community full of godless heathens(another thing I used to be).

I'm certain I don't come across depressed in my videos, because I'm not in any sense, so maybe you could make informed guesses about why I'm doing it, and if you did, maybe you'd be right. That's all I'm saying. 

Ywan C wrote:

What you say is also true. I am in no dispute over your viewpoint above.

We are celebrating and (some of us) are discussing and analysing and building a framework of understanding around the subject of "loving risky climbing but also not wanting to overly encourage or egg on others to do the same".

Here's where mine, which is separate from yours, came from:

1. My best friends 13 year old son fell in love with climbing after watching Leclerc in The Alpinist.

2. We have all watched very risky things being done by all manner of people.

3. What Marc Andre does seems to be objectively off the charts risky. Risky beyond all reason. 

4. The level of risk doesn't seem to be well discussed in the film.

5. My friend's 13 year old son might have developed a gross misunderstanding of what MAL did in terms of risk.

6. How should we advise and explain this subject to our loved ones?

Really appreciate the feedback so far on this forum which is the reason I came in the first place.  To find answers.

Thank you.

In follow up to my post above, I can add another observation:  There is no clear discussion (and probably no clear empirical studies) on the risks taken.  

My original point is about how I think the risks taken by Marc Andre were completely off the scale. Utterly and completely off the scale. And how I have to try to explain this to a 13 year old inspired by the film in order to orient that person away from thinking of doing similar things.

Or am I wrong?  

Was he so skillful that he had reduced the level of risk down to something considered acceptable to other professional climbers?

I'm very leery of becoming involved in this discussion for multiple reasons, especially as it is touching on very 'dangerous' areas. But, I have to ask Eric, with all seriousness, what do you think of Tobin Sorensen--another deeply committed Christian, who also pushed that envelope, very unfortunately also to a fatal end? We have to be more than careful in analyzing--and passing judgement upon--the motivations of others--we are all extremely complex creatures psychologically.

I’ll state the obvious for some of you. The reason folks get a thrill from these activities, and why we are entertained, is precisely because they are dangerous.
Regarding the drug analogy, I’d rather have my kid solo than be a heroin addict. At least when they are alive, they’re physically healthy and not cheating, stealing, and lying. And if I have a problem when they die, that’s on me. Also, it’s a bit delusional to think you can just stop someone from self-destructive behavior.
I agree that it’s fairly macabre to cheer these kids as they throw themselves into the fire, and I always hope they are going in with eyes wide open.
Anyway, I think it’s a good discussion.

Ywan C wrote:

In follow up to my post above, I can add another observation:  There is no clear discussion (and probably no clear empirical studies) on the risks taken.  
My original point is about how I think the risks taken by Marc Andre were completely off the scale. Utterly and completely off the scale. And how I have to try to explain this to a 13 year old inspired by the film in order to orient that person away from thinking of doing similar things.

Or am I wrong?  

Was he so skillful that he had reduced the level of risk down to something considered acceptable to other professional climbers?

But there are quasi-empirical studies of the risks inherent in all branches of climbing, from sport climbing to alpinism. It’s the compiled accident and fatality statistics. You can find worldwide estimates of alpine statistics online.

If you want your child to understand more of the risks, buy a bunch of back issues of ANAM now ANAC, read them together and discuss.

Almost 5 years of working as an ER nurse has taught me to not have an opinion on the way others choose to live, or die. I certainly don’t want them voicing an opinion on how I do the same  

With all of the talk of “meaningless death” or some variation of that idea in this thread… I haven’t ever personally seen a “meaningful death.” We just die.

The process of death and dying is pretty damn ugly no matter how it happens, and none of us is getting out of it. With that being considered, and in my face all the time, I’ve chosen to live life how I see fit.

Marc Andre chose how he wanted to live his. 

NateC wrote:

Almost 5 years of working as an ER nurse has taught me to not have an opinion on the way others choose to live, or die. I certainly don’t want them voicing an opinion on how I do the same  

With all of the talk of “meaningless death” or some variation of that idea in this thread… I haven’t ever personally seen a “meaningful death.” We just die.

The process of death and dying is pretty damn ugly no matter how it happens, and none of us is getting out of it. With that being considered, and in my face all the time, I’ve chosen to live life how I see fit.

Marc Andre chose how he wanted to live his. 

Imagine a world where we don't voice opinions about risks of climbing and risk of dying in extremely high risk environments with the children we are teaching to climb!

Im not here to judge MAL for sake of judging him. I commented that the first thing I want to understand is why he was doing climbing that was not survivable over any medium period of time. And so how do I explain to my kids the why of why he did what he did.  Since he is now famous and kids are watching and think its cool..

Is it supposed to forever remain unexplainable?

Ywan C wrote:

Imagine a world where we don't voice opinions about risks of climbing and risk of dying in extremely high risk environments with the children we are teaching to climb!

Im not here to judge MAL for sake of judging him. I commented that the first thing I want to understand is why he was doing climbing that was not survivable over any medium period of time. And so how do I explain to my kids the why of why he did what he did.  Since he is now famous and kids are watching and think its cool..

Is it supposed to forever remain unexplainable?

He made Alex Honold look like a "safety first" climber.  My explanation is that the extremely, extremely, extremely high risk climbers are living in some type of extreme denial or misunderstanding of the risks taken. That's what I would explain to the kids. 

I haven't read the whole ten pages, but has no one talked about his ADHD?  He expressed that high risk climbing got rid of his 'squirrel brain' . If his climbing gave him peace who are we to judge. Was he supposed to live  a life of pharmaceuticals?

Congrats to all you self-righteous keypad warriors using the dead to pump up your sense of importance and moral superiority. 

The lack of tact, humility and basic kindness is gross.  

I’m baffled by the entitlement to have a hot take on any fucking issue.  How many of you knew Marc and Ryan? How many know the area they died in, what the conditions were?

A lot of the latest comments have nothing to do with dissecting an accident for lessons.  Just a lot of people using the death of others to make themselves feel better. 

Ywan C wrote:

Imagine a world where we don't voice opinions about risks of climbing and risk of dying in extremely high risk environments with the children we are teaching to climb!

Im not here to judge MAL for sake of judging him. I commented that the first thing I want to understand is why he was doing climbing that was not survivable over any medium period of time. And so how do I explain to my kids the why of why he did what he did.  Since he is now famous and kids are watching and think its cool..

Is it supposed to forever remain unexplainable?

Nah. You actually are here for exactly that.

This is an Internet forum where you are openly and publicly dissecting the life and death of another human. Parenting is done in the home and not on the internet.

If you’d like some parenting advice on how to explain risk assessment and management to your child, start a new thread. Don’t dissect the life of another and try to make his life choices fit your own view of the world. 

Ywan C wrote:

Imagine a world where we don't voice opinions about risks of climbing and risk of dying in extremely high risk environments with the children we are teaching to climb!

Im not here to judge MAL for sake of judging him. I commented that the first thing I want to understand is why he was doing climbing that was not survivable over any medium period of time. And so how do I explain to my kids the why of why he did what he did.  Since he is now famous and kids are watching and think its cool..

Is it supposed to forever remain unexplainable?

Yes, it is unexplainable. You might have a decent glimpse on the issue watching some Dave MacCleod/Will Gadd videos and writing. Someone asked Dave MacCleod why he did Echo Wall even it's so sketchy (if you fall, yer gonna die). He said something like "you gotta ask yourself, if you're ok to live with the idea of not trying/doing the route". That was pure tautology, but we can't really find better explanation, even for a lot more trivial (and implicitly risky) stuff in life. 

Why do many of us not stick to speed limit even when that reduce the risk of car accidents, when it barely save you 5 minutes in a 2 hours drive? Why do you choose to sleep with and eventually have kids with this particular person, instead of the thousands potential (better) alternatives?

I'd argue the most beautiful thing about the film and his life was helping us to realize how personal motivation and aesthetics are, which MAL held fast, and why it's cool. Most of us/them won't ever get motivated nor inspired enough to do any of the things shown in the film anyway. If the kids were (un)fortunately inspired to go trad/alpine climbing, I don't think the film makes it harder to talk about whether it's worth it, and help them understand the risks (MAL actually died).

What happens mostly likely is after the first alpine climb, they complain about alpine start, heinous approach, thin air, wind, wetness, choss, runout, and stick with gym/sports climbing forever. Heck if you don't want them to go alpine climbing ever, just tell them "yer gonna die like MAL" :)

Ywan C wrote:

Imagine a world where we don't voice opinions about risks of climbing and risk of dying in extremely high risk environments with the children we are teaching to climb!

I have, and it's okay

I don’t get the worry about “the children.”

I’ve had a few kids who are adults now. It’s really up to the parents - in my experience- what parents want to try to embue in their kids, what they want to try to shield them from and when, etc.  And then it is up to the kid.

But some extreme Alpinist might have an ill effect that needs to be controlled at a public level? Give me a break. Or, sure, be the absent parent and worry about what will fill gap.

“The children” are just an excuse to pontificate - which I am prone to do like anyone here.  :)