Fun (was Mobile Phones)
Alan White
I'm getting slightly depressed at the tone of some of these postings.
In general I agree with everything that Philip has written. What I
find depressing is that we seem to be expanding the discussion into a
"them and us" argument in conjuction with a "use technology, deny
technology" argument.
Where has the _fun_ gone?
Some little stories, (it's too hot to cut the grass).
I started hill walking in April 1959. I wore an old macintosh, grey
flannel trousers, army surplus boots and carried an army surplus
haversack. I think I had a compass but I know had a map. In July 1959
four of us attempted Ben Nevis, Sca Fell Pike and Snowdon in twenty
four hours. At that time the only motorway in the country was the
Preston bypass and our transport wouldn't cruise faster than 50mph. We
completed Ben Nevis directly from the car park at the head of Glen
Nevis (warning signs there now) in appalling conditions and managed to
lose ourselves in thick mist on Sca Fell Pike, ("Which way is Wast
Water", four different answers roughly ninety degrees apart). We
didn't bother with Snowdon after that but it was _fun_.
In May 1960 two of drove overnight from Hampshire to Pen-y-Pass
arriving at two in the morning. We completed the Snowdon Horseshoe by
ten and spent the rest of the day dozing in the sun. Crib Goch and the
Pinnacles were completed in misty gloom. By today's standards we were
sadly ill-equipped but it was _fun_.
In March 1992 three of us set off to Skye to bag some Munros. We ended
up on Beinn Eighe in Torridon in thick cloud and dense snowcover,
almost white-out, and some very careful navigation was required, using
map and compass, to find the summit. No one knew we were there but us.
It was _fun_.
In September 1994 we were in Central Wales north of Teifi Pools on a
featureless, boggy moor in thick mist. Using the GPS, map and compass
navigation was a doddle and we ended up exactly were we intended. It
was _fun_.
In January 1997, to test my stamina after 'flu, we decide to walk from
Ambleside up Scandale to High Sweden Bridge. We wore our boots and
Polartec jackets (plus some other bits and pieces!). We had no foul
weather kit, no map, no compass, no GPS, no mobile phone but we did
have a Mars Bar. As I felt fine at the bridge we continued to the head
of Scandale. As I still felt fine we continued to Dove Crag. We ended
up on the summit of Fairfield and descended via Great Rig and Heron
Pike. For that brief period we had become "these people" but it was
_fun_.
Last Friday we went over Pike o' Blisco, Crinkle Crags and Bowfell in
blazing blue sky and blistering heat. We were in shorts and short
sleeves but had our foul weather kit, GPS etc., etc. because its
easier to take them than to leave them behind. On Pike o' Blisco we
met a couple wearing fleecy hats, fleece jackets, windproof walking
trousers, gaiters etc. They had obviously read all the books and were
putting theory into practice. There was no doubt that they were having
_fun_, and so were we.
I will no doubt be flamed by the "treat the hills with respect"
brigade, (what exactly does that patronising phrase mean), but at no
time during my thirty eight years of hill walking has a piece of kit,
other than ice axe and crampons, given me a sense of security, or lack
of it, other than ice axe and crampons, given me a sense of
insecurity. To me, kit, high or low tech, is there to enhance the
enjoyment. Kit is not an end but a means to an end. The bottom line is
to use it sensibly, to enjoy it and to have _fun_.
Regards,
Alan White
in England's Lake District.
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/alan.lesley/
jane marie thomas
Alan White wrote:
>
A lot of marvellous stuff. Hooray!!!
Paul Murphy
Alan White wrote:
>
> In March 1992 three of us set off to Skye to bag some Munros. We ended
> up on Beinn Eighe in Torridon in thick cloud and dense snowcover,
> almost white-out, and some very careful navigation was required, using
> map and compass, to find the summit. No one knew we were there but us.
> It was _fun_.
>
Wow, now that's what I call a navigation error!
"We turned the corner, and BANG - we found overselves 140 miles away!"
To be serious for a moment, I agree that its important to keep the fun
in walking, and I'm not for a second going to preach about the
advisability of going out with very little equipment, as I'm sure you've
heard it all before. When compared to some, at least you have the
benefit of informed choice - unlike the toddlers and dogs which get
dragged up Ben Nevis every year with no inkling that leaving the Glen at
4.30 is unlikely to result in you arriving back in daylight...
Paul.
--
------------------------------------------------------
Paul J. Murphy - System and Network Manager
Gemini Research Ltd, 162 Science Park, Cambridge
Phone: 01223 435305 Fax: 01223 435301
Philip Blair
Hi Alan and everyone,
Warning: This is pretty long but I hope it makes my point.
alan....@dial.pipex.com (Alan White) wrote:
>I'm getting slightly depressed at the tone of some of these postings.
<snip>
>Where has the _fun_ gone?
<mega-snip>
I agree with you totally Alan, a few years ago I posted to this group on this
very subject and came under what TV news readers would call "frenzied attack"
for even suggesting that people go up there intending to smile.
At that time I had a theory which I will take this opportunity to bore everyone
with again:-
How people are taught to walk seems to be the factor in their enjoyment of it.
Like yourself I went walking because I went walking. I didn't know that there
were special things to wear and at that time I didn't even know about maps and a
compass. I knew how I got on there and got back off the same way, quite how I
was going to cope with mist/fog or what ever is something best glossed over :-)
Today many people get interested in walking and then "learn" about it on a
course or from books and mags. There is no doubt that all these are very
valuable. However the only things which can really be "taught" about walking are
safety and navigation and so courses, books and mags dwell on these areas in
some detail.
It is my belief that this leads to a walking culture where technical aspects,
should it be the right jacket or the correct action to take in emergency, become
all and a very many people lose sight of why they go walking. If anyone has ever
been to a camera club meeting you'll know what I mean, they have little interest
in actual photographs and are totally obsessed with who's got the biggest
camera.
In actual fact people don't just lose sight of why they go walking, because of
how they learn many people never have sight of it in the first place.
HOWEVER this is not to say that it's not possible, or reasonable, for people to
enjoy walking for the technical, e.g. navigation, aspect. I do suspect though
that there are few people who enjoy walking for just the technical challenge.
Recently a friend stopped going walking when she discovered that she never
really enjoyed it in the first place but was just carried along by the technical
and physical challenge, being on a hill didn't really have any appeal for her.
(No, her gear isn't for sale!)
Now I've a confession to make, I usually go hill walking with a purpose in mind
and probably only 30 percent of days in the year when I walk are just about
walking. Usually, now, I go on the hill in search of fishing! Strange as it may
sound it's true. Then again fishing is often more about lying in the heather
drinking tea than catching fish.
On this group it is rare to see people post about how good a time they had while
walking, they post about navigation, about stupid people on the hill etc. but
rarely about how good a time they had. I'm on a fishing mailing list were people
frequently post about how much they enjoyed themselves. Here's one I posted a
week or two back, for the technically minded it was a 10 - 15 mile day and I did
have my mobile phone and GPS with me. The viz was low in the morning but it
became a fine day and I didn't need to be rescued at any point:-
Today I was atop a mountain doing a bit of fishing. Now that's not as strange as
it seems as the mountain has a flat top and there are quite a few little loughs
up there, many hold trout and one or two hold big trout.
I had the whole hill to myself, no one else feeling up to the considerable walk
on a Monday. Perhaps everyone else thought the weather less than promising with
bright blue skies and an east wind. It wasn't like that early on and as I walked
in before lunch the sea mists were still hanging around the peaks and creeping
up the little valleys. On one knoll overlooking the little stream there is a
huge building it's walls torn asunder by weather and time. This edifice, perched
in the middle of nowhere with no road or path, was once part of an iron ore
mining operation and it is said that the miners came from Donegal. On a Saturday
night the women of the little town of Carnlough would walk up the hill, probably
a good four miles, to this remote outpost and then they would dance the night
away. I can only imagine what sort of person it takes to walk four miles across
the hill on a dark winter night, dance until the early hours and then walk back
but as the mist drifted up the valley and tripped over the walls I was sure that
I could hear music; the "Mason's Apron" and then, perhaps, "MacCrimmon":
The breeze o'er the Beinn
is gently blowing.
The brook in the glen
is softly flowing.
There was no mist on the lough, no reflections of times past, just the hard May
sunshine and a cool east wind. A few fish were moving but it didn't take rocket
science to realise that today was not going to be a good day. On went a Black
Pennell and a Black Zulu, just the two today, and it wasn't long before a small
fish came to hand. After that there were quite a few more tugs and my Black Zulu
was totally destroyed without ever hooking a fish. In this harsh environment it
pays a trout to be fast.
Lough Fad produced a few little fish and then it was time to move on to pastures
new. Over several hours I walked and fished my way around Loughnabrick, Denny's
Lough and Loughfine without any sign of a fish, it was a quiet day for the
fishing and I wasn't going to make the long walk out to Lough Natullig, lying in
the heather appeared a better option.
From Loughfine it is but a short walk to the back of Big Trosk, which isn't
actually as big as Little Trosk I might add, and there I lay in the sun having
an apple and watching the world go by. As you can imagine there isn't much world
to watch go by up there in the bog.
Then I saw it, a slight movement. I was once told by a chap well acquainted with
the hill that the one thing which stands out on the bog is movement and yet
again he was proved correct. About 300 yards away there was something moving in
the heather. It moved again and I got it, a hare. What in the world was it up
to? Then another movement some way out, another one. Soon the hillside was alive
with hares, I counted eight in all, running about and behaving exactly like Mad
March Hares. Mad March Hares in May?
Then they vanished, I couldn't see a raptor but later when walking out I did
spot the brick red coat of a very busy looking fox. I wonder did he put an end
to their fun?
Apple consumed it was time to beat a retreat, out around the front of the Big
Trosk and down to Loughnatrosk for a few casts. The conditions hadn't improved
any and my few casts produced not a sign of a fish. The flies were snipped from
the leader and it was time for the walk out, at least it's all downhill.
Regards,
Philip Blair.
(bla...@iol.ie TZ=GMT)
*** Nation Shall Peak Six Unto Nation. ***
Michael Farthing
In article <3393e987...@news.dial.pipex.com>
alan....@dial.pipex.com "Alan White" writes:
> I'm getting slightly depressed at the tone of some of these postings.
> I will no doubt be flamed by the "treat the hills with respect"
> brigade,
Well I think that the quality of this ng is shown by the fact that you
weren't!! We talk a lot about kit and quite a bit about safety, but we've
also talked about dogs, Ireland, France, Skye, wallabies, peak racing,
lochs within lochs (it wasn't off-topic), Gaelic spelling, midges, more
midges, inversions, rights-of-way, helicopters, munro bagging, Scottish
mud, Rum and Eigg, food, vegetarianism, fishing (well Philip tried!),
photography, the science of lightening, beer and pubs, letterboxing,
wild camping, navigation by grass blades ... We've managed to ignore the
spams, be friendly to visitors and not been (very) nasty to each other.
Perhaps we don't write too much in praise of our fun on the hills, but my
fun is really my fun, and it won't mean much to others. I could write
all day about how Timothy managed his first v. diff up two large (for him)
boulders last weekend and then went on to walk half a mile out of his
rucksack. How he loved the sun and looked at leaves and flowers and roots
and rocks. Well it was magical for me but I'm sure the rest of you won't be
excited (but I've managed to sneak it in now, haven't I?). I think the
sense of this ng is that walking *does* have a lot of fun and it shines
through in the varied topics that appear.
Perhaps one thing that hasn't been said explicitly in this thread, (and
which may cause mani to blink a little) is that the sense of danger is
quite often deliberately courted by walkers (and certainly climbers). This
is one of the attractions of remote walking, just as at a more extreme
level it is an attraction of Everest expeditions and walks across
Antarctica. Perhaps this is the real reason why some of us are resistant
to GPS? We don't actually want to feel safer, and we're a bit afraid that
one day we'll have to, because it'll be irresponsible not to!
--
Michael Farthing
cyclades
software house
Alan White
>Well I think that the quality of this ng is shown by the fact that you
>weren't!!
I agree.
>Perhaps we don't write too much in praise of our fun on the hills, but my
>fun is really my fun, and it won't mean much to others.
I'm not sure that's true. I enjoyed Philip's story and I can picture
your enjoyment. I find personal stories far more interesting than
discussions on kit. But then I'm a romantic :-)
> I think the sense of this ng is that walking *does* have a lot of fun and it shines
>through in the varied topics that appear.
Except when discussing mobile phones etc.!
>Perhaps this is the real reason why some of us are resistant
>to GPS? We don't actually want to feel safer, and we're a bit afraid that
>one day we'll have to, because it'll be irresponsible not to!
Fine, if it makes you feel safer, but the point that I'm labouring to
make is that it should add to the fun and that we shouldn't get all
knotted up and worried about using them.
Rodger Mayze
In article <3393e987...@news.dial.pipex.com>
alan....@dial.pipex.com (Alan White) wrote:
>
> Where has the _fun_ gone?
>
> Some little stories, (it's too hot to cut the grass).
>
> I started hill walking in April 1959. I wore an old macintosh, grey
> flannel trousers, army surplus boots and carried an army surplus
> haversack. I think I had a compass but I know had a map. In July 1959
> four of us attempted Ben Nevis, Sca Fell Pike and Snowdon in twenty
> four hours. At that time the only motorway in the country was the
> Preston bypass and our transport wouldn't cruise faster than 50mph. We
> completed Ben Nevis directly from the car park at the head of Glen
> Nevis (warning signs there now) in appalling conditions and managed to
> lose ourselves in thick mist on Sca Fell Pike, ("Which way is Wast
> Water", four different answers roughly ninety degrees apart). We
> didn't bother with Snowdon after that but it was _fun_.
--------big snip----------- all good stuff see the original
> to enjoy it and to have _fun_.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alan White
> in England's Lake District.
> http://ds.dial.pipex.com/alan.lesley/
I just want to agree with all Alan said about _fun_ -- including the bits
I've cut out.
--
Rodger Mayze |Keep out
|Sig. file found to be structuraly unsound
Nick Thorne
Firstly I'd like to say how much I agree with Alan's original posting re
having fun. And notice how you haven't been flamed either!
Michael Farthing wrote
>Perhaps one thing that hasn't been said explicitly in this thread, (and
>which may cause mani to blink a little) is that the sense of danger is
>quite often deliberately courted by walkers (and certainly climbers). This
>is one of the attractions of remote walking, just as at a more extreme
>level it is an attraction of Everest expeditions and walks across
>Antarctica. Perhaps this is the real reason why some of us are resistant
>to GPS? We don't actually want to feel safer, and we're a bit afraid that
>one day we'll have to, because it'll be irresponsible not to!
>
I remember a long while back coming across some piece of psychoanalysis
stuff (I didn't really understand it all - struck me as a bit pseudo :)
Anyway, the main point of it was about *risk compensation*. The theory
said that we all felt comfortable with a certain level of risk in our
lives (everyone being different of course). In the advent of something
new coming along to make our lives safer, we'd simply compensate by
taking more risks. I think the originator of the theory was making a
case out to say people drove faster when compelled to wear seat belts,
etc. So presumably we'll all buy a GPS system and go up Ben Nevis,
Everest, etc :)
--
Nick
mani
HMMM, that's one way of looking at it :-)
my thinking goes like this: if i carry a gps, and i get lost, i can find my way
back. i also enjoy messing about with gimmicks.
it's nowt to do with the risks of walking. just how i enjoy myself.
now when i was skydiving (a number of years back) i used to love "pulling low"
(illegal, dangerous, risk taking to the extreme) because of the BUZZZZZZZ....
it's also part of the reason why people enjoy base jumping (leaping off tall
buildings, towers, mountains, with parachute of course).
could you send me the name and address of
that psychiatrist/psychoanalyst please ?
pretty please...?
<fx: hands begin to shake with adrenalin withdrawal symptoms>
}I remember a long while back coming across some piece of psychoanalysis
}stuff (I didn't really understand it all - struck me as a bit pseudo :)
}Anyway, the main point of it was about *risk compensation*. The theory
}said that we all felt comfortable with a certain level of risk in our
}lives (everyone being different of course). In the advent of something
}new coming along to make our lives safer, we'd simply compensate by
}taking more risks. I think the originator of the theory was making a
}case out to say people drove faster when compelled to wear seat belts,
}etc. So presumably we'll all buy a GPS system and go up Ben Nevis,
}Everest, etc :)
regards, mani.
+++
Nick Thorne
mani wrote
<snip>
>
>could you send me the name and address of
>that psychiatrist/psychoanalyst please ?
>pretty please...?
>
><fx: hands begin to shake with adrenalin withdrawal symptoms>
>
Sorry mani, I did say *a long while back.* I'm afraid the name's been
confined to the dustbin of my mind for some while now.
In case anybody joins this thread late, and thinks I'm having therapy
(!), I'd better re-quote my original posting ;-)
>}I remember a long while back coming across some piece of psychoanalysis
>}stuff (I didn't really understand it all - struck me as a bit pseudo :)
>}Anyway, the main point of it was about *risk compensation*. The theory
>}said that we all felt comfortable with a certain level of risk in our
>}lives (everyone being different of course). In the advent of something
>}new coming along to make our lives safer, we'd simply compensate by
>}taking more risks. I think the originator of the theory was making a
>}case out to say people drove faster when compelled to wear seat belts,
>}etc. So presumably we'll all buy a GPS system and go up Ben Nevis,
>}Everest, etc :)
>
--
Nick
Mike Peters
After much thought and deliberation, m...@cyclades.demon.co.uk (Michael
Farthing) felt obliged to write:
>snipped<
>Perhaps one thing that hasn't been said explicitly in this thread, (and
>which may cause mani to blink a little) is that the sense of danger is
>quite often deliberately courted by walkers (and certainly climbers). This
>is one of the attractions of remote walking, just as at a more extreme
>level it is an attraction of Everest expeditions and walks across
>Antarctica. Perhaps this is the real reason why some of us are resistant
>to GPS? We don't actually want to feel safer,
Got it in a nut shell ....Michael
It would not be a challenge...or fun :-)
Mike Peters