Showing posts with label Attempted Humor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Attempted Humor. Show all posts

Saturday, May 1, 2010

Pigs at the Trough: A Retrospective on the Grand Teton Climbers' Ranch

The Tetons.  Photo by Sean Neilson.

As summer approaches, climbers with pending free time might consider volunteering for Work Week at the Grand Teton Climbers' Ranch from June 7-11. "Work week is an opportunity for volunteers to help prepare the Ranch for opening in exchange for free lodging during the month of June."

The Ranch, which is operated by the American Alpine Club, provides rustic accommodations at the base of the Tetons in Wyoming. The ranch consists of about a dozen communal cabins, an indoor library/lounge, and a large pavilion for cooking and socializing. The ranch is only open from early June to mid-September, and is inhabited mainly by mountaineers who stay for as little as one night or as long as three months. It is a great place to meet other climbers, swap information, and plan spine-tingling climbs.

Some years ago, I participated in Work Week and then base camped at the Ranch for the rest of the summer. Though I had a fantastic time mountaineering in the Tetons, those lofty spires and my adventures thereabouts are not the subject of this article. Rather, what I want to focus on are the jaw-dropping eating habits of climbers at the Ranch. To put it bluntly, they eat like pigs.

Allow me to begin the rogues gallery tour with a wildly disheveled, middle-aged mountain man I'll call "Compost Heap". Why I call him Compost Heap will become clear later. Let me first paint a vivid portrait of his appearance. I think this can best be accomplished by imagining one of those illustrations that charts the evolutionary progression of man from a crouched chimpanzee-like creature, through various stages (each less hairy and more erect than the last), to the clean-shaven office schlep of modernity. With that picture firmly in mind, direct your attention to the creatures in the middle of that progression. That is where you will find Compost Heap. Now that you know more or less what he looks like, I'll briefly describe his eating habits, which will make it clear why I call him Compost Heap. The reader will also find that his eating habits correspond to his place on the evolutionary scale. Getting to the point now, what made Compost Heap stand out was that he ate all of the vegetable parts that others threw away (or tried to throw away). He chomped on rejected broccoli and cauliflower stocks and munched the outermost leaves of lettuce and cabbage. He savored carrot and celery ends and chewed onion skins and potato peels with a flourish. And he ate them all raw, and sometimes right out of the garbage. To the incredulous stares of his unwitting patrons and other spectators, he claimed that the vegetable parts they profligately discarded contained the highest concentrations of nutrients, or some such nonsense.

Unlike Compost Heap, the climber I will call "The Poet" was more dignified. He was well-groomed and eloquent, even philosophical. However, he was unable to keep up appearances, and around meal time he regressed, like Compost Heap, into savagery. For instance, during casual breakfast conversation one fine morning, The Poet suddenly cried "wait!" as someone deposited a burnt pancake into the garbage. He lunged at the garbage can, plunged his hand through the small swivel door at the top, and began fishing around inside. After a few tense seconds of looking back and forth out into space at nothing in particular (as people do when they are searching with their hands for something they cannot see), he pulled out the pancake. Appearing more annoyed than triumphant, he mumbled something about it being "a perfectly good pancake". In fairness to The Poet, it was only black on one side. Then, after a final cursory inspection, he ate it. It had all happened too fast. The reader must understand that the garbage can was completely covered and the contents not visible, meaning that The Poet had little idea, beyond what he had felt with his groping hand, what the pancake had contacted inside. After this incident, I was not surprised to see The Poet eating meals of plain white rice directly out of plastic grocery bags.

There are those who march to the beat of a different drummer, but they don't last. Take "Can Man". Can Man did not eat out of the kind of can into which Compost Heap and The Poet intrepidly ventured. Quite simply, Can Man only ate food from factory-sealed cans. Thus, there would be no symbiotic relationship between Can Man and Compost Heap, and you can forget about grabbing a burger or pizza with him after a climb. In regard to climbing, his backpack must have weighed a ton, which is perhaps why he disappeared faster than you can say, "Star Kist and Campbell's and Chef Boyardee, the food never spoils was his repartee."

Eye-opening eating displays were not confined to the Ranch. Some of the worst displays occurred at the notorious Dornan's All-U-Can-Eat Barbecue in the nearby village of Moose. Dornan's served only a few items, each simmering away in enormous black cauldrons that were lined up on, yes, a trough. The customer ladled barbecued beef and beans onto his plate, and returned as many times as he liked (or dared). A group of us returned too many times one gorgeous evening and spent the next few hours back at the Ranch concentrating on one thing: keeping it all down. Good training for high-altitude climbing, perhaps. As we sat around groaning and trying not to laugh, Dean (I will use his name since he deserves some credit, as the reader will soon discover) suddenly looked as if a tremendous weight had been lifted from him. He had at that instant made a bold decision that, in fact, promised to do just that. Dean rose slowly with a solemn air of resignation. He walked deliberately, though not hurriedly, across the creaking floor boards of the cabin, out onto the porch, down the front steps, and into the brush behind the cabin. The sound of his footsteps grew faint.

As Dean gagged himself and threw up violently out back, making quite a lot of horrible noise in the process, I grimly contemplated an aphorism by John Stuart Mill to the effect that it is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied. On that gluttonous night, we were not even pigs satisfied.

Sean Neilson (L) and Sam Page (R) on the summit of the Grand Teton in 1996. 

Thursday, December 31, 2009

The Dr. Frederick Albert Cook Award for Best Mountaineering Blog

Today, on this last day of 2009, it is with great enthusiasm and reverence that The Mountaineering Review hereby inaugurates a momentous year-end award.  The purpose of the award is to recognize the best mountaineering blog of the previous year.  We at The Mountaineering Review  felt it important to name the award after someone whose integrity and accomplishments exemplify the award's significance.  Accordingly, we have chosen to name the award the Dr. Frederick Albert Cook Award for Best Mountaineering Blog.



Dr. Cook's infamous 1906 photo of Mt. McKinley's summit

Since The Mountaineering Review is itself a mountaineering blog, there has been some understandable concern regarding procedural impartiality.  To address these concerns, we have decided to publish the multi-step process which was followed to pick this year's winner.  The reader will notice that if these steps are followed, there is simply no room for subjective bias.  Here are the steps:

(1) Recall to mind some mountaineering blogs.
(2) Discuss those mountaineering blogs.
(3) Give the award to The Mountaineering Review.

As you can see, if the three steps above are followed, there is no way that the arbitrary whims of judges can affect the outcome.  It is a purely objective process of which Dr. Frederick Albert Cook would surely approve.

So, without further hesitation, it is a great privilege to announce this year's winner of the Dr. Frederick Albert Cook Award for Best Mountaineering Blog.  The winner is . . . The Mountaineering Review!!!

Friday, December 11, 2009

What Really Happened to Mallory and Irvine

Today is International Mountain Day.  There could hardly be a better time to reflect on why you climb mountains.  And when contemplating the question "Why do you climb?", you may find yourself distracted by the infamous answer attributed to George Mallory: "Because it is there."  But what exactly did Mallory mean by this cryptic quip?  Theories about his meaning are as various as theories explaining his disappearance high on Mt. Everest in 1924.

The Wildest Dream, a movie scheduled for release in 2010, promises to shed light on the enduring conundrum of Mallory and Irvine's disappearance.  However, given that the mountain featured prominently on the movie's website is not Mt. Everest, but a reversed image of Mont Blanc du Tacul in France, I wouldn't hold your breath. [Editor's note: the image was eventually switched to Mt. Everest, perhaps as a result of this article!]  In fact, you may want to take this opportunity to draw a few deep breaths, because there is a brand new theory that simultaneously deciphers Mallory's cryptic quip and explains his disappearance.  And it is a theory that The Mountaineering Review is now proud to unveil on this International Mountain Day eighty five years after Mallory and Irvine vanished.

Solving complex problems often involves challenging assumptions that have been left unchallenged.  Consider again Mallory's retort, "Because it is there".  For too long, scholars and laypersons alike have assumed that by "it" Mallory was referring to Mt. Everest.  But on this day -- a day designated by the United Nations General Assembly as "an opportunity to create awareness about the importance of mountains to life" -- it is the distinct pleasure of The Mountaineering Review to lay bare what Mallory was referring to with the word "it".  When Mallory said that he wanted to climb Mt. Everest because it is there, he did not mean that he wanted to climb Mt. Everest because Mt. Everest is there.  Rather, George Herbert Leigh Mallory wanted to climb Mt. Everest because it is there.  Yes, that's right.  Call it what you like: Yeti, Abominable Snowman, or my personal favorite, Kangchenjunga Rachyyas.   

To reiterate what has been suggested thus far, Mallory wanted to climb Mt. Everest because he believed (or knew?) the Yeti was there.  But what light does that shed on his disappearance, you ask?  Well, if you don't want to get snow blindness, you had better put on your mountaineering goggles.  But first, a refresher on the nature and history of science is in order.  Scientific theories endeavor to explain phenomena -- that is, they try to determine what causes what.  Sometimes, when a scientist finally stumbles on the correct theory, its accuracy seems so obvious in retrospect as to render all rival theories laughably preposterous.  (Incidentally, I know all of this stuff about science because my daughter's brother's grandmother's husband's daughter is a scientist.) 

With a clearer understanding of the nature and history of science, we are now positioned to account for the heretofore mysterious disappearance of Mallory and Irvine.  As with many good scientific theories, as soon as you hear this one, it will seem so obviously correct that all other competing theories (such as the one that will no doubt be presented in The Wildest Dream) will seem, well, wild.  Ok, here it is.  You may want to take a few deep breaths.  George Herbert Leigh Mallory (1886-1924) and Andrew "Sandy" Comyn Irvine (1902-1924) were killed high on the northeast ridge of Mt. Everest (also known as "Sagarmatha" by the Nepalese and "Chomolungma" by the Chinese) by something that I will discuss in a forthcoming blog entry.  I actually lost track of time and ought to be getting ready for bed.  Oh, what the hell, let's do this now: They were killed by a yeti!  That's it, you read that right.  Mallory and Irvine were killed by a yeti.  Have a look at this picture.

Having clearly articulated this intoxicating new theory about what really happened to Mallory and Irvine, a sober evaluation is required.  The history of science demonstrates that the best theories have sweeping explanatory efficacy -- that is, they not only explain the main thing you want to explain, but every other related significant detail as well.  The Yeti theory can obviously explain how Mallory and Irvine died (a yeti killed them).  But can it explain why Mallory's body was found, while Irvine's body was not found?  Yes.  The Yeti ate Irvine (because he was much younger than Mallory), but was too full to eat Mallory.  And now for the explanatory hurdle -- that one little fact that the rival theories just cannot explain.  Why was Mallory's body found with all of his personal effects intact, with one glaring exception: the photograph of his wife that Mallory planned to leave on the summit?  Quite simply, the Yeti stole it.  That is what you call explanatory efficacy.

So, there you have it.  Mallory wanted to climb Mt. Everest because it -- namely, the Yeti -- is there, and Mallory and Irvine were subsequently killed by that selfsame Yeti.  It should go without saying that the timing of the publication of this Yeti "theory" (one is now tempted to say Yeti "fact") could not be any worse for the producers of The Wildest Dream.  Although I'm sure the scenery will be pretty, in light of the Yeti theory, watching the movie will be like watching two teams who failed to make the playoffs in their final regular season game: ultimately, it just won't matter.

Curiously, though not surprisingly, representatives of The Wildest Dream could not be reached for comment.*

* I didn't try to reach them.