Having been predominantly in the sport climbing realm of late… (living in Europe), I am left unimpressed by the over-use of symbols in climbing guides.
O.k. so it is nice considering that my ability to pick up languages is minimal, but ultimately I think that they are too simplistic and unless formatted really well are often more confusing than the old-fashioned description.
With the introduction of E-grading, symbols, and codes, I fear the loss of descriptions, stories, history, and ambiguousness.
It has crossed my mind that these symbol using guides of sport climbing areas are partly responsible for the change in the punter’s relationship to climbing over the past decades. If there is no subtlety in the descriptions and no mystery left in the route (e.g. the only description being how many draws and where the crux is), then of course the 23 next to the 18 is the way in which we remember.
So basically ...I am excited about a new guide from you guys, and don’t use computers and symbols too much.
I was always impressed by the way in which routes of all grades were taken seriously and described with the understanding different limits existing.
Of course this is in an Australian laid back way, but I think once you know Arapiles, you are aware of the possibility of a sting in the tail.
Es gibt kein Geschenk
Having said that, I think that a more descriptive way of grading bouldering would be great, and also a grading system which could be compared to other areas (v or font grading) would be of value, especially if Simey is not interested in waxing lyrically about boulder problems.
I think the spiral back is tacky and rips apart.
p.s. can you take ages to finish the guide so that I can get some pics in when I get back??
> es.
|