Concerning Classification
By C. E. Benson
The man who proposes to destroy; demolish, overturn,—¦ or any of the twenty-one alternatives to be found in The Thesaurus—old, well-established, honourable or respectable customs in the insensate hope that out of the resultant chaos may emerge something better, if not a new Elysium at any rate something infinitely happier, healthier, etc., etc., than the condition precedent is known commonly as a Bolshevist, a word which presumably means something or other in some language. Certainly it is not Russian.
To shield myself in advance against the charge of being a Bolshevist, I may as well say out of hand that I have neither intention nor desire to inflict anyone of the twenty-one activities indicated on the matter in hand. In fact, even were it my desire, I could not do so, inasmuch as the matter is neither old nor well established. Neither do I anticipate that new and harmonious relations will be the issue of the chaos into which I propose to plunge it. On the contrary I look forward, with considerable glee, to ructions. After which Pagliacci prologue, when I ring up the curtain everyone in the stalls ought to know what they will see staged.
The factors which have misled me into this histrionic and modern-historic attitude are 0. G. Jones, G. D. and A. P. Abraham, E. A. Baker, A. W. Andrews, J. M. A. Thomson, E. W. Steeple, G. Barlow, H. MacRobert, H. E. L. Porter, G. B. Bower, H. M. Kelly, and the Chemist. Naturally the works of this galaxy are bright with
“……… jewels five (or even more) words long,
“That on the stretched forefinger of all time
“Sparkle for ever.”
The brightest .of these gems comes from the casket of the Keswick Brothers. Here it is : ” Now we do not for a moment imagine that anyone will agree with us in our classification. This is hardly to be expected when we cannot agree between ourselves.” This is modest, and good sound sense withal. It is not, however the classification of any given climb I am tilting at. It is the principle or want of principle.
O.G. Jones, the Abrahams, and Baker may be placed in one class. Jones started the system and the others followed, Baker with some misgivings. The system is known to every climber, a scale of courses working up, or rather down, through Easy to Moderate, through Moderate to Difficult, and so on. There may have been, or appeared to be, desirability of transposition here and there ; there may have been overlapping, but in the opinion of most climbers the estimates were recognised as being in general remarkably sound.
After a while, however, Authority began to look askance at these graduated lists. They encouraged, so it was averred, a certain class of climbers to concentrate on the most difficult climbs to the danger of their lives and detriment of the sport. Then came the Andrews-Thomson experiment on Lliwedd which naturally could not avoid partaking of the character of that intricate mountain and leaving the unsupereducated in a dunno where ‘e are ” frame of mind. Then came fruition in the Ogwen Book by J. M. A. Thomson.
Of this I have just read in ” The Mountains of Snowdonia ” that ” he agreed to adopt a form of description and graduation which has become the model of all subsequent Climbers’ Guides to our hills.” (The writer has by some unaccountable oversight omitted to add ” Worse luck ! “). Then he goes on :—” It may be added that his individual style in these books set an example of elasticity in climbing terminology almost as beneficial as his effect upon our climbing methods,” which is as may be. Personally I can affirm that the vision of titubantic Gallios bitting ropes round stooks of bollards has had no beneficial effect on me whatever. I have in fact heard an Expert compare the classification and attendant prose in this volume to Doctor Samuel Johnson’s leg of mutton, ” as bad as bad could be, ill killed, ill cooked, etc., etc.” I think he was overstating, but I confess that the classification appeals to me as little as the jargon—language I mean. Anyone of intelligence can appreciate the meaning of the late A. D. Godley’s happy phrase “delectable places” but no one of intelligence can approve of the application of the adjective to that foul smallpox-looking finish to the Arete Climb on the South Buttress, Tryfan. The correct word begins with “d” and ends with “able” all right but the answer is not “delectable.”[1]
If this new graduation was intended to alleviate, if not remedy, the distemper of scalp-hunting, it was foredoomed to failure. The scalp-hunter is unscrupulous when he is out for a scalp and a considerable liar in the interval; in the interval his scalp-hunting is the spirit ” that made England great, that dared all, not counting the cost.”
It is nothing of the sort. The spirit that made England great counted the cost, dared all for England’s sake, and was heroic. The spirit of the scalp-hunter is not heroic. His adventure is generally undertaken for his own satisfaction and nobody else’s. If the venture comes off, the verdict is generally ” More fool he ! ” If he comes off, the verdict is similar, only emphasised.
As a matter of fact, if a climber, fool-man or sane, wants to look up a climb he thinks may give him pleasure, or enable him to swank with a due veneer of modesty, etc., etc., he will not be deterred from finding it by the trouble of turning over a few pages, even if he be debarred from access to a condemned category of Easy, Moderate, and so forth. By way of experiment I picked up the Ogwen Guide and less than three minutes’ research brought three exacting climbs under my eye. Wherefore it would appear that the distinction between the morality of distributing such climbs promiscuously over various pages and the immorality of collating them at the tail end of a graduated list is not very marked.
The gravamen, however, of the charge against this type of volume is the failure to recognise that there must, insistently must, be one common standard, that no climber, however accomplished, can be justified in setting up a standard of his own. Fortunately there is only one possible standard, that of O. G. Jones, which has been followed nearly by the brothers Abraham. By one possible standard I mean one possible general standard. There is no possibility, alas! of the gifted compiler revising it—assuming he might wish to do so. There is, I think, one serious inaccuracy, but an item does not affect the assessment as a whole. Classification, however presented, is for the information of those who do not know, not of those who know. Thus a party which has passed its novitiate in the Lake District under the above auspices might, on coming to Wales, find itself reliant on a scheme of classification differing here and there somewhat seriously from that which they regarded, and with reason, as established. If then, misled by these unfamiliar adjustments, they essayed a climb beyond their powers and anything happened, blame would be laid by many, and those, too, climbers of experience, on the altered classification, and the charge would be extremely difficult of refutation. Moreover, and this is a grave fault, there is no graduation in the various groups. Moderate throughout is precisely the same on its face value. It may be urged that the letterpress supplies the necessary corrective. I question if this is so, even if the letterpress were in plain English.
The Appendix by H. E. L. Porter is a great improvement on the original but unfortunately he is shackled by its disabilities.
In the S.M.C. Guide to Skye, E. W. Steeple, G. Barlow, and H. MacRobert have done the best possible with the scheme innovated at Pen-y-Pass, yet it cannot be said that their method is conspicuous for any advantage over that designed by O. G. Jones. It suffers from the disabilities indicated in the last paragraph but one, and the Very Difficults are found even more easily than in the Welsh Guides. You have only to run your eye down the list at the end of the volume to spot the ” Plus Fours ” on sight.
Lastly among the authorized versions come the F. & R.C.C. Guides. The compilers have adopted a modification of both systems with gratifying results. H. M. Kelly’s Guide to the Pillar would be hard to better. Moreover his style is as workmanlike as his system. He has realized what some others have not, that a Guide issued by a Club is an Official Publication, and that in such, facetiousness and phraseological eccentricities are out of place.
As an ” authorized rider ” comes the Chemist. I call him the Chemist because he deals in chemical formulas as applied to climbing. There is a good deal to be said “for his scheme if it be workable, which is doubtful. He complains, and with justice, of the unsatisfactory nature of the letterpress. A situation is described as — breezy. Quite ! but the Eagle’s Nest Ridge is breezy, and so is the Needle Ridge, but the situations are markedly dissimilar. Wherefore he devises an ingenious formula, a kind of H2S04, though there is nothing sulphuric nor acid about his contention.
Here is the formula:— A. Obstacles requiring the exertion of muscular strength. — B. Places where delicate balance is needed. — C. Exposure. — D. Rotten rock, loose grass, etc. Maximum number of points assessable per heading, 10. I worked this out on his formula for the Eagle’s Nest Ridge and then applied it to the Eagle’s Nest West Chimney. The amazing result was that the Chimney presented no difficulty of any kind whatsoever.
Then “…….. medio de fonte leporum,
“Surgit amari aliquid.”
Into the midst of this ” wilderness of harmony ” stalks the cloven hoof with rubbers on. The legend is that they were first imported from the Channel Islands by Mr. Shadbolt, senior. He certainly wore them, because I saw them on his feet. I did not see them in action, however. I think it was Adam Fox’s party who held out the right hand of fellowship to him. They also noted that he went very well. If that were the first introduction, rubbers did not come to stop. It was long after that date that Herford made his series of dazzling assaults on Scafell Pinnacle and I think I am right in stating that those climbs were made in stockinged feet. Dim rumours came from Cornwall of A. W. Andrews in unusual footgear slaying unsuspecting guests on granite cliffs and pinnacles. Later some hint of the innovation found place in print. On Lliwedd when the work became too delicate for boots we find that he and the present Sir John Farmer changed into tennis shoes. The conditions under which such change was thought desirable is worthy of note. It no longer exists. Folk now start off shamelessly in rubbers from the hotel door.
Rubbers have recently found a very “doughty ” champion in a climber who has written a paper on the relative merits of clinkers, which are mineral, and rubbers, which are vegetable, entitling the said paper, “Nothing Like Leather,” which is animal, so that he seems all out for an old nursery game on a Walpurgis night on the Brocken. I have no intention of mixing it with this gentleman. He has since been faithfully dealt with by a future ornament of the Bench.
Besides which, I reckon I have got myself into quite sufficient hot water with this article to keep me warm for the remainder of my limited existence. ” Alas, it is not till time with reckless hand has torn out half the leaves of the Book of Human Life to light the fires of passion with, from day to day, that man begins to see that the leaves which remain are few in number,” and it seems not improbable that these few will be employed to boil the cooking pot with myself as the principal ingredient. One remark, however, I will rashly venture, with a few others to follow.
I. If a climber can lead an ordinary climb of rather more than moderate difficulty, such as may be found handily on, say, the Milestone Buttress, under good conditions in boots, it is very certain he will be able to lead it in rubbers. The converse is by no means certain.
II. It is high time for a reversion to the Gully Epoch. I know of plenty of rubber-gritstone young gentlemen who can make modified mincemeat of Ribs and Slabs but would be utterly floored by the Oblique Chimney on Gable, aye, and easier ‘ enclosed’ climbs, and would be in deadly peril if they essayed that mysteriously classified course, the West Jordan Gully, which has stood and still stands in one standard list as a Difficult and not much more than half way down the list at that.
II. (a) ” Forty years on, growing older and older,
“Shorter of wind as of memory long,
“Feeble of foot and rheumatic of shoulder,”
I am evincing a distinct preference for face climbing. Why ? Because it is less strenuous and much drier. I have noticed that seniority has induced a similar propensity in others. It would be a pity if our youngsters grow old before their time. It would be a greater pity if they shirked labour, discomfort, and dirt. Let them not imagine that, because they have taken in Moss Ghyll, ordinary route, they have one of the best gully climbs in their pocket. On the ordinary route there are only two gully pitches and those of no great severity.
III. The exposition of the classification is all at the wrong end. Classification is mainly intended for the benefit of beginners and undergraduates. The Graduate who can take a party safely up, say, the North Pillar or one of the more difficult Tryfan routes ought to be able to judge of his own capacities and also of what he is up against. It is the Undergraduate who wants educating. Compare the number of words given to a Moderate and a Very Severe in almost any climbing book. It is scandalous. ” Difficult climbs and how I did them ” may be of interest, especially to the writer, but educationally they are of very little value.
IV. I think that in the classification of the useful, instructive climbs, steady, experienced climbers who are not stars should be consulted. It is quite impossible for genius to appreciate a difficulty it cannot experience.
[1] I note that the latest Guide, Snowdon, by H. R. C. Carr, is happily free from this blemish.