84
America’s hiking culture is built on ego (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by to c/solarpunk@slrpnk.net
73 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Outdoor recreation often slips into what I call an achievement-based relationship with nature. I’ve been guilty of it myself. Whether it’s “bagging peaks”, racing to finish the AT, or stamping the land with machines and monuments, the focus shifts from ecology to ego.

Being obsessed with Peak Bagging is not Solarpunk.

Nature is not your personal obstacle to challenge yourself against, it is a shared place of discovery you trample when you only see it as a place to endlessly, exhaustingly conquer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 5 months ago (12 children)

Is this really an issue though? Whatever gets people a bit closer to nature seems good to me

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (11 children)

    Yes, yes it is. Just look at how the top of Everest is trashed by climbers insisting on conquering it and it is a perfect symbol of the broader outdoor movement in many ways.

    When people relate to nature as something to be tested against and conquered/overcome they begin to lose the capacity to understand how they can have a meaningfully negative impact on nature from their actions because this entire perspective frames nature as an obstacle far bigger than us, hopelessly more powerful than us and so encompassing we are tiny in comparison. There is a rotting false, dangerous comfort and naivety embedded in the core of that belief. It reminds me of this catastrophically off base speculation in Moby Dick about how since Whales are so much more powerful than humans and the ocean is so big that we could never diminish their numbers in hunting.

    But as perhaps fifty of these whale-bone whales are harpooned for one cachalot, some philosophers of the forecastle have concluded that this positive havoc has already very seriously diminished their battalions. But though for some time past a number of these whales, not less than 13,000, have been annually slain on the nor'-west coast by the Americans alone; yet there are considerations which render even this circumstance of little or no account as an opposing argument in this matter.

    ...

    Wherefore, for all these things, we account the whale immortal in his species, however perishable in his individuality. He swam the seas before the continents broke water; he once swam over the site of the Tuileries, and Windsor Castle, and the Kremlin. In Noah’s flood he despised Noah’s Ark; and if ever the world is to be again flooded, like the Netherlands, to kill off its rats, then the eternal whale will still survive, and rearing upon the topmost crest of the equatorial flood, spout his frothed defiance to the skies.

    Moby Dick - Herman Melville

    How awfully wrong that quote was about the future of whales...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    In my experience, the more goal/achievement oriented a person is in their relationship to nature, the more likely they are to care for it.

    Appalachian trail thru hikers, for example, are far more likely to know and follow leave no trace principles, and will enforce these principles on each other via informal social tactics. Hikers who cut the handles off their toothbrushes to save a few grams of weight would be appalled at the prospect of leaving their garbage behind at a campsite or on the side of the trail. The people who dump their garbage everywhere tend to be people who come to the forest for a party, or to have a picnic.

    Similarly, the Everest climbers leaving all the trash are chasing the vague goal of "get to the top". But high end alpinists leave no trash behind. They leave no fixed lines, and do not carry bottled oxygen, and so cannot leave the bottles. Whatever the underlying motivations, they want to achieve a significant feat, and they want to do it "in good style" - in a way that meets their community's approval. And the community is quite clear that good style requires leaving no (or very little) trace. Climbing Everest with fixed lines and sherpa and oxygen would be embarassing for any serious alpinist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] [S] -7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (7 children)

    In my experience, the more goal/achievement oriented a person is in their relationship to nature, the more likely they are to care for it.

    In my experience the more goal/achievement oriented a person is the more hollow and superficial their relationship to nature is.

    You are essentially using a "No True Scotsman" fallacy here on hiking and mountaineering culture. I don't doubt there are lots of really passionate nature lovers who are deep into hiking and mountaineering. Of course there are, but the point is that the underlying ideology undermines the pursuit of connecting with nature in a way an overwhelming chunk of outdoor sports culture in the US seems oblivious too.

    The people who dump their garbage everywhere tend to be people who come to the forest for a party, or to have a picnic.

    These are not the people I am comparing to, I am comparing the obsessive peak bagging, personal goal oriented culture of outdoor sports to people who protect, spend time in and love the natural landscapes right outside their door instead of looking at instagram and fantasizing about climbing that one mountain they really need to climb to cross off their list that is hundreds of miles away. I don't see the culture of most outdoor oriented communities in the US as anything other than weaponized FOMO meant to push people into an endless loop of needing to conquer more and more nature to prove themselves to their peers.

    Anecdotally I have noticed that the people I know who are the most accomplished hikers and outdoor enthusiasts are the least capable of enjoying a boring patch of woods or nature because they compare it to the mountain peaks in their minds and the beauty of the space in front of them becomes bland in comparison. This is not the mindset of a true nature enthusiast, it is the mindset of a conqueror who isn't amused by obstacles smaller than they have already witnessed and defeated.

    To put it another way, I don't see most outdoor sports culture in the US as meaningfully different than downhill skiing culture, that is these things are fun, beautiful, challenging and rewarding to participate in but they aren't a process of becoming more intimately connected with and supportive of nature.

    Frontier myths permeate outdoor narratives and media, shaping stories in ways that hinder meaningful self-reflection and critical analysis. These narratives often portray personal growth or enlightenment as achievable only through solitary, soul-searching journeys. This framing emphasizes the adventurer's internal experience while neglecting the broader social, environmental, and historical impacts on the lands and communities they traverse. Even today, the individual setting out to the frontier and removing the self from collective traumas or responsibilities continues to be a common theme from films, documentaries, books, history, and magazines. Whether or not we actively subscribe to these narratives, we are all affected by them. They obscure a fundamental truth: that survival, success, and even adventure are not the result of rugged individualism, but of our interdependence.

    https://www.terraincognitamedia.com/features/frontier-narratives-and-why-we-must-rewrite-the-outdoors

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    to people who protect, spend time in and love the natural landscapes

    Gotta say, No True Scotsman right back at you. Plenty of hippies around me like to leave their shit and beer cans around the hot springs they drop acid in - though I'm sure if you asked them, they would tell you about how intimately they connected with nature.

    I don’t see the culture of most outdoor oriented communities in the US as anything other than weaponized FOMO meant to push people into an endless loop of needing to conquer more and more nature to prove themselves to their peers.

    Honestly, this sounds like you are just judging people for enjoying the outdoors in a different way than you enjoy the outdoors. I basically am one of those people you describe, but I have literally never posted on IG about what I do, and have not been active on social media for years. I do the things I do because going on epic, challenging missions is personally meaningful and memorable to me, requires me to challenge myself and see how I can overcome those challenges, and creates new relationships with others and deepens my existing relationships.

    You can enjoy the sunshine in your local city park by sitting on a bench. Or you can play soccar with your friends. Neither way of interacting with nature is "wrong"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -5 points 5 months ago* (5 children)

    I do the things I do because going on epic, challenging missions is personally meaningful and memorable to me, requires me to challenge myself and see how I can overcome those challenges

    Again you have explained your relationship with nature as almost entirely about you and your experience.

    You can enjoy the sunshine in your local city park by sitting on a bench. Or you can play soccar with your friends. Neither way of interacting with nature is “wrong”

    Both of those things are very different than participating in a culture of needing to conquer nature to prove yourself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    Again you have explained your relationship with nature as almost entirely about you and your experience.

    And you are describing listening to crickets - which is all about you and your cricket-listening experience.

    Both of those things are very different than participating in a culture of needing to conquer nature to prove yourself.

    I could easily say that the people playing soccer are doing so to fulfill their ego goal of "conquoring" the other team and proving themselves. But if I did, the people who showed up to have fun playing soccer with their friends would look at me weird.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] [S] -8 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    And you are describing listening to crickets - which is all about you and your cricket-listening experience.

    No it is about me and the crickets, it is about placing the value of witnessing over the value of conquering something with my body. The latter is inherently more selfish than the former.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    value of witnessing

    Witnessing is an experience. That's your experience. You are conquoring the desire to interact with nature, fulfilling your ego goal of passive acceptance.

    I joke - but really, go to a hiking trail sometime and tell all the people who show up to hike they are all selfish and egotistical for wanting to hike the whole trail instead of just stopping whenever the mood strikes them and going home. I feel like if you were to actually talk to people about these views, you would realize how weird you sound very quickly

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -4 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Witnessing is an experience. That's your experience. You are conquoring the desire to interact with nature, fulfilling your ego goal of passive acceptance.

    What a tortured twisting of my words, of course witnessing is an experience, it is an experience that brings you outside yourself unlike a physical battle with the limits of your body that draws you inward.

    I joke - but really, go to a hiking trail sometime and tell all the people who show up to hike they are all selfish and egotistical for wanting to hike the whole trail instead of just stopping whenever the mood strikes them and going home.

    Why would I do that?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    Why would I do that?

    Because it would be an experience that brings you outside yourself, giving you the opportunity to directly witness the beauty of the human experience through others' point of view.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I agree that its not a great attitude; but exposure to nature seems like a good way to correct it. I've known people who didn't care about climate change; until they realized it would effect the trail they like to go running on.

    The trash left on hiking trails isn't great; but its nothing compared to the damage corporations have done. If just a few more people discovered a love of nature, that could inspire tighter regulations on corporations

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago

    Sure, but my argument is that it isn't just about being physically in nature, that doesn't magically make it impact you, it can end up just hurting nature and driving you further into an internal quest that diminishes your capacity to witness the world around you.

    I am glad when people decide to care about climate change because their personal exercise facility is impacted but it is a shallow reason to care and it is fragile too. It is far better to invite people into nature in a way that actually deepens and radicalizes them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent