| Author |
Topic |
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 03:12 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ecoulthard
quote:
Originally posted by DCIPHER
I agree that many names have been somewhat arbitrary, but I'm not sure Eric, how you are going from that, to: it's OK to name a non-prominent peak after Fox because it's arbitrary. Random name/mountain generation? Perhaps....I think we can do better. This mountain was named within my lifetime, and I question the appropriateness....I am not content to simply say....it's completely arbitrary, and therefore, there can be no notion of appropriateness. Obviously, this mountain was named with intent, and is intended to be looked at. I believe that:
1.Fox was a prominent and admirable Canadian
2.If we are going to name a mountain after him (especially one which which will people will be directed to look at), it should be one appropriately prominent.
I'm afraid that disagreeing with premise #2 because, as Kid Charlemagne suggested, Fox didn't do his journey with having a mountain named after him in mind, is a nonsensical notion to me. Similarly, saying that premise #2 doesn't follow because other mountains seem somewhat arbitrarily named, is not to me, sound reasoning. I don't think we need be always bound to arbitrary naming, and I think that #1 and #2 are a good qualifiers to that end. Now if you wanted to argue that Fox shouldn't qualify for ANY mountain, that would be a different matter, and one which I might be able to support.
Essentially what I was agreeing to was that mountain names are historically arbitrary and therefore not worth much thought. In my mind there is no way to compare a person and mountain. If you are going to question the naming of a mountain it should be is this person worthy of having this mountain named after them. Not is this mountain worthy of being named after this person.
Maybe names shouldn't be so arbitrary. I don't really care. I am more interested in mountains at least having names. Nobody seems to care about GR's no matter how prominent they are. Plus the naming system in place right now is near impossible to change. People don't generally want a peak with a name to be given a new name and good luck removing a peak name in exchange for no name.
Well as I mentioned I agree they have been arbitrary, and yes, I agree it's generally not worth putting much thought to.
However in the case of a tribute mountain, if you are going to do it, and direct people to it, I absolutely think that their can be a judgment of value and impact, which represents our what we thought of the figure.
For example, one could certainly say, in the same manner, that there is no way to compare say, a statue, or monument, to a person. Nevertheless, if the government said, hey, we made a Terry Fox tribute statue, and, I arrive to find a sign pointing to a figure made of 5 popsicle sticks and a jelly bean head, I think many people would find this unacceptable. |
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 03:15 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dru
quote:
Originally posted by DCIPHER
quote:
Originally posted by Cary
Mount Terry Fox, if this is it, is weak.
Thats not it. I have been to the top twice. The picture you have linked is on the way up and you can only view it from one spot and that spot is much closer to Mt Robson vistors site.
That's good! Have a good pic?
A trip report from a week or so ago it looks like you didn't read
http://www.clubtread.com/sforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=51079
Yes, I certainly did see that. Which pic is the one of Terry Fox?
|
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 03:32 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by darrenbell
DCIPHER, is it really all about how prominent a peak was named after Terry Fox?
In my opinion his achievments in his short life far out do any mountain or statue or high school that could ever be named after him.
Agreed.
quote:
Originally posted by darrenbell
[br
Personally, I think you are being very petty.
Why is that? I think that the SUBSTANCE of a tribute to Terry Fox is obviously, of extreme importance, in a tribute to Terry Fox. You may think the tribute itself petty, but if one is in favor of a tribute, then the content and nature of that tribute is hardly a trivial matter.
quote:
Originally posted by darrenbell
[br
Instead of looking to fault someone or something, try telling us how very proud you are that a great Canadian youth attempted to cross this great country by running on a prostetic leg and his only hope was to raise funds in the search fore a cure to a terrible disease that has no doubt touched each of us at one point in our lives.
This is not relevant to my point, though I think my point, very much implies that I have a great deal of respect for the person.
It is interesting to me that you would call me petty with the argument that: We should be proud of Terry Fox, and therefore, that is all we should discuss, rather than talk about the nature of the "honor" we as Canadians have bestowed upon him. I absolutely think, in fact, I think it's vitally important, that we take responsibility for acts done in our name. Particularly when they relate to a person whom one respects.
Look at yourself in the mirror, and ask yourself: if the tribute to Terry Fox was a star wars action figure, with a popsicle stick leg, would I think it petty to object? If you say "this wouldn't bother me in the slightest, it would be a great tribute by Canadian", then that is fine, and you are entitled to that opinion. If in fact, it would actually bother you, then I think you should grant me the same right without labeling me "petty".
To be frank, I think it very irresponsible to gloss over, and attempt to misdirect the discussion, by calling another person "petty" for talking about it.
quote:
Originally posted by darrenbell
[br
Not everything needs to be negative, smile and be happy.. it doesn't hurt!!
I appreciate your happy-go-lucky nature, but it can also be taken as an attempt to belittle anyone who wishes to discuss it. While I think that kind of no-questions-asked positivity can be a desirable trait (say in a trip partner, while on a difficult trip), I don't think we'd get too far in a discussion forum applying it universally!
|
Edited by - DCIPHER on 07/26/2012 03:59 AM |
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 03:52 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dru
Anybody remember the old crappy arch at BC Place that was torn down and replaced with the thing Coupland designed? Now that was a lame-ass memorial to Terry.
Yeah....I didn't "get" that arch...but at least it was....big.
Apparently though, discussing the appropriateness of a Terry Fox memorial makes one "negative".
Even more exasperating, it isn't something that should be talked about because...and this is where it gets nonsensical...
1.Terry was great and therefore, we can only talk about that, and not about the whether our memorial is appropriate
2.Terry didn't run for monuments and therefore, it doesn't matter what we give him
3.Terry can't be captured by a monument and therefore, it doesn't matter we give him.
I'm surprised. I can certainly see people not caring about it too much, and I suspect that's the real reason behind these arguments, and not people really thoughtfully subscribing to that reasoning. If that is so, fair enough. I guess Terry gets what he gets. Personally, I'd be a bit embarrassed to tell people traveling through the Rockies, who think Robson is Mount Terry Fox: oh no THAT'S not it... see that nondescript mound over there....
...then again, I'd probably due it with an embarrassed smile and laugh it off...that's Canada eh?
I don't agree with the reasoning or sentiments of many of these posts (though obviously some others I do), but I thank everyone for the feedback. If nothing else, I learned something about what others are thinking.
|
Edited by - DCIPHER on 07/26/2012 03:54 AM |
|
|
1064 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 08:09 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by DCIPHER
I'm surprised. I can certainly see people not caring about it too much, and I suspect that's the real reason behind these arguments, and not people really thoughtfully subscribing to that reasoning.
Self serving garbage, but whatever makes you think you're 'right'. |
|
|
 Kootenay Bud
2695 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 08:24 AM
|
| Dcipher, I think you are beginning to argue with yourself. Everyone else is out enjoying Canada's all too brief summer. |
|
|
877 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 08:56 AM
|
By all accounts the view from the top is exceptional. Not many mountains have this commanding view of the highest and most spectacular mountain in the Rockies:
Determining value by characteristics like elevation or circumference seems like the geological equivalent of phallic measurement  |
Edited by - dav1481 on 07/26/2012 08:56 AM |
|
|
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
331 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 09:15 AM
|
| I suggest you head up Mount Terry Fox before comparing it to a mound or a bunch of popsickle sticks. With 1800m of elevation gain it is not a walk in the park. It also has a steep North East face and a glacier. I have photos of the mountain but they are at home. Maybe I can upload them tonight. Been pretty behind on my photos these days. I am trying to catch up though. I wish I had as much free time as Stephen. |
|
|
Newton, bc
Canada
282 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 09:16 AM
|
Determining value by characteristics like elevation or circumference seems like the geological equivalent of phallic measurement
touche .....made me laugh
and again another good reason not to be drinking in that park and arguing about size |
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 10:45 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kid Charlemagne
quote:
Originally posted by DCIPHER
I'm surprised. I can certainly see people not caring about it too much, and I suspect that's the real reason behind these arguments, and not people really thoughtfully subscribing to that reasoning.
Self serving garbage, but whatever makes you think you're 'right'.
I already wrote a reply to you, and you're free to write a rebuttal, but of course, just shouting "garbage" is much easier isn't it?
PS. You're a stinky dirty pants yourself. OH yeah... I WIN!!!! (rolls eyes) |
Edited by - DCIPHER on 07/26/2012 10:53 AM |
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 10:47 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by sandy
Dcipher, I think you are beginning to argue with yourself. Everyone else is out enjoying Canada's all too brief summer.
Hello Sandy,
Nah, I haven't left the basement all summer (never have, as you have pointed out before), so that's why I have nothing better to do than post attacks accusing others of being the only ones not "out" there! I don't even try to address the topic anymore!
...astonishingly lame? Yes...but it does make me feel a tiny bit better about myself.
|
Edited by - DCIPHER on 07/26/2012 11:18 AM |
|
|
 | Dru
Mountain Grammar Police
|
Sardonic sandbagging scoundrel, Cascade Climbers lobotomized spraymeister, space blanket flyer, new millennium vulgarian betaboy and friend to all squids
Climbing, a mountain
Canada
∞ Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 10:49 AM
|
| How many mountains and schools did we name for Steve Fonyo? |
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 10:52 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ecoulthard
I suggest you head up Mount Terry Fox before comparing it to a mound or a bunch of popsickle sticks. With 1800m of elevation gain it is not a walk in the park. It also has a steep North East face and a glacier. I have photos of the mountain but they are at home. Maybe I can upload them tonight. Been pretty behind on my photos these days. I am trying to catch up though. I wish I had as much free time as Stephen.
Yeah, I'd love to see them Eric. Though the only pic that would matter to this topic is one of the mountain from the viewpoint, nor do I think one need go up the mountain to assess that.
However, I'm NOT comparing the mountain itself to popsicle sticks....that's my very point. I used an extreme example to illustrate that while we may disagree on the "impressiveness" (or insert alternate term), at some point, nearly everyone would have an issue with the quality/quantity of the tribute, and thus, it is quite legitimate to discuss the issue. That was in response to those who tried to put forward that the very discussion is not legitimate.
Note though, that I'm also not interested (in terms of the monument) any technical aspects of the mountain itself....this isn't a scrambling or mountaineering thread...I'm only taking issue with the impact of the monument itself.
|
Edited by - DCIPHER on 07/26/2012 11:22 AM |
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 10:55 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by troutbreath
Determining value by characteristics like elevation or circumference seems like the geological equivalent of phallic measurement
touche .....made me laugh
and again another good reason not to be drinking in that park and arguing about size
LOL. True, but the fact is, when it comes to visual impact of a mountain, size counts. Of course, if the shape is particularly pleasing, or outstanding, that can be vitally important....from what little I've seen, Mount Terry Fox has none of any of these things!
|
|
|
Newton, bc
Canada
282 Posts |
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 11:05 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dru
How many mountains and schools did we name for Steve Fonyo?
We did name a mountain after him, but if Fox didn't get much of an impressive peak, Fonyo's has a relief of 14 meters, and isn't visible from any road....the price of being #2. It's right beside Mount Assiniboine...have you not noticed?
 |
Edited by - DCIPHER on 07/26/2012 11:07 AM |
|
|
| Dru
Mountain Grammar Police
|
Sardonic sandbagging scoundrel, Cascade Climbers lobotomized spraymeister, space blanket flyer, new millennium vulgarian betaboy and friend to all squids
Climbing, a mountain
Canada
∞ Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 11:16 AM
|
| I don't know any real climbers that give a damn about prominence. |
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 11:22 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dru
I don't know any real climbers that give a damn about prominence.
Me neither! Thank goodness! ;-)
Your posts in the thread have been good Dru, I mean that sincerely, even if the thread overall has been yet another tribute to internet discussion. |
Edited by - DCIPHER on 07/26/2012 11:26 AM |
|
|
|
Outward Bound author of the Seinfeld Thread, who builds his own snowshoes
Troy, MT
USA
3125 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2012 : 4:22 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by tu
Personally, I think it a bit ironic that Mount Terry Fox and the Provincial Park around it isn't all that accessible to a lot of Canadians with disabilities.
Are you kidding me? If anything, it is too accessible. A mountain named after Terry Fox should be a relentless slog, which would cause almost all to give up save for a select few determined enough to give everything they have. To get to the top, one should have to "try the impossible, to show it could be done."
Anyone who thinks otherwise has some learning to do. |
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2012 : 05:33 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Farmer
quote:
Originally posted by tu
Personally, I think it a bit ironic that Mount Terry Fox and the Provincial Park around it isn't all that accessible to a lot of Canadians with disabilities.
Are you kidding me? If anything, it is too accessible. A mountain named after Terry Fox should be a relentless slog, which would cause almost all to give up save for a select few determined enough to give everything they have. To get to the top, one should have to "try the impossible, to show it could be done."
Anyone who thinks otherwise has some learning to do.
Interesting, and arguably appropriate,angle. Maybe something like Sunwapta should be the Terry Fox trail. No technical difficulty at all, but for the average person, even average hiker, a long slog.
|
Edited by - DCIPHER on 07/28/2012 05:35 AM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
That's the best we could do for Terry Fox??
