메뉴
HN
Hacker News 48일 전

세르로 토레: 가장 논란 많은 산의 역사

IMP
4/10
핵심 요약

파타고니아의 세르로 토레(Cerro Torre)는 등반 커뮤니티 내에서 50년 이상 논란의 대상이 되어 온 산입니다. 1959년 첫 등정 주장으로 시작된 진실 공방과, '공정한 수단(fair means)'을 둘러싼 등반의 순수성 문제가 중요한 쟁점입니다. 이는 알피니즘과 등반 윤리가 무엇인지 근본적으로 묻는 사건으로 의미가 있습니다.

번역된 본문

칠레와 아르헨티나 국경에 위치한 남파타고니아 빙원(Southern Patagonian Ice Field) 위로 솟아오른, 높이 3128미터의 좁은 암탑은 50년이 넘는 세월 동안 등반 커뮤니티에서 논란의 중심에 서 있었습니다. 지난달 그곳에서 사건 하나가 발생하여 이 산의 논란 많은 역사에 새로운 장이 추가되었고, 현재 등반계에서 가장 뜨거운 화제가 되었습니다.

이 산은 바로 세르로 토레(Cerro Torre)입니다. 그리고 이 이야기의 핵심 인물은 이탈리아의 등반가 체사레 마에스트리(Cesare Maestri)로, 현재 80대인 그는 1959년 자신이 이 산에 최초로 등정했다고 주장했으며, 이후 1970년에 독특한 상황 속에서 두 번째 등반을 위해 다시 돌아왔습니다. 비록 그의 첫 등정은 의심받고 있지만, 그가 악명을 떨치게 된 것은 두 번째 등반 때문입니다.

최근 무대에 등장한 인물들은 헤이든 케네디(Hayden Kennedy)와 제이슨 크룩(Jason Kruk)이라는 두 명의 젊은 미국인 등반가입니다. 이들은 미래에 이 산의 개척 등정을 이룬 인물로 기억될 수도 있지만, 현재 사람들의 논쟁 대상이 된 것은 그들이 오르는 동안 무엇을 했느냐가 아니라, 하산하는 동안 무엇을 했느냐 때문입니다. 이 이야기의 중심에는 등반의 순수성이라는 매우 감정적이고 주관적인 주제와, 암벽을 오르는 데 있어 '공정한 수단(fair means)'이 무엇으로 구성되는가에 대한 질문이 자리 잡고 있습니다.

현재 인터넷에는 세르로 토레에 대한 블로그 게시물과 뉴스 기사가 셀 수 없이 많이 떠돌고 있습니다. 이 세 명의 등반가가 취한 행동은 매우 논쟁적인 성격을 띠고 있어, 일부 포럼 스레드에는 문자 그대로 수천 개의 댓글이 달렸으며, 도대체 어떤 일이 벌어지고 있는지 파악하기가 매우 어렵습니다. 저 역시 한때 아르헨티나의 피츠로이 지역을 트레킹하며 세르로 토레의 산기슭과 매우 가까운 빙하를 걸었던 적이 있습니다. 그것은 정말 아름답고 인상적인 산으로, 본격적인 암벽 등반가들에게 그러하듯 저에게도 항상 매력으로 다가옵니다. 저는 등반 역사에도 관심이 많기 때문에, 이 모든 소음에 개의치 않고 사태의 맥락을 제대로 짚어보고자 합니다.

마에스트리는 무엇을 했고, 케네디와 크룩은 무엇을 했으며, '공정한 수단'을 둘러싼 이 소동은 대체 무엇일까요? 처음으로 돌아가 봅시다.

1959년, 마에스트리의 의심받는 최초 등정 1959년 등반 이후 수년 동안 마에스트리의 말은 그대로 믿어졌습니다. 즉, 그가 이 악마처럼 어려운 암탑을 올랐고, 정상에 함께 도달했던 등반 파트너 토니 에거(Toni Egger)는 하산 중 사태로 목숨을 잃었다는 주장입니다. 유일한 생존자였던 마에스트리는 며칠 뒤 정신 혼미 상태로 발견되었고, 자신과 에거가 등정에 성공했다고 어눌하게 중얼거렸습니다. 의구심이 제기되기 시작한 것은 훨씬 나중의 일이었습니다. 이 산에 등반을 시도했다가 실패하고 두 번 다시는 그곳에 가지 않겠다고 맹세했던 경쟁 등반가 카를로 마우리(Carlo Mauri)는 이후 정상이 한 번도 오른 적이 없음을 암시하는 글을 발표했습니다.

이후 '정복의 콜(Col of Conquest)'이라는 지점 위쪽 마지막 1000미터 구간에 해당하는 마에스트리-에거 루트(현재는 동남 능선으로 알려짐)를 오르려는 수많은 후속 시도가 있었음에도 불구하고, 그들의 등정 흔적은 단 한 번도 발견된 적이 없습니다. 그러나 1976년 인접한 토레 에거(Torre Egger)를 등정하는 과정에서는 초기 루트 구간 수 미터마다 흩어져 있던 로프, 하켄(pitons), 쐐기(wedges), 카라비너(carabiners) 형태로 마에스트리와 에거가 1959년에 '그 특정 산'을 올랐다는 증거가 발견되었습니다. 하지만 마에스트리의 주장이 말이 된다는 정황 증거도 많습니다. 많은 의심론자들이 마에스트리-에거 루트를 통한 모든 후속 등반 시도가 실패했다는 사실을 지적하지만, 날씨의 기이한 변화로 인해 1959년의 환경은 산의 높은 곳을 오르기에 매우 유리한 조건이었습니다. 그들이 등반하기 직전 며칠 동안 폭풍이 산을 강타했습니다. 폭풍이 걷힌 후 평소에는 노출되어 있던 암벽이 두꺼운 임시 얼음층으로 덮였고, 덕분에 당시 세계 최고의 빙벽 등반가 중 한 명이었던 에거가 앞으로 나아갈 수 있었습니다. (본문 누락으로 인해 여기서 끊김)

원문 보기
원문 보기 (영어)
February 15, 2012 Mark --> History February 15, 2012 --> albert mummery , andes , cerro torre , cesare maestri , climbing equipment , fair means , false summit claims , first ascents , hayden kennedy , jason kruk , patagonia , rock climbing , southern patagonian ice field , toni egger , via ferrata 7 Comments Rising above the Southern Patagonian Ice Field on the border of Chile and Argentina is a narrow finger of rock 3128 metres in height that for over 50 years has been a source of controversy among the climbing community. Last month an incident occurred there which added another chapter to its controversial history, and has become the most talked about topic in the world of climbing . The mountain is Cerro Torre, and the central character in its story is an Italian climber called Cesare Maestri, now in his 80s, who claimed its first ascent in 1959, then returned in 1970 for a second go in extraordinary circumstances. Although his first ascent is disputed, it's for his second attempt that he gained notoriety. The latest characters to enter the stage are two young American climbers called Hayden Kennedy and Jason Kruk, who may be remembered in future years for making a pioneering ascent of the mountain, but for now are the subject of debate not for what they did on the way up, but what they did on the way down . At the heart of the story is the very emotive and subjective issue of climbing purity, and what constitutes "fair means" of climbing a rock face. There are gigabytes of blog posts and news stories knocking around about Cerro Torre at the moment. The incendiary nature of the actions of these three climbers are such that some forum threads have attracted quite literally thousands of comments, and it's very difficult to work out what's going on. I once trekked in the Fitzroy region of Argentina, and walked up a glacier very close to the foot of Cerro Torre. It's a beautiful mountain, a very striking one that will always have an attraction for me, as it very evidently does for serious rock climbers. I also have an interest in the history of mountaineering, so undeterred by all the noise I'm going to try and make sense of it all . What did Maestri do, and what did Kennedy and Kruk do, and what's all this fuss about fair means? Let's go back to the beginning. Maestri's disputed first ascent, 1959 For many years following his 1959 climb, Maestri was taken at his word: that he climbed this fiendishly difficult tower of rock, and that his climbing partner Toni Egger, who reached the summit with him, was killed in an avalanche during the descent. Maestri, the only survivor, was found in a state of near delirium days later, muttering confusedly that he and Egger had been successful. It wasn't until much later that doubts began to be expressed. Rival climber Carlo Mauri, who made an aborted attempt of his own on the mountain and vowed never to return there, later published an article implying the peak had never been climbed. Despite many subsequent attempts by the Maestri-Egger route, now known as the Southeast Ridge, on the final 1000 metres of the ascent above a point known as the Col of Conquest, no trace of their climb has ever been found , yet an ascent of adjacent Torre Egger in 1976 discovered evidence of Maestri and Egger's 1959 ascent of that particular mountain in the form of rope, pitons, wedges and carabiners littering every few metres of the early part of the route. Yet there's much circumstantial evidence to suggest Maestri's claim is plausible. Many of the doubters point to the fact that all subsequent attempts to use the Maestri-Egger route have failed, but a quirk of the weather meant conditions in 1959 made climbing the higher reaches of the mountain favourable . For several days prior to their ascent a storm rocked the mountain. When it cleared the usually bare rock was covered in a thick layer of temporary ice which enabled Egger, at the time one of the best ice climbers in the world, to make headway. The precipitous nature of the mountain, combined with the strong Patagonian winds and the fact that the ice of their ascent route was only temporary, meant that much of the debris they left behind couldn't possibly have remained in any case. Maestri's notes on the climb are somewhat sketchy, but his descriptions of the extended fore summit and ice mushrooms lining it bear a similarity to conditions which would require a remarkably prescient imagination to have invented. Although we may never know the true history of Cerro Torre, we do know the first undisputed ascent occurred in 1974, by another Italian team led by Casimiro Ferrari. While most people these days regard Maestri's 1959 climb to be a hoax, there are still many people who believe he did climb it. Maestri's 1970 attempt: the infamous Compressor Route Maestri didn't help his cause by returning in 1970 for a fresh attempt armed with a 150 kilogram petrol-driven compressed air drill to attach bolts into the side of the mountain. He then refused to climb the final 50 metre ice mushroom on the summit saying it wasn't really part of the mountain and would fall off eventually. It's this "bolt ladder" that has so offended climbing purists since. Many say he murdered the mountain, and the Slovenian climber Silvo Karo famously said "that climb was stolen from the future" by Maestri (meaning that a "genuine" first ascent by that route could never be made now that so many bolts had been placed into the rock). For 40 years the Compressor Route as it's now known (though perhaps not for much longer) has been the de facto normal route up Cerro Torre. 90 per cent of the ascents since have been via this route, where climbers have some 400 bolts they can choose to attach to most of the way to the summit. Kennedy and Kruk, January 2012 While plenty of people have climbed the Southeast Ridge using Maestri's bolts, until last month, when Kennedy and Kruk chose to avoid them yet still made the ascent in a very rapid 13 hours, nobody had ever climbed it by "fair means". Even so, their impressive climb may still have been a footnote had they not removed 125 bolts from the Southeast Ridge on their descent , effectively erasing the Compressor Route from the mountain in a matter of hours. They believed they were doing the right thing, that they were claiming the route back again for the purists, yet when they arrived in the village of El Chalten, a popular outdoor activity centre not far from Cerro Torre, police arrested them and confiscated 102 bolts. While most people agree Maestri should never have put the bolts there in the first place, opinion is hotly divided about whether they should have been removed , and even more so about the manner of their removal, by two climbers on one side of the debate taking the decision unilaterally. Clearly many lesser climbers would now be unable to climb Cerro Torre. Should Kennedy and Kruk have been entitled to deny them the chance just because they are better climbers and have different beliefs? One respected climbing historian asked the question "should we flatten the Pyramids because they were built with slave labour?". Yet for many people Kennedy and Kruk are heroes. Another climbing writer said they had done a great service and said he was saddened "to see them receive so much criticism for what I consider to be an altruistic act", pointing out that nobody has a "right" to climb Cerro Torre, and there are many easier mountains for less skilful climbers. So what is fair means ? At the heart of the debate is the question of how much equipment a climber can use for his or her ascent to be considered fair . The phrase fair means is believed to have been coined by the Victorian mountaineer Albert Mummery, an Englishman who climbed many peaks in the Alps without hiring continental European guides, which may not sound very unusual now, but went against the norms of his time. He avoided the use of grappling hooks and ladders, and pushed the boundaries of climbing st