Marko Prezelj, prejemnik Pioleta d’Or 2007 skupaj z Borisom Lorenčičem za njun vzpon na Chomo Lhari (7326 m) oktobra, je nagrado ostro kritiziral, saj po njegovih besedah »potiska [alpiniste] v areno, kjer gledalci uspevajo na drami.«
Marko Prezelj
Več ljudi me je kritiziralo, ker sem se letos udeležil podelitve Pioleta d’Or. Nihče od njih ni bil v Grenoblu.
S tem, ko sem se pridružil temu cirkusu, sem dobil priložnost, da javno izrazim svoje mnenje o nagradi. Čas bo pokazal, ali je bila to napaka.
Ne verjamem v nagrade za alpinizem, še manj v trofeje ali nazive, ki jih podeljuje javnost ali mediji. Na prireditvi sem lahko videl in občutil tekmovalni duh, ki so ga ustvarili in spodbujali organizatorji. Večina alpinistov je to razpoloženje zlahka sprejela, ne da bi razumela, da so bili potisnjeni v areno, kjer gledalci živijo od drame, kjer se presoja o zmagovalcih in poražencih.
Ni mogoče objektivno presojati vzpona drugega človeka: vsak vzpon vsebuje nešteto neizrečenih zgodb, oblikovanih z pričakovanji in iluzijami, ki nastanejo dolgo pred tem, preden stopimo na goro. V alpinizmu so celo najbolj osebne sodbe izjemno subjektivne. Ko se vrnemo z gora, se trenutkov spominjamo drugače, kot so bili tam in takrat — v trenutku, ko smo morali sprejemati odločitve pod pritiskom številnih dejavnikov.
Primerjati različne vzpone ni mogoče brez osebne vpletenosti, in tudi takrat je težko. Lani sem plezal na Aljaski, v Patagoniji in Tibetu. Ne morem se odločiti, katera odprava je bila najbolj… najbolj kaj sploh?
Da to ponazorim, sem med prvim delom prireditve prosil očeta več otrok, naj odloči, kateri je najboljši in kateri najslabši. Ni mogel odgovoriti.
Morda lahko izberem vino, hrano, pesem, knjigo ali film, ki mi je v nekem trenutku najbolj všeč, vendar žirija ne more odločiti, kaj je najboljše, najslabše ali najbolj karkoli za vse v enem letu. Če žirija izbere enega zmagovalca, to samodejno pomeni poraženca — bistvo tekmovanja. In prvo mesto pomeni, da obstaja drugo, tretje in zadnje mesto. Je zadnje mesto res manj‑slabo, ali so bili zmagovalci preprosto bolj spretni v igri manipulacije? So morda bolj učinkovito pretiravali »lepoto« svojega vzpona in se bolje prodali žiriji?
Ideja navdihujočih srečanj alpinistov je pozitivna, vendar ne morem podpreti absurdne ideje, da bi se ti isti alpinisti »pomerili« v alpinizmu. Na podelitvi Pioleta d’Or sem govoril proti temu tekmovanju. Rekel sem, da mi trofeja ni pomembna, ker je izbira zmagovalca subjektivna, podobna pevskim in lepotnim tekmovanjem, komercialni vpliv na dogodek pa je očiten in nedvoumen. Moja polomljena angleščina mi je preprečila, da bi bil jasen.
Toda zgodba Pioleta d’Or jasno kaže, da je primerjanje vzponov (in protagonistov ter njihovih idealov) nesmiselno — še manj pa to početi za eno koledarsko leto. Če je primerjava nemogoča, kaj potem mediji in sponzorji predstavljajo in promovirajo — in zakaj? Zaradi večje prodaje, ali morda zaradi SLAVE?
V slovenščini ima slava isti zven kot žensko ime: »Slava«. Stari ljudje so rekli: »Slava je kurba« — en dan spi z enim, naslednji dan z drugim. Slava je poceni past, ki jo nastavijo mediji, v katero se samozadovoljni hitro ujamejo in so izkoriščani, ko prepozno spoznajo, da čast in poštenje ne živita v isti hiši kot razvpitost. Javnost se v resnici ne zanima za alpiniste, ki so členi v incestuozni verigi, ki povezuje bolno lakoto po pozornosti z mediji, ki promovirajo ali kritizirajo glede na svoje interese. Organizatorji Pioleta d’Or vedo in računajo na kruto dejstvo, da bodo vedno našli dovolj obupanih, strastnih gladiatorjev in klovnov, ki bodo igrali v igri slave. Bolj zanimivo vprašanje je, ali gre za resničnostni šov ali za telenovelo.
Če naj romantična ideja Pioleta d’Or preživi v prihodnosti, se mora razviti v preprosto srečanje, kjer lahko alpinisti izmenjujejo ideje ter delijo svoje sanje, iluzije in realnosti. Morda bi lahko celo plezali skupaj — brez tega, da bi kdo postal zmagovalec ali poraženec. Če to ni mogoče, prosim medije in promotorje, naj prenehajo vsiljevati tekmovalni duh v alpinizem in naj začnejo spoštovati alpiniste, njihove človeške razlike in ustvarjalne ideje, ki naredijo alpinizem tako zapleteno in bogato izkušnjo.
Opravičujem se, če sem užalil koga, ki je zasvojen z gospo Slavo; veliko se druži, zato pazite na spolno prenosljive bolezni. In za konec: alpinisti so krogle, mediji pa puška. Kje je tarča.
2007 PIOLET D’OR WINNER QUESTIONS AWARDS
Marko Prezelj, recipient of the 2007 Piolet d’Or with Boris Lorencic for their ascent of Chomo Lhari (7326m) in October, has denounced the award, which he says has “pushed [climbers] into an arena where spectators thrive on drama.”
Alpinist.com – Marko Prezelj
Several people criticized me for participating in the Piolet d’Or ceremony this year. None of them were in Grenoble.
Joining this circus gave me the opportunity to present my opinion about the award publicly. Time will tell if doing so was a mistake.
I don’t believe in awards for alpinism, much less trophies or titles presented by the public or the media. At the ceremony I could see and feel the competitive spirit created and fueled by the event’s organizers. Most of the climbers readily accepted this mood without understanding that they had been pushed into an arena where spectators thrive on drama, where winner and loser are judged.
It is not possible to judge another person’s climb objectively: each ascent contains untold stories, influenced by expectations and illusions that develop long before setting foot on the mountain. In alpinism, even the most personal judgments are extremely subjective. When we return from the mountains we remember moments differently than they were–there and then–in the moment when we had to make decisions under the pressure of many factors.
Comparing different climbs is not possible without some kind of personal involvement and even then it is difficult. Last year I climbed in Alaska, Patagonia and Tibet. I cannot decide which expedition was the most… the “most what” in fact?
To illustrate this I asked (during the first part of ceremony) the father of several children to decide which is the most-best and which one is the worst? He could not answer.
I might choose which wine, food, song, book or movie I like the most, in a certain moment but a jury cannot decide which is the best, worst or most for everyone in one year. If a jury does choose a single winner it automatically implies a loser, which is the essence of competition. And first place means there is a second, third and last place. Is the last place truly less-worse, or were the winners simply more adept at the manipulation game? Did they exaggerate the “beauty” of their ascent more effectively, and market themselves better to the jury?
The idea of inspirational gatherings of climbers is positive however I cannot support the absurd idea of those same climbers “competing” at alpinism. At the Piolet d’Or ceremony I spoke against this competition. I said the trophy is not important to me because the choice of a winner is subjective, like singing and beauty contests, and commercial influence on the event is obvious and definite. My broken English prevented me from being clear.
But the story of the Piolet d’Or makes it clear that comparing climbs (and the protagonists and their ideals) is nonsense, much less doing so for one calendar year. If comparison is impossible what are the media and sponsors presenting and promoting, and why? For increased sales, or for FAME maybe?
In Slovenia fame has the same word as a woman’s name: “Slava”. Old people used to say: “Slava je kurba” (Fame is a bitch), one day she is sleeping with one and the next day with another. Fame is a cheap trap set by the media in which the complacent are quickly caught and exploited, realizing too late that trust and honor do not live in the same house as notoriety. The public doesn’t truly care about climbers, who are links in an incestuous chain binding sick hunger for attention to media that promote or criticize according to their interests. The Piolet d’Or show organizers know and count on the cruel fact that they will always find plenty of desperate, passionate gladiators and clowns to role-play in the fame game. The more interesting question is whether it is Reality Show or Soap Opera?
If the romantic idea of the Piolet d’Or will survive in the future it must evolve into a simple gathering where climbers can exchange ideas, and share their dreams, illusions, and realities. Perhaps they might even climb together–with no one cast as winner or loser. If this is not possible then I ask the media and the promoters to stop forcing the competitive spirit into alpinism, and to start respecting the alpinists, their human differences and the creative ideas that make alpinism a complicated and rewarding experience.
I apologize if I have offended anyone who is addicted to Miss Fame; she gets around so watch out for STDs. And finally, alpinists are bullets, and the media is a rifle. Where is the target?
