|
dirtineye
Feb 27, 2004, 12:53 AM
Post #2 of 6
(3384 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
I forget who it was, but some person criticized Arno's use of the word warrior for some of the same reasons that thread talked about.
My view about rock warrior as a term is that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. It's the principles and guide lines in the book, not the title that makes the difference.
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Feb 27, 2004, 1:27 AM
Post #3 of 6
(3384 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
In reply to: I forget who it was, but some person criticized Arno's use of the word warrior for some of the same reasons that thread talked about. My view about rock warrior as a term is that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. It's the principles and guide lines in the book, not the title that makes the difference.
The word "Warrior" was a big barrier for me to overcome when approaching his book, and it continues to be as I try to understand the principles. I have never gone into physical battle with another person in my life. Nor will I ever. The mentality that I must apply to staying alive in such a situation...well, I've never considered it, and it's not a parallel that I care to draw either. "The Rock Monks Way" would have fit my feelings about the approach better, but I admit that it lacks a poetic ring.
Although we now have idols like Lara Croft and there were those mythical one-breasted amazon gals...for the most part "warrior" is pretty much a male-centered concept (at least in the US), so I wasn't sure that my approach to the world would be very represented in the book. The language of the book was all man-oriented...whenever a hypothetical climber was discussed, it was always assumed that he was a guy...but in the end this was pretty easy to over come as the situations weren't gender-specific at all.
I've found that I if I ignore the word 'warrior' altogether and just think of it as "principles to be a better person and a mentally stronger climber", then everything everything is okey dokey for me. I guess some of my attachments to negative ideas about the way Arno chose to use language is egocentric and based on previous negative experiences, so I can work on the "Warrior's Way" principles by not getting hung up on them.
|
|
|
|
|
shank
Feb 27, 2004, 5:36 PM
Post #4 of 6
(3384 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2002
Posts: 541
|
I believe it was Don Juan that said "A man goes to knowledge just as he goes to war, with fear, respect, wakefulness and absolute confidence."
And by man I assume he means human.
|
|
|
|
|
arnoilgner
Mar 1, 2004, 6:29 AM
Post #5 of 6
(3384 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2003
Posts: 366
|
The purpose of using "warrior?"
When you think of a samurai, soldier, [which are examples of warriors] we can learn a lot about what they do to stay alive and not get killed. A warrior must be absolutely present and have attention focused onto the task at hand. If a warrior can do this then she improves her chances of surviving. So, we can learn a lot from this about focusing attention in other areas like climbing.
One critical thing to remember is: the warrior's way isn't about aggression. It's about joining with challenging situations and blending your skills with what the situation requires. Don Juan never used warrior in an aggressive way and I drew much of my perspective on warrior from Millman and Castaneda's works.
By the way, I struggled quite a while with the "he" "she" pronoun issue for the book. Initially I was going to switch pronouns from chapter to chapter. Then I decided to ask some folks. Most thought the switching was a terrible idea. I asked several men and women about it. There were more men that had issues with only using "he" than women. In fact, almost all of the women recommended using "he." I only did a small sampling so I have no idea how the feedback matches a wider audience. It is a topic I will put more thought into for the next book.
arno
|
|
|
|
|
dredsovrn
Apr 17, 2004, 2:09 AM
Post #6 of 6
(3384 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 1226
|
Good points and interesting commentary in this thread, but the one from bouldering.com left me thinking "what a bunch of crap." Please. Such shallow thinking. It reminded me of a conversation I recently had with someone who said that they knew humanity was headed the wrong way because they had heard a news story of someone stealing a wallet from a man who had just had a heart attack.
Obviously, that's not good. I argued against his assertion that humanity was headed for the toilet, however. I mentioned to him that in the early 1600's in England, times known for "virtue," clergy ran for the countryside during plague outbreaks, and at the same time said the plague was the hand of God striking down the wicked.
When people pointed out that the clergy had no reason to run from a sickness that could not affect such men of virtue, they were imprisoned, forced to sign statements contrary to their beliefs or executed. One example of many that we are making progress. I suggest that the person who posted on bouldering.com should put a bandaid on their bleeding heart and open their eyes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
