Steep: Glorifying extreme risk taking?

I don’t know about you guys but I usually cringe at these movies attempts to define what people get out of so called extreme sports. I have been involved with a couple of sports that became less fun as they became more popular. It took a bit of reflection to understand why that was. There isn’t fame or money or respect in riding the backcountry. Most of us don’t ride down a mountain to a crowd of cheering fans but in the absence of all those things you can usually find the freedom to do whatever you want. So until these film makers and marketers learn that they are essentially trying to sell freedom (is that possible?) they will keep missing the point. I find these types of movies are best with just a soundtrack or on mute.

There isn’t fame or money or respect in riding the backcountry. Most of us don’t ride down a mountain to a crowd of cheering fans but in the absence of all those things you can usually find the freedom to do whatever you want...

I agree with what you say--for most backcountry skiers. But for skiers in a film like this, I think there are other motivations at play. The elephant in the room, the one that nobody will talk about, is the quest for prestige. I think it's a big motivator for the kinds of stunts you see in these films. The ski community bestows prestige upon people who take risks and survive them.

This is basic human nature. In fact it is also present in the animal kingdom. It's called "signaling," the display of fitness by taking risks that are not strictly necessary. Some evolutionary biologists believe that signaling explains altruism. Why do creatures (including people) risk their own well-being to help others who are not family? Because it signals their fitness and increases their prestige in the community. In the case of altruism (think of a volunteer fireman, for example) the behavior benefits the community at large. In the case of extreme sports, it doesn't.

This model provides the best explanation I've found for some of the really stupid things you see smart people saying in these films when they are interviewed. The cheerful fatalism with which people brush off the risks they've taken increases their aura of superhuman fitness. And many of the skiers who watch these films eat this stuff up. At least that's been my impression when I visit some of the other skier forums out there.

Interesting stuff. Well even with all that said I am sure it will be on my netflix queue before too long.

This is basic human nature. In fact it is also present in the animal kingdom. It's called "signaling," the display of fitness by taking risks that are not strictly necessary. Some evolutionary biologists believe that signaling explains altruism. Why do creatures (including people) risk their own well-being to help others who are not family? Because it signals their fitness and increases their prestige in the community. In the case of altruism (think of a volunteer fireman, for example) the behavior benefits the community at large. In the case of extreme sports, it doesn't.

Perhaps people see a powerful illustration of the will to experience and enjoy all that life offers, even in the face of the ultimate consequence. It's a powerful metaphor for life in general; a testament to the human spirit. There's a value in there somewhere (IMO!).

...and plenty of thin lines and slippery slopes, highlighted with hyperbole. But that doesn't mean that the value isn't there.

Trolling:

An interesting response to this 'extreme' ski culture phenomenon might be for someone to produce a documentry on the documentry. i.e. a film following the life and times of some Bellingham twin-tip skier or boarder who watches this video among others and gets it into his head to live a life of risk and crime on the steeps at Mt. Baker. It could include several shots of this boarder going head first over the various cliff bands at baker... maybe one of him getting stuck on a 100 footer and being belayed and rescued by the Mt. Hood ski patrol, and a shot of him starting a major slide only to be partially buried with a broken leg, only to show him in the hospital getting it cast and getting right back out there to self test the avi-lung, the new back-pack balloon thingy while navigating Coleman glacier in a whiteout with an advanced GPS system that feeds hidden cravasse information right into his eye-balls.

Perhaps people see a powerful illustration of the will to experience and enjoy all that life offers, even in the face of the ultimate consequence.  It's a powerful metaphor for life in general; a testament to the human spirit.   There's a value in there somewhere (IMO!).

There must be value for the person doing it, otherwise they wouldn't bother. But what other people see is harder to say. The New York Times reviewer saw a death-defying sport pursued by a cult-like group addicted to danger. I would guess that what people see depends on whether they are (or would like to be) in the cult or not.

I don't see extreme skiing as a way to experience all that life offers. It's impossible to experience all that life offers. There's not enough time. You have to make choices. Is extreme skiing a richer experience than, say, being a teacher or an artist or a parent?

I've skied must-not-fall slopes and I've skied safe-and-sane slopes, and I don't recall that there was anything superior about the former. To my recollection, the only difference between them was that on the must-not-fall slope I was aware of the imminent possibility of violent death. Looking back, I don't see that as a big plus.