Yeah, I think a lot of the promotion of this event bugged me because they were billing it as an amazing death-defying stunt. Which is clearly is not, unless you include the very small chance that he fell and the safety gear failed.
I can enjoy watching amazing acrobatic performances that involve very little chance of serious injury or death, but I wouldn’t call them “daredevils”.
It was more of an “embarrassing inconvenience-defying stunt.”
Gosh, I hardly know where to start. I don’t follow how someone can not fathom the difference in concentration, skill and focus required to do something like this over the course over many, many minutes, as compared to a stunt that is done and over with in just a few seconds? There is more here than the mere skill of walking on a wire because the walker is only human, he must sense the dangerous position he is in and instinctively his mind and body must recoil. Repetition and much practice and discipline let him overcome this reaction so he can focus and complete his self-defined mission…but it is nothing like the “Wait, I sneezed, did I miss it?” instant gratification stunts that we see on TV all the time.
Not exciting? Well, for some, chess matches are not exciting. This was not your traditional stunt, true and maybe you have a hard time appreciating the nuances of it. But you sound absolutely, dismissively, disrespectful, which I think is your right but way off the mark and it does not show you in a flattering light.
I meant “interesting” in the sense that someone thought it could sustain enough viewer interest for a 3 hour show. If he’d walked across the walmart parking lot 3 feet above the ground, it would take him exactly the same skill set but no one would have watched it.
[QUOTE=gunnergoz]
Gosh, I hardly know where to start. I don’t follow how someone can not fathom the difference in concentration, skill and focus required to do something like this over the course over many, many minutes, as compared to a stunt that is done and over with in just a few seconds? There is more here than the mere skill of walking on a wire because the walker is only human, he must sense the dangerous position he is in and instinctively his mind and body must recoil. Repetition and much practice and discipline let him overcome this reaction so he can focus and complete his self-defined mission…but it is nothing like the “Wait, I sneezed, did I miss it?” instant gratification stunts that we see on TV all the time.
Not exciting? Well, for some, chess matches are not exciting. This was not your traditional stunt, true and maybe you have a hard time appreciating the nuances of it. But you sound absolutely, dismissively, disrespectful, which I think is your right but way off the mark and it does not show you in a flattering light.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not saying anything about the tightrope walking itself. I certainly couldn’t do it. I’m saying it is made artificially dramatic and dangerous by the fact that it took place hundreds of feet in the air. Being above the falls, or between two skyscrapers, or whatever, does not increase the skill requirement for it. It’s artificial tension and danger. The “concentration, skill and focus” do not increase whether it’s 3 feet or 3000 feet, it just removes the margin for error, making it more interesting to television viewers, or so it seems to me. Gymnastics on a balance beam, for instance, takes a lot of skill and training without having to put the beam hundreds of feet up in the air. I’m dismissive of artificially making it seem more dangerous in an effort to appeal to viewers, not of the actual skill involved. And it turns out he had a freakin tether anyhow, so the whole point was moot.
On the roadside at 3 a.m. with red/blue lights flashing in your eyes, I’ll bet tightrope walking ability comes in handy.
“Sorry Mr Wallenda, have a nice night”.