Because it's there (and Dad made me)
By Colby Cosh - Thursday, April 8, 2010 - 42 Comments
At what point can we consider actively cheering against child adventurers with glory-hog Type-A parents? As you read this, 13-year-old Jordan Romero is en route to Hong Kong; from there he will push on to Nepal with his father Paul in an effort to become the youngest person to reach the summit of Everest. Jordan, who has reached six of the “Seven Summits”, says he is “as stoked as can be” about the expedition. What do you suppose Jordan will make of the ubiquitous corpses, ever growing in number, scattered around the upper reaches of the mountain like discarded dolls? If he survives, will he be posting to his website about how nifty a sight that was?
According to journalist Jon Krakauer, Everest kills about 1 in every 33 climbers who dare the approaches to its peak. In recent years it has become a commercialized, watered-down challenge characterized by semi-permanent technical cheats; it’s the scene of undignified races to the top by people with various classes of debility or identity-group memberships, and a means for rich nuisances to acquire extreme-tourism cred. But none of this has reduced the risk all that much, because no other environment on earth can prepare climbers for decision-making at such extreme altitudes. The presence of large numbers of sponsored cripples and hapless plutocrats has created new queueing and crowding problems, as the 1996 disaster near the peak demonstrated. Climbers are now getting injured by falling onto each other. Guides (of varying quality and dedication) are ultimately responsible for the lives of all less-experienced climbers on Everest, and sometimes both perish. Needless to say, the whole sordid enterprise is only made possible by the Sherpas. The mountain has become an amphitheatre for humanity at its worst, not its best.
A well-trained adolescent should be able to climb Everest. Jordan is responsible, organized, and intelligent; he has passed every health test put before him in reaching the first six of his summits. But even a sympathetic journalist made to wait six months for access to the family found some evidence of strong paternal pressure on Jordan. It’s simply impossible to believe he is climbing Everest entirely for his own reasons, whatever those could conceivably be—not with a $150,000 cash investment complicating the tough decisions. (Sometimes, Everest demands the master poker player’s willingness to fold his cards; many climbers have died, as some did in 1996, by starting for the summit too late in the day, or in poor conditions, and essentially opting for a one-way trip to the top.)
The ugly truth is only made more obvious by Jordan’s constant protestations that the whole project was and is his idea. He tells a canned story about seeing the Seven Summits on a poster and being inspired; we’re supposed to believe, I guess, that it’s a complete coincidence (and what a felicitous one!) that his father is an expert in high-altitude medicine, helicopter rescues, and mountaineering. No sir, no pressure from Dad here. The real horror is that if Jordan summits and returns alive, he will have set a benchmark that some other kid (i.e., parent) will try to break, and then someone else, and then someone else after that, as the idea percolates downward to the Lloyd Dubroffs and Richard Heenes of the world. And by “the world” I mean “almost certainly the United States”.
Let’s give Paul Romero a break and ignore the total lack of scientific evidence concerning the effects of prolonged oxygen deprivation on the developing brain of a child. Even setting that triviality aside, most fathers would be reluctant to let their child perform an activity that involved a ~3% risk of death. No, let’s put this another way: most fathers would try to attack you if you suggested it seriously. But Paul Romero “simply refuses to impose limitations that could restrict Jordan from realizing his full potential.” (Nothing helps a youngster realize his potential like becoming a worldwide celebrity before his voice changes, right? God forbid he should sit at home learning calculus.) And Jordan’s divorced mother appears to have been convinced to dismiss her own wholly rational fears for her child as nothing but “the mom thing.” Aren’t you glad you didn’t have parents like this?
-
No one saw Barack in the balloon?
By Mark Steyn - Thursday, November 5, 2009 at 12:00 PM - 72 Comments
Wafting ever upwards on gaseous clouds of hope, only to have his numbers crash . . .
On the day America went Balloon Boy crazy, I chanced to be on the radio, appearing live coast to coast on The Hugh Hewitt Show. And, as the Balloon Boy was the hot breaking news, Hugh asked me about it. “I don’t know what to say,” I said, “except it’s one of those peculiar and potentially tragic and instantly horrifying combination of circumstances.” If I sound a bit vague, well, that’s the idea. I’d gotten the gist of what was happening a couple of minutes before I went on air, but these days I’m wary: almost any “human interest” story turns out to be interesting for an entirely different set of reasons from the initial ones—the shocking “hate crime” the victim turns out to have perpetrated on himself, etc. So simply out of a sense of self-preservation, when I’m told that a six-year-old boy is sailing through the skies in a balloon, I try to suppress the urge to demand mandatory pilot’s licences for kindergartners or making helium a prohibited substance.So Hugh moved on to Afghanistan and the economy and other peripheral matters, and a couple of minutes later broke in with the news that the boy had been found safe and well. He wasn’t in the balloon at all. “Thank God,” I said, still wary, “but you know, there are a lot of law enforcement people, there have been a lot of people who have been sitting around at airports waiting to scramble into planes, and at the end of the day, this kid is likely to have cost authorities some significant six-figure sum.” Continue…
-
2012 Are you ready?
By Brian Bethune - Friday, October 30, 2009 at 2:00 PM - 66 Comments
It’s not just a movie for those who believe the world really will end then
Even though there are still three years to go, give or take a few months, before the end of civilization as we know it, Hollywood has decided to cash in now with 2012, director Roland Emmerich’s $200-million love letter to special effects. Perfectly reasonable plan. After all, millions worldwide believe that cataclysmic destruction—or, just maybe, total spiritual transformation—will commence as soon as the millennia-old Mayan calendar grinds to a halt on Dec. 21, 2012. In either case there won’t be any Ferrari dealers, cocaine suppliers or anyone else to lavish the film profits on. And, for true believers, there’s every motive to go for the gold now. That may have been the thinking of Richard Heene, when the father of six-year-old Falcon concocted the Balloon Boy stunt. “Heene believes the world is going to end in 2012,” according to his friend Richard Thomas. “Because of that he wanted to make money quickly, become rich enough to build a bunker or something underground, where he can be safe from the sun exploding.”Our friendly neighbourhood star going supernova may be the only destructive touch missing from 2012. The official trailer for the movie, which opens on Nov. 12, has earthquakes, tsunamis and super-volcanos. Whole cities slide into the ocean, and an aircraft carrier, tossed like a child’s toy, lands on the White House. Religious imagery is even harder hit: the dome of St. Peter’s rolls over the faithful; in Rio de Janeiro the giant statue of Christ the Redeemer crumples to the ground; and a lone Buddhist monk (an ecumenical touch, perhaps) is swept away as a wave crashes over his mountaintop shrine. What brings on this Götterdämmerung is barely hinted at in the trailer; according to early reports, it’s not much clearer in the film itself. Continue…
-
Why Balloon Boy's dad deserves a break
By The Editors - Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 10:00 AM - 7 Comments
Richard Heene deserves public opprobrium for his publicity stunt, not a jail term
Eccentric inventors were once the stuff of romantic comedy. Today they’re the object of derision, anger and possible six-year jail sentences. Does this say something about eccentrics? Or the rest of us?Richard Heene, father of six-year-old Falcon, the famous Balloon Boy, has been called many things over the past week, the most charitable of which may be “candidate for world’s worst dad.” Yet in many ways he seems the spitting image of Dick Van Dyke’s endearing and fatherly Caractacus Potts character from the 1968 musical Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. Continue…
-
High-priced stunt
By Jason Kirby - Friday, October 23, 2009 at 8:20 AM - 7 Comments
How much did the Balloon Boy drama cost the economy?
Where were you when the empty balloon floated over Colorado? Last week’s drama-turned-alleged-hoax was no presidential assassination or shuttle disaster. But the clichéd question is still getting asked a lot lately. Where were you when Michael Jackson died, or during his funeral, or when the jet plane miraculously landed on New York’s Hudson River? Nowadays, the answer is often the same: at the office, watching it happen instead of doing any work.Even before last week’s story about the boy in a runaway balloon was exposed as a possible scam, a question emerged. What happens to the economy when millions of workers simultaneously ignore their jobs and gather around the TV, surf for gossip about the weird family behind the stunt, or Twitter each twist and turn of the story? “The amount of work hours that are wasted by people playing around on computers is already mind-bogglingly astronomical,” says Robert Thompson, a professor of media studies at Syracuse University in New York. “When something like Balloon Boy or Michael Jackson’s death comes along, workers all waste their time on the same thing.” That collective procrastination can easily add up to vast sums at a time when the recession is already hammering companies. Continue…
-
That Timmy O'Toole Is a Real Hero!
By Jaime Weinman - Friday, October 16, 2009 at 10:49 AM - 8 Comments
There might have been some people who didn’t think of the Simpsons “Radio Bart” episode after yesterday’s Balloon Incident (or “Ballooncident”), but I certainly don’t know who those people might be.
I would like to add that I think of “Radio Bart” as the perfect Simpsons episode. I don’t know whether it’s my choice for the very best episode, though at various times it’s been my favourite. But I do know that it’s got everything the show had in its prime period: observational, realistic humour (Bart’s crappy birthday party and gifts), satirical humour (obviously), surreal stuff (“The Lincoln squirrel has been assassinated!”), movie takeoffs (the whole episode came about because Matt Groening wanted to do a homage/ripoff for Billy Wilder’s Ace in the Hole) family interaction, sentiment, celebrity-bashing, and the “happy God!” scene. Like most of the best episodes, it’s not just packed with jokes, it’s packed with every different kind of humour and storytelling you can do on television.














