The quality and purpose of trip reports
- Thread starter Kenilworth
- Start date
I particularly enjoyed the Dow Cave trip report recently posted and would much rather read that than Kenilworth's worthless 'literary' trolling. Trip reports are entertaining, informative and take me to places I used to go and to places I'll never go. Please keep 'em coming and ignore Kenilworth's requirements for works of art etc.
Speleofish
Active member
What's wrong with trip reports? The best can be inspiring, informative, occasionally blood-curdling. Even the more mundane involve someone sharing their experiences and are the online equivalent of talking caving over a beer. Criticism seems churlish.
ZombieCake
Well-known member
Kenilworth - the standard trip quote template you quote is remarkably accurate for a large number of trips. What would be great is examples of trip reports that fulfil the other thoughts you have on the subject.
Balmerfish
Member
Kenilworth - Thank you for you illuminating assessment of trip reports. Your title indicates you wish to discuss the purpose and quality of trip reports...i am curious as to what your expected outcome here. The manner in which you explore this subject, does not engender a positive response.
I posted my first ever trip report the other week. It could be said I used your guide to how to write a trip report, as stated " I woke up at such and such a time and met so and so at a place. The weather was thus." - But isnt it the bit between the line we enjoy reading.
I very much enjoy, reading trip reports - they give me a sneak peak.
I posted my first ever trip report the other week. It could be said I used your guide to how to write a trip report, as stated " I woke up at such and such a time and met so and so at a place. The weather was thus." - But isnt it the bit between the line we enjoy reading.
I very much enjoy, reading trip reports - they give me a sneak peak.
Kenilworth
New member
Balmerfish said:
I read your trip report carefully, and especially appreciated the amount of work involved in preparing it. As you say, it fits pretty much exactly into the format that I described, as do most caving trip reports. Part of the problem I think, is that this has been the case for so long that we don't expect anything more of ourselves when preparing to write. Often the bits between the lines are just as ordinary as the framework that holds them.
Your trip report is dominated by your feelings. This is appropriate, since your experience was probably dominated by those feelings. However, you had opportunities to say more. For example you describe your awe at the Gaping Gill waterfall, but you say nothing about the feature that engendered those emotions. Good writing should create a shared experience, or a shared understanding. Informing the audience of your emotions does not accomplish this. You need to make them feel it too. Your efforts are very commendable and a perfect illustration of the sort of inspiration and initiative that could be turned to extraordinarily good use. Please keep writing
As for what I expected of this thread... nothing really. I wasn't looking for discussion here, only to put the awareness in the head of those who write about caves and caving that they have much potential to improve. I do not know how to say what I mean and engender a positive response at the same time. So I've only tried to say what I mean as clearly as possible, with no particular efforts at diplomacy.
I have not read the other responses to this thread, I've started with yours. No doubt I'll find that people have complained about what I've said. I just want to be a better writer and to read something better out of cavers. So get to it cavers!
Balmerfish
Member
Thank you for you considered response -
I will always argue that documenting a time is better than not. The reader of a trip report is always afforded the opportunity to not read them.
Let me put it this way - if i had read your analysis of trip reports 10 mins before posting my report, it would have made me feel uncomfortable posting it - is that what you really want? People post trip reports, the reader can decide if it relevant to them within a few lines.
I appreciate your honest comments.
Adele
I will always argue that documenting a time is better than not. The reader of a trip report is always afforded the opportunity to not read them.
Let me put it this way - if i had read your analysis of trip reports 10 mins before posting my report, it would have made me feel uncomfortable posting it - is that what you really want? People post trip reports, the reader can decide if it relevant to them within a few lines.
I appreciate your honest comments.
Adele
Kenilworth
New member
In response to the rest of the pack:
Nothing is wrong with writing trip reports, and I will always stop to read every one I come across. The purpose of my post is to remind writers that they could be doing much more. If they don't want to, that's perfectly ok. But this is a selfish thing (listening OG). I want them to do better because reading good writing is my favorite thing. Reading good writing about an especially important topic to me is even better.
I think some of you have missed the point. Reports need not be artistic or scientific to have value, but they need to know what they are. Then they can be crafted with a goal in mind. The majority could be improved with only a little awareness and extra effort from the author. That would be a good thing.
Mark, Madness, Badlad, and probably others have made an important observation that I flew right past in the original post. Entertainment. Trip reports can be extremely humorous and very entertaining, and this is valuable. It also takes a certain amount of talent that some do not have.
Alex - Sorry sir, I'm not stating that you aren't tough, daring, and athletic, simply that caving requires none of those things. I don't know what sort of references you're after, but my own experience is evidence of this. I have done many cave trips that the other cavers have defined as too difficult. I am definitely not tough or daring. This reminds me of the most impressive underground feat I have witnessed. I was on a survey trip with a man around sixty who had one crippled arm. It only dangled around and got in the way, good for absolutely nothing. We crawled for twelve hours, often on the belly through wet cobbles and soft mud. It was a very strenuous trip, and this man never fell behind or asked for help or remarked on the difficulty of the cave. I am positive that he does not think of himself as an athlete.
Poor grammar. I don't like it. However, it is usually no obstacle to communication, and some of the most informative and practically useful cave descriptions I have read were horribly written.
Nothing is wrong with writing trip reports, and I will always stop to read every one I come across. The purpose of my post is to remind writers that they could be doing much more. If they don't want to, that's perfectly ok. But this is a selfish thing (listening OG). I want them to do better because reading good writing is my favorite thing. Reading good writing about an especially important topic to me is even better.
I think some of you have missed the point. Reports need not be artistic or scientific to have value, but they need to know what they are. Then they can be crafted with a goal in mind. The majority could be improved with only a little awareness and extra effort from the author. That would be a good thing.
Mark, Madness, Badlad, and probably others have made an important observation that I flew right past in the original post. Entertainment. Trip reports can be extremely humorous and very entertaining, and this is valuable. It also takes a certain amount of talent that some do not have.
Alex - Sorry sir, I'm not stating that you aren't tough, daring, and athletic, simply that caving requires none of those things. I don't know what sort of references you're after, but my own experience is evidence of this. I have done many cave trips that the other cavers have defined as too difficult. I am definitely not tough or daring. This reminds me of the most impressive underground feat I have witnessed. I was on a survey trip with a man around sixty who had one crippled arm. It only dangled around and got in the way, good for absolutely nothing. We crawled for twelve hours, often on the belly through wet cobbles and soft mud. It was a very strenuous trip, and this man never fell behind or asked for help or remarked on the difficulty of the cave. I am positive that he does not think of himself as an athlete.
Poor grammar. I don't like it. However, it is usually no obstacle to communication, and some of the most informative and practically useful cave descriptions I have read were horribly written.
ZombieCake
Well-known member
Bored now. Fed up with this bollocks. Please stop posting.
Kenilworth
New member
Balmerfish said:
No. However, we need to be able to take some criticism and use it wisely, whether that means ignoring it, fighting it, or applying it. There might be some feelings involved. That's ok.
ZombieCake
Well-known member
Balmerfish
Member
Kenilworth said:
Thank you for your response - noted.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
cavemanmike
Well-known member
Don't respond to this thread.
It only encourages a negative response to
Someone who relishes this kind of environment
It only encourages a negative response to
Someone who relishes this kind of environment
Kenilworth
New member
Emulate good writing? I wish. I've been scribbling long enough to come to terms with the fact that I lack both the technical skill or artistic instinct to ever reach linguistic proficiency. But I don't mind trying and failing for the rest of my life. To be honest, I struggle hugely to use proper English and find my own distaste for poor grammar somewhat embarrassing. With few exceptions, I can't see why language ought not be descriptive.
Kenilworth
New member
[quote author=Badlad]
Who will be the new Casteret?
[/quote]
Though I don?t think you meant it to be taken so specifically, your question has been stuck in my brain since the night I first read it. I?m not sure there can ever be another Casteret. The circumstances that birthed his work no longer exist. At least it is easy to say who ?the next Casteret? cannot be. He cannot be a member of the American or British caving communities. The lack of prior exploration and advanced equipment meant that Casteret, a man of great initiative, ability, and boldness, was presented with abundant opportunities for discovery. These conditions might be partly duplicated if passionate individuals undertook independent exploration of isolated and neglected karst regions. I believe this is probably happening in some instances in the US. The difference is that, so far, few of these explorers are asking enough questions, and even fewer are writing about or publishing details of their exploration. There are some rough examples though.
In the 1960s, Gary Jessey began exploring the caves near his home in southeastern Kentucky. He not only explored them but photographed them, described them, and sketched them. Jessey was not a caver, and when his work began he knew nothing of the ?caving community? or of ?proper? caving gear or surveying technique. He was also unaware that he was creating the seminal work dealing with his region?s caves. He was eventually contacted by a group of cavers, who helped him create some maps of higher quality, and who were of course eager to be shown his data. They went on to use his work as the basis for many new discoveries. In 1973 Jessey published ?Letcher County?s Pine Mountain Caves?. To date it is the most significant work dealing with caves in Letcher County, and its unaffected tone is quite refreshing.
In 2005, I began exploring the caves near my home. This was partly a retracing of steps, as my father and grandfather had hunted for caves here since the 1950s. I had been taken to some of these caves as a child, but not until I was grown did my interest in caves override my fear of them. Along with my brother, I not only walked hundreds of miles searching for new caves, but explored, photographed, described, and sketched them. Additionally I wrote daily about our activity. I was not a caver, and when my exploration began I knew nothing of the ?caving community? or of ?proper? caving gear or surveying technique. Eventually, in an effort to learn how to make accurate maps, I learned that cave surveying was a well-established thing, and that cavers existed. I joined the NSS and read everything I could about caves and caving. In 2015 my own book was published by NSS. It is the only comprehensive or thorough work dealing with caves in my county, but its tone and content were heavily influenced by my exposure to guidebooks and papers written by cavers. Hence, much interesting or entertaining material that I foolishly considered ?unprofessional? was regrettably omitted.
The major differences between these somewhat organic works and those of Casteret are obvious. We were not entirely independent of Caving. Casteret was. The body of knowledge that Casteret started with was much smaller, allowing his raw observations to be the source of fascinating speculation and (sometimes inaccurate) theorization. A similar treatment today, in our countries, would only be seen as ignorance, laziness, a failure to do research. Also his work was overwhelmingly physical. With modern equipment cheaply available, there is no reason to duplicate the methods of exploration that he used. To do so would be seen as reckless, foolish. And since there is no modern equivalent to diving icy sumps with candles in a shower cap, or hand-over-hand rope ascents, things which are a big part of what make his books compelling and memorable to readers, I do not know if a modern "cave adventure" book is possible.
It is awesome though, to imagine that somewhere in the world is a person who has undertaken completely independent original study of caves. I hope that they exist, and that I one day get to read their work.
Who will be the new Casteret?
[/quote]
Though I don?t think you meant it to be taken so specifically, your question has been stuck in my brain since the night I first read it. I?m not sure there can ever be another Casteret. The circumstances that birthed his work no longer exist. At least it is easy to say who ?the next Casteret? cannot be. He cannot be a member of the American or British caving communities. The lack of prior exploration and advanced equipment meant that Casteret, a man of great initiative, ability, and boldness, was presented with abundant opportunities for discovery. These conditions might be partly duplicated if passionate individuals undertook independent exploration of isolated and neglected karst regions. I believe this is probably happening in some instances in the US. The difference is that, so far, few of these explorers are asking enough questions, and even fewer are writing about or publishing details of their exploration. There are some rough examples though.
In the 1960s, Gary Jessey began exploring the caves near his home in southeastern Kentucky. He not only explored them but photographed them, described them, and sketched them. Jessey was not a caver, and when his work began he knew nothing of the ?caving community? or of ?proper? caving gear or surveying technique. He was also unaware that he was creating the seminal work dealing with his region?s caves. He was eventually contacted by a group of cavers, who helped him create some maps of higher quality, and who were of course eager to be shown his data. They went on to use his work as the basis for many new discoveries. In 1973 Jessey published ?Letcher County?s Pine Mountain Caves?. To date it is the most significant work dealing with caves in Letcher County, and its unaffected tone is quite refreshing.
In 2005, I began exploring the caves near my home. This was partly a retracing of steps, as my father and grandfather had hunted for caves here since the 1950s. I had been taken to some of these caves as a child, but not until I was grown did my interest in caves override my fear of them. Along with my brother, I not only walked hundreds of miles searching for new caves, but explored, photographed, described, and sketched them. Additionally I wrote daily about our activity. I was not a caver, and when my exploration began I knew nothing of the ?caving community? or of ?proper? caving gear or surveying technique. Eventually, in an effort to learn how to make accurate maps, I learned that cave surveying was a well-established thing, and that cavers existed. I joined the NSS and read everything I could about caves and caving. In 2015 my own book was published by NSS. It is the only comprehensive or thorough work dealing with caves in my county, but its tone and content were heavily influenced by my exposure to guidebooks and papers written by cavers. Hence, much interesting or entertaining material that I foolishly considered ?unprofessional? was regrettably omitted.
The major differences between these somewhat organic works and those of Casteret are obvious. We were not entirely independent of Caving. Casteret was. The body of knowledge that Casteret started with was much smaller, allowing his raw observations to be the source of fascinating speculation and (sometimes inaccurate) theorization. A similar treatment today, in our countries, would only be seen as ignorance, laziness, a failure to do research. Also his work was overwhelmingly physical. With modern equipment cheaply available, there is no reason to duplicate the methods of exploration that he used. To do so would be seen as reckless, foolish. And since there is no modern equivalent to diving icy sumps with candles in a shower cap, or hand-over-hand rope ascents, things which are a big part of what make his books compelling and memorable to readers, I do not know if a modern "cave adventure" book is possible.
It is awesome though, to imagine that somewhere in the world is a person who has undertaken completely independent original study of caves. I hope that they exist, and that I one day get to read their work.
Kenilworth
New member
NewStuff said:
I care very much about trip reports. I spent more than a year reviewing every US grotto publication for a monthly NSS News column, have read the entire canons of The West Virginia Caver, TAG-net, and Pholeos, have read every trip report posted on the NSS forum and many posted on this forum. Having read tens of thousands of trip reports, I feel like I'm in a qualified position to recognize patterns and make some observations. I don't think I've said anything emotive or provocative.