In reply to Willy:
Hi Willy,
I completely agree with you and, in that regard, I would never encourage somebody to solo if they did not want to do so. In fact, even for those people who have told me they enjoy soloing, I have never encouraged them, nor discouraged them. Both "State of Nakedness" and "Low Winter Sun" are personal accounts of specific events in my life. They do not make any recommendations and furthermore, have failure at their core.
The post above, from tobykeep, is also 100 per cent accurate. But then so is what Dan Goodwin said. Everything has to be taken in context. I suggested to UKC that for the summary at the top of "State of Nakedness", they should use the words, "unrestrained ambition". They ignored this and changed it to "a dangerous pastime". tobykeep is correct with what he says in that it was exactly "unrestrained ambition" that got me onto Crest Route in the first place. Raw ability and luck then got me to the top. The route was my third winter climb (roped or unroped) ever. If you read the final two paragraphs of that article, there's no "glorification" of that ascent or of soloing in general, just an honest depiction of the result and what followed.
Dan Goodwin talked about "calculated risk" and this is represented in the second article, "Low Winter Sun". The solo at the heart of that article may seem an extreme act by some but, for me, having learned from the events detailed in the first article (and a lot more thereafter), it was logical.
With the label of "a dangerous pastime", soloing is relegated to recklessness and a senseless pursuit. On the contrary, many soloists (those who specialise in it) will take a very cautious approach to their climbing - as Dan pointed out in his post. Sure, there may be a dangerous, formative period and there may be times when they nearly get caught out, but that occurs to many roped climbers too. That's the risk of climbing in general, not attributable specifically to soloing. We could examine many aspects of climbing, from high-altitude mountaineering to big wall routes, and this risk pattern is echoed throughout.
I found out a few days ago that "The Tyranny of Success", which UKC ran last December, generated many complaints directly to UKC for "glorifying" soloing. The very title I chose, borrowed from Mark Twight, is actually self-deprecating. The routes that I do recommend in that article assume that a rope is being used. I don't know if people felt that I was recommending all those routes to be soloed - I wasn't. In retrospect, this was maybe not made clear enough in the text of that article. The article was intended for those climbers who aspire to climb (not solo) Grade V, and about the importance of consolidation to achieve this. If read from that perspective, I think the article is useful.
Personally, I feel psychologically suited to soloing. Not all the time of course, but most of the time. While one needs to be physically fit and technically able, psychological strength is vitally important for soloing, at any level. Climbers have to be at ease with their surroundings, and with themselves, before they do it, which is why it's such a personal pursuit that often transcends the physical act of climbing itself. Nevertheless, a Grade I can kill a soloist just as routes at higher levels can, something which we've, sadly, seen occur in the past. Make no mistake however, a rope isn't necessarily going to stop an accident from happening either.
Regards,
Patrick
PS. I've just heard about the very tragic death of Guy Lacelle. If people ever wondered which climbers I have taken inspiration from, Guy Lacelle would top the list. His unassuming attitude masked his status as one of the world's finest soloists. My sincere condolences to his wife, family and friends.