Is skiing a risky activity? And if so, should we accept or avoid risk? In this postmodern world of skiing, there are social groups that encourage risk and others that promote controlled skiing.
The world of skiing, like all other domains, is characterized by opposing dualities: up and down, fast and slow, pleasure and displeasure, risk and safety. We could say that skiing is dynamic, and this changing dynamic generates a certain tension, especially in the last two aspects mentioned above.
It is possible that risk and safety are not opposites, but rather complementary, and that total safety or zero risk does not exist in skiing. As skiers, we not only have a basic need for safety and protection, but we also need to evolve, and this is achieved by facing challenges that present certain calculated risks. When we were beginners, we needed to develop our need for safety and feel protected, but it is impossible for us to evolve without assuming certain ‘risks‘ and skiing with total safety because, as we have mentioned, zero risk does not exist either in life or in skiing.
Perhaps an intelligent evolution would imply moving from one state of stability to another of calculated risk, in order to reach the next level of stability. Nevertheless, an important part of our postmodern society emphasizes safety, demanding that all activities be performed ‘safely‘ and avoiding ‘risks.’ Once we experience risk, we dramatize it, giving rise to a ‘dramatized‘ skiing society where safety is paramount.
We dramatize risk because we are incapable of assimilating environmental data exactly as it is, rather than how we think or interpret it to be, and we use unconscious strategies to reduce the consequences of excessively ‘intense‘ events. But shouldn’t we try to de-dramatize? Do we dramatize to make ourselves visible, to feel and confirm that we exist in the eyes of others? Are we simply experiencing skiing in an excessively emotional way?
Yet, at the same time, we aim to have a ‘civilized‘ skiing experience, wanting everything to be ‘controlled‘ and our skiing to always be ‘under control.’ Assuming unnecessary risks is perceived as being irresponsible and reckless, much like when we disregard rules of conduct.
Interestingly, the Parmenidean interpretation of skiing derives from the unalterability of the skiing reality, where nothing changes and we illusorily yearn for the stability and predictability of our skiing. Conversely, according to the Heraclitean perspective, skiing is a dynamic and unpredictable activity in which no skier ever goes down the same slope twice.
Now, there is another problem: is it possible that beneath our skin as rational postmodern skiers, we hide a ‘beast‘? It would seem that the risky skier, the extreme skier, or the skier of the extreme, possesses an ‘inner beast‘ that drives them to challenge nature, and who not only refuses to accept risks but actively chases them.
Could it be that, as we have said in a previous article, man is a wolf to man—or rather, a skier is a wolf to another skier? We all possess a certain degree of instinctive aggressiveness that we conceal, and for certain individuals, taking risks while skiing can serve as a means to release that repressed aggression. The environment induces a certain aggressiveness within us, as we strive to exert dominance over nature, which in turn we think makes us happy. In contrast, if we prioritize the authenticity of ethical virtuosity, we will never bother others, nor will we endanger our own skiing or that of others, while also striving toward our own self-improvement.
However, even though most people face challenges when skiing, some tend to take risks. In these cases, are they capable of managing them? Risks that are not properly managed are outside our control. In skiing, some accidents are due to temporary factors, chance, or complexity; while others may be the result of our own mistakes.
Driven by the need to feel challenged, properly managing risks is a priority. However, it is essential to determine which risks are appropriate. Appropriate risks are those that are predictable, anticipated, and intelligently managed, taking into account our skills and capabilities.
The issue is that we demand technological safety in everything; we aspire for technological risks to be as minimal as possible. We demand that ski lifts be safe, yet incoherently we assume the risk of descending off-piste terrain with the danger of avalanches that could cause an accident not only to ourselves, but also to others.
Certain social groups perceive postmodern existence as too predictable and ‘safe.’ In these social environments highly focused on safety and constant precaution, individuals must utilize their inclination toward adventure and overcoming obstacles to achieve self-satisfaction in a “Just do it” sense—and skiing is an activity that offers ample opportunities to satisfy these needs.
And simultaneously, is there any challenge that the subculture of risky skiing does not face in everyday life? Off-piste skiing, in its most extreme form, elucidates the distinctive characteristics of the postmodern skiing experience, possibly due to existential frustration or the absence of self-reflection on the meaning of one’s own life. However, what is considered ‘extreme’? We consider extreme that which is away from the center, the extravagant, and that which seeks excess.
