The sad demise of the five men exploring the Titanic wreckage in a submersible two miles below the Atlantic also brings out another interesting dimension of travel: there is reason to believe that each person onboard would have weighed the risk and done the same thing again…their adventure cannot be simply dismissed as reckless travel, but as a way of life and a frankly admirable way to leave this Earth.
The Risk Of Travel, The Risk Of Life, And How We Balance It
I smiled at the fact that the five crew members onboard the Titan submersible enjoyed gourmet coffee before their final voyage at Terre Café in St. John, Newfoundland. Two hours later, an implosion onboard killed them instantly (quite candidly, not a bad way to go…), but they had spent their final moments on earth exploring the depths of the Atlantic Ocean. What an adventure!
In my news story on the incident, reader Stuart left a comment that resonates with me:
“The fact is, especially given my rather crazed personality, is that time spent pushing extremes on rivers, canyons, oceans and mountains around the world is a centering and calming experience. It’s often the one thing that can get us all out of our heads. No, it’s not for everyone, but it is also not worthy of criticism as to a choice.
“Yes, I’ve watched friends die on rivers and oceans. No, I refuse to say, “they died doing what they loved.” But I will say that, in the end, they would do it again if they could. There is a subset of the world that refuses to acquiesce to the sofa and the desk every day. To us, that is dying.”
What I am wrestling with today is how we measure risk and why some of us are so much more willing to take risks than others.
I’ve taken a lot of risks in my life. In terms of travel, despite having to bribe my way out of two countries and being accused of being a spy in Cuba, it has worked out okay. I’ve walked the streets of Iraq alone after dark, been interrogated in Iran, visited Afghanistan and Ukraine during active wars, and even snuck into two nations. Sometimes, though, what people think is risky or dangerous turns out not to be so.
When it comes to business, friendship, and money, my risks have not always turned out so well…but that’s another story I will not get into today.
The point is that I seem pre-wired to risk, even as I ground my life in my Christian faith and realize that my greatest obligation right now is not to travel the world, but to care for my wife and children (ironically for me, I provide for them by traveling…). We are unique humans, but there is a (perhaps thankfully…) small subset among us who are willing to push the boundaries in ways that most would simply shake their heads at.
Yes, I’d go to Mogadishu or Port-au-Prince tomorrow (with a security detail). I’d volunteer to go on the next space mission. Yes, I’d even volunteer to go on a submersible to visit the Titanic wreckage, despite what just happened.
Some would question my priorities and specifically my commitment to my family over such “reckless” risk. Some would scoff at me, suggesting that genuine faith could not lead to such a lack of discernment.
I get it.
And as I write this, I am not excepting to convince anyone…or even clear about what I am trying to say. I’m just thinking through this idea of risk and invite you to help me think through it.
Yet, I look at what has transpired this week and while on the one hand I think the OceanGate should face tremendous liability via wrongful death lawsuits for the reckless disregard for safety displayed by its CEO, I also think that had safety measures been taken and the sub still blown up, it would have been a great way to go. Not because “you died doing what you love” but because I have found pushing boundaries represents one of the greatest joys of life.
CONCLUSION
People don’t understand why I visit some of the places I do. People will fault the five “explorers” who perished on the Titan submersible for taking a foolish risk in the first place. But I think we have to look deeper. For some, there is no comfort in a “comfortable” and risk-averse life. At the very least, we should herald those who refused to be content with the status quo for changing the world for the good (and yes, sometimes lament those who were discontent and changed things for the worse).
The billionaire on the submersible, the country counters like us, the skydivers, or the mountain climbers are not the real risk takers. Our stories sound great but we’re never in real danger.
The risk takers are the ones who cram on to boats and traverse the seas hoping to haphazardly make it to a land where they can make a better life. The families that walk across the Darien Gap fighting disease, nature, and criminals, only to have to walk 3,000 more km to sit and wait, and wait, and wait, and wait some more, only hoping to be safe, or full, or fulfilled one day.
Those people set out knowing they may actually die. Not theoretically, but very possibly. They have travel adventures we’ll never understand. I’m sorry the 5 Titanic tourists loss their lives, but hundreds of travelers die every day, and their circumstances are far more tragic.
Well said, Jerry and Matthew.
I’d add that risk-taking is highly subjective. For some, it is using a telephone and for others it’s going to space, with everything in between. Life is an exercise in choices and risks – Life is risk. I’d gently counsel not to assign virtue to either at the expense of the other – bravery, be it small or large, is inherently virtuos and uniform.
Excellent point, Jerry. A refreshing perspective.
Just heard Obama say the same thing Jerry. 😉
Merely coincidence, I swear. The only thing I’ve ever stolen from 44 is the tan suit. And considering the heat wave we’re having here in Texas… It’s a lifesaver!
Who cares about what Obama said!!~!keep politics out of travel..please
@Jerry. Wanted to respond to this directly. All of your points are excellent and well intentioned. And you are right, nothing comes close to the difficulty of travel in comparison, even what I have experienced spending nearly 30 years in running rivers in some of the most inhospitable places. Many that were considered on the verge of impossible. Regardless, it is a bit of apples and oranges. One is a forced adventure for survival that is not by choice. The other is a chosen adventure to push ones limits beyond comfort. In many ways so that we can appreciate exactly the scenario you describe. This is why many of my friends that I have spent my life with in places that truly tested our limits are often the most empathetic to the struggles of those who are forced to survive. We have all the best gear, water purifiers, jet boils, and everything imaginable.
Yet, we do feel an essence of what you describe. Enough to respect it and know we never want to feel that struggle as a “daily bread.” In many ways it is an almost primal urge. To go back to basics. To see what little you actually need. And to appreciate better what you do have. You also learn to rely on others, trust others, and that your “brothers and sisters” will do anything for you if needed. As I said, it’s all about primal instincts. Something that so many in the world have lost in the Instagram world of packaged experiences and “rides.” Much like what you are all witnessing with the Titan.
Titan is far from anything I or my friends around the world do. We loathe motorized anything, we despise cushioned soft adventure. The Titan was far from “adventure” other than signing a waiver and hoping for the best. It was a gut check for sure, but it required no skill or any training. Nor did it capture the real spirit of what pushing your limits to come to terms with life (and that thin line) is all about.
As to the Titan, it’s a shame. But I am very familiar with the cries and screams on all sides as to the why, how, what if, and the idiots deserve it scenario. Friends have died on rivers, and when they do at first there is an outpouring of how sad it is. Then come the questions, everyone who wasn’t there laying judgement. Why were they doing this? They risked the lives of the community to save them! Those Fools deserve it! People with too much time! They should have done this or that. It’s unsafe…they need to go out and get real lives!
This is why I am not in the least bit shocked at all the news outlets and responses from people across the world. I’ve lived it before. Even though this was far from what I would call an approach to a trained and properly executed adventure. It’s more like a really expensive but risky Four Seasons Private Jet tour. Still, the responses are surprisingly the same as when something goes wrong with one of our epics. The difference being we are trained, we know the risks, we accept them, and we are not counting on a machine to get us there. In fact, we are as low impact as anyone can be.
My greatest fear is that this stokes up again the same global sentiments of banning risk travel that we saw after “Into Thin Air” came out. Even though a whitewater kayaker, and not a mountaineer, we still had fallout where suddenly rivers were banned in places around the world and we were forced to poach them. I imagine the same will come as people try to associate this guided trip as being even remotely in comparison.
I could go on, sorry, tl,dr, already
I couldn’t agree with you more. Well said!
Jerry,
Thank you. I couldn’t have said it better.
Frank
Were is the pictures
The submersible an experimental vehicle so there’s certainly a risk. I put Matthew’s risk taking as somewhat higher than my comfort level but enjoy reading about places that I deem too dangerous for me. I still wear masks.
I disagree about sudden death. I would prefer to have some prior notice of death. A few minutes at least. A few months is better.
I did not have a will until about 4 years ago. That was risky and foolish.
Risk is subjective. Once you understand a risk and take measures to mitigate it, even a previously risky activity can be made relatively safe.
The danger lies with those who fail to properly understand the risks they are taking, or worse, provide an inaccurate set of data to those evaluating the risk for themselves. These people wind up making the wrong decisions for the wrong reasons.
Finally, risk is not absolute. You can do something 99 times and survive, yet the first timer may pull the short straw. Individual experiences in isolation neither prove nor disprove risk.
Excellent points.
“Once you understand a risk and take measures to mitigate it, even a previously risky activity can be made relatively safe.”
True. I have found that the proper weighing of risks, comfort with saying no, and putting aside pride can, at times, save our lives. I know it has for me.
With that, I will also say that in the case of Mother Nature, she can still be forgiving when we make mistakes. Sometimes she offers us a pass.
Other times, often when we least expect it, she decides differently. Sadly, some of the worst accidents I have witnessed on rivers were in places that we least expected it. When, perhaps, the “victim” of Mother Nature was a harsh message, “Don’t underestimate me.”
Maybe a parasitic infection makes some people less risk averse:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31980266/
An animal hit by toxoplasma gondii infections has an increased likelihood of being more aggressive and adventurous than an animal not hit by such parasite.
As for comments about mitigating risk by using security details in towns like Mogadishu or Port Au Prince, my view is that is not mitigation as much as transference. When you choose to voluntarily engage in a risky activity with a security team, you are not just putting yourself at risk but also your security team.
I lived and worked in Somalia and due to my position at the time, I had to have a security team for when I wanted to go outside the green zone. I never did that unless I absolutely had to, because I could never live with myself if something happened to one of them while they were protecting me while I wanted to go to the beach or whatever else. Even those who go out soft-side without security teams are putting people at risk, because the rescue missions launched to recover them after kidnappings put security forces at risk, and the ransoms paid to release them usually go towards funding more terrorism.
Maybe my views are skewed on this issue because I’ve lost too many friends who either made poor choices in risky situations, or who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. But I will do everything in my power to ensure that any friend of mine (and you know I’ve had this chat with you offline as well Matthew!) understands these risks to themselves and others before they travel to somewhere like Somalia, Yemen, Libya, etc..
According to what I heard from the Netherlands-residing sister of the Pakistani businessman who was on this submersible’s visit to the Titanic along with his son, the son was terrified of going but went along with the idea of going as a Father’s Day thing for his father who was reportedly obsessed with all things Titanic.
We all have to go someday, and sad as it is when someone goes too early and suddenly, going instantly may be far more merciful than suffering a miserable and miserably protracted end.
I would never have my son with me if I decided to take this risk. If I die, I want to have my son to continue taking care of my family. Big corporations do not allow their entire leadership team travel together on the same plane. The president and vice president of a country do not travel on the same plane. The guy bringing his son together was more stupid than his decision to go himself.
I’m all for taking risks in traveling – those are the most memorable experiences that make it worth it. I’ve had to bribe police, flee from riots, angry mobs, and wild animals, but this particular story would set off loud alarm bells in my head that I could not ignore. When you hear about all the sketchy things about this company – particularly the fact that they bolt the hatch from the outside and used unrated parts and designs, I wonder why anyone would trust them with their lives. Risk in travel is like risk in anything in life. You have to consider the likelihood of something going wrong and the consequences. I have plenty more adventures I want to do, and a watery grave isn’t among them.
“I’ve had to bribe police” – was that the time you were attempting to leave Thailand with a 6 year old boy?
Naw it was in North Macedonia, and don’t deflect. We all know you and UA-NYC are part of the same pedophile ring, if not the same guy.
Hey you’re the one that said you bribed police to look the other way for human trafficking
Hey tiny-handed incel – you zero reason for existing. Do us all a favor.
I’ll just record this as the day Matthew let a death threat stand in the comments because it came from a lefty. Shameful.
How is engaging in extremely risky behavior any different than suicide? These people boarded a pod built by a hobbiest, made out of substandard materials, steered with a Logitech video game controller, and went 11,000 feet deeper than a navy sub can go. And they left behind family that will be devastated. Because, why? They were bored?
If only it had been you instead of them.
Too bad it was Ashley Babbitt and not you at the Jan 6 insurrection (you probably weren’t man enough to be on the front lines…she had bigger balls than you).
LOL at known pedophile leftist talking about masculinity.
It’s good that it wasn’t you though, who would take care of your real doll?
Serious question – Are you and UA-NYC the same guy?
No, but like him I breathe with my mouth closed
Liar
Intent. The people who went on this submersible ride took a risk that involves a chance of dying, but taking a risk with a chance of death is far different than having suicidal intent.
Having worked with people who are near death and elderly, the biggest reject is not spending more time with loved ones. I love travel but some of my most fulfilling moments are just enjoying someone else’s company, maybe just sitting still and enjoying the view is a wonderful thing.
I think risks can be calculated. I manage my risks very carefully trying to minimize risk as much as possible. When taking a flight, I prefer to fly Singapore Airlines vs Aeroflot. I prefer to take Uber Black vs regular Uber. I only get into boats that are from reputable companies, I watch closely the limit of passengers and look where the life jackets are. I prefer to rent larger cars than small ones. I stay at nicer hotels in nicer locations vs small sh..y holes in bad areas. I would never skydive, I hate helicopters, roller coasters. Now, back to the submersible, I think the biggest problem was not them go that deep to see the Titanic but to trust their lives to a not very reputable company that cut corners and broke rules to build a rudimentary product that looked like built at my backyard using materials from Home Depot. That was way too much risk in my opinion.
Doesn’t all of Brazil qualify as a bad area?
Only for stupid people like you.
Stuart and I don’t have to take big risks to have big fun.
I explained to my kids everything is risk reward. And if you make a decision it isn’t the wrong one if it doesn’t come off. It was still the right one in the circumstances but it didn’t come off.
The 19 yr old I doubt did any risk assessment. At that age you don’t do that. You either go thinking it is fun or because your dad is going.
Also a lot of people has a strange way of looking at things especially when younger. I’ve watched a number of mountain climbing documentaries and although I’ve skied (poorly) a lot in my past I’m not good with heights but the number of 20 somethings that have died while climbing is pretty high considering the numbers of climbers. Often they use no safety ropes and just free climb.
Its their lives so whatever and I can’t say I have any real sympathy for anyone since no one forced them to go although I think clearly the company was taking unnecessary risks to make a buck.
There’s calculated risk taking and then there’s just plain stupid risk taking. I feel like this was the latter. Was this submersible even tested without humans on board first? Surely it could have been remote piloted down to the bottom to see if it could withstand the pressure first.
Sorry, I don’t agree with the ‘risk’ arguments. Like taking a rocket ship to the moon, this ‘expedition’ was all about ego, and nothing to do with risk. These little boys who somehow ended up with a lot of money are constantly looking for ways to show it off by partaking in ‘risky’ activity. There was absolutely nothing to be gained by sitting in a man made vessel that is dropped to the bottom of the ocean so you can look out a 18″ window and observe what is left of a 100+ year old shipwreck except that you can brag about it. How did this excursion benefit oceanography? Or anyone except the company that sold it?
It’s all about these people’s ego, and to what lengths they need to (and are able) to feed it.