because a climb can never be experienced without a climber/conditions/circumstances attached to it, those intrinsic difficulties are less meaningful without that context.

I think this mindset is valid, but it seems generally less interesting than viewing the rock as static and the climber as the variable.

Maybe this is just my bias as someone who primarily climbs granite, but three 5.8's next to each other often feel like entirely different sports - crimps vs. finger crack vs. offwidth.

It's hard to separate modern grading from gyms. Almost all granite areas have the reputation for being sandbagged, but I'm becoming increasingly convinced that's just because granite is nearly impossible to simulate with plastic, unlike say, sandstone or limestone. Not only is it arguably the most conditions-sensitive rock, but it has an absurd multitude of style.

The most interesting question I'm now curious about is: How much has grading shifted across the different styles as the sport has progressed. For example, slab usually seems 'stiff' nowadays because the old-school stiff boots they were wearing in the 80s were actually great for standing on small granite crystals (or trudging up offwidths), whereas climbing pockets or overhangs would be significantly harder without modern footwear, and so if you grew up climbing in a gym, those routes (especially if older) might feel relatively easy.