UKC

Having just finished reading "The Climb" by Anatoli Boukreev and G.Weston Walt I was amazed by the controversy that seems to surround that fateful May 10th on everest in 1996.
I am about to read "into thin air" by John Krakauer to try to understand his side of things, although from what Anatoli and co-author raise in Anatoli's personal account of the tragedy it would appear that Krakauer has made a bundle of conficting statements the are not fully justified.

If you have read "into thin air" you MUST read "the climb" also. Anatoli Boukreev's book, although not, I am told, written in the same gripping style as Krakauers', is a really interesting account that keep you turning the pages. The guy was a legendary high altitude climber and his book raises issues that need to be heard.

I'd be interested to hear what other people think about this.

cheers,

Tim.

In reply to Tim:
"gripping style as Krakauers'"
I haven't read Thin Air but I did buy another book of his. I actually went as far as taking it back to Waterstones and asking for my money back because the book was so bad.
They gave me a refund without any bother.

I presume that his other books are a tad better then...

In reply to AlexC: Into Thin Air rocks! Even my brother who has never set foot on rock is well into it. I would be interested to read some of the other books on the Everest disaster though.

Tis my opinion thought that once above 8000m it is very much every man for himself owing to the extreme nature of the environment on which you are expected to survive.

In reply to Tim: Read ITA before TC. TC was written to defend himself against aspersions implied in the ITA book. Bouokreev's climbing credentials are not disputed and of the highest calibre. My sympathies are with Boukreev. Good luck out there.

In reply to AlexC: which one? I read one of his about lots of different climbs that me dad gave to me a Xmas, wasn't too bad. Suppose it depends on what you want?

cheers,

tim

In reply to AlexC:

was it about some guy getting lost in the woods and dying?

that book took me to new levels of boredom. i kept on thinking it cant be this bad!!

i read into thin air and thought that it was ok, the incident makes the book, not the author.

ive also recently bought boukreevs book, but am yet to read it as im about to start beckoning silence.

In reply to Jon Dittman:


I find it pretty extreme down here. Can I be ruthless at sea level.

In reply to Tim:

i've only recently read into thin air (i know its been out for ages), which i thought was an excellently written book, i'd definetly be interested in reading the climb now cause from the first book krakauer definetly seems to put a lot of the blame on boukreev. maybe after reading both books i'll get a better understanding of what really happened on that day

In reply to stonemaster:

>My sympathies are with Boukreev. Good luck out there.

Boukreev is dead

Brashears has a chapter on 1996 in one of his books (He was the guy filming the IMAX who took beck weathers down). He reckoned Boukreev made a fantastic effort rescuing people however, should have being using supplementary oxygen (cause he was a guide and had already climbed everest twice without oxygen) and shouldn't have gone down to south col without any of his clients.

In reply to Tim:

Having read several books with different perspectives on this incident I'm left with the impression that maybe Boukreev was premature in descending too early but that he more than made up for this by literally superhuman efforts in single handed rescues in blizzards during the night.
He may have been one of a handful of climbers capable of this feat having climbed Everest without oxygen the previous day.

In reply to Li'l Ze:


Of course you can - well Sloper seems to be taking the lead in that department

In reply to Anonymous:


We can agree on that. Perhaps I have not quite put it clearly that I feel Boukreev's point of view is the one I would favour.

Boukreev in his defence had already said that since he did not climb with oxygen, he HAD to go down to recover. His view of climbing with oxygen is that in the event that he ran out of oxygen the difference would be far to great for his physiology to cope with. So, Breashears and Krakauer may criticise all they like AFTER the event but Boukreev was the one who was there at the time and it is a matter of record what he did in terms of rescue.

In reply to alaneatwork:

I've read both books and most of Boukreev's heroics occurred whilst Krakaur was out for the count and unable to assist with anything. Boukreev maintained that it was the plan for him to desend to the South Col to act as backup and rescue, which in the event he did. No doubt things appear very clear with hind sight, sitting in warm offices with a full helping of O2, but I see little to criticise Boukreev. It's worth pointing out that none of his clients died that day, though the expedition leader did.

In reply to Anonymous: What seems to made as claer as possible in Boukreevs book is that Anatoli would go down ahead of the clients because he knew they would run out of oxygen. It a case was balancing the risk of leaving them to start down alone in order to try to get more oxygen back up to them, or staying with them and risking the worst case scenario of them all failing when their oxygen ran out. Charlott Fox on the xped had heard from Scott Fischer b4 the climb (allegedly) that Boukreevs early descent was a contigency plan - a case that Krakauer does nt acknowledge when later challenged on the issue.

All I can see is read "The Climb" and decide for yourself.

Cheers
Tim

In reply to Tim:

I've read ITA, TC, plus Leni Gammelgard and Matt Dickinson's books.

My sympathies lie with Boukreev. Sadly, Fischer isn't here to confirm Boukreev's version of events that his early descent was agreed by him, although other members of the team have supported this view.

No-one else (I'll repeat that, NO-ONE, even those who _had_ used oxygen) was in any state to stage a rescue that night. Boukreev was able to make two long searches, alone, in a raging storm, resulting in the rescue of (I think) three people. He was also fit enough the next day to go up in the continuing storm and try to help Fischer.

Not for nothing was Boukreev given an award for his efforts by the American Alpine Club.

http://classic.mountainzone.com/news/heroes.html

So, if you've read Into Thin Air, _do_ read The Climb. Not as exciting, but only fair to get both sides of the story.

In reply to Tim:

So no-one else thinks that Into Thin Air was an appallingly-written book consisting largely of libellous racist fiction, then?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: ...no, go one John. Don't hold back. Tell us what you really think!


In what way racist?

I read it a long time ago, can't remember thinking that much about it either way. I've been trying to read the latest Simpson book recently, and to be honest I think I'm just bored with books on climbing overall. It just makes the point what incredibly stupid way to spend your spare time climbing is. Perhaps its just in comparison to the other stuff I'm reading currently.

I have two 'reading for pleasure' books on the go at the moment (as opposed to reading for self of professional improvement) and that's the Simpson one and a James Ellroy, and I'm afraid at the mo' it Ellroy everytime. Sorry Joe.

In reply to TobyA:


Well, I'm guessing that it's because "Boukreev was a god-damned Russky". Or some such allusion.

Whereas of course, Boukreev considered himself Ukranian.

In reply to captain paranoia: Thought he was a Kazakh from Kazakhstan....

In reply to stonemaster:

damn! I wasn't sure about the Ukranian bit, but I did remember he was adamant he wasn't Russian...

In reply to AlexC:

I've read "Into Thin Air" and thought it was excellent, followed it with "Into The Wild" which I packed in about 2/3 of the way through before dieing of boredom - coincidentally, I'm just finishing Into Thin Air for the second time, and still think it very good.

In reply to TobyA:

Agree with you. The latest Joe Simpson is repetitive. He just had to fulfill a publishing contract without real inspiration.

In reply to Tim:

I also think Krakauer was wrong about Boukreev. At the end of the day, none of the clients on Scott Fischer's expedition died. What more can you say?

In reply to DaveH:

Having read both accounts, I would tend to put more creedance on Boukreevs version of events. Unfortunately, as most of the major players are now dead, many questions will remain unanswered; particularly with reference to Scott Fischers instructions to Boukreev and also why Rob Hall was still ascending the mountain with clients well beyond his stated turnaround time.

In reply to captain paranoia:

Boukreev started his mountaineering in the Urals, that's about as Russian as you can get.

He moved to Kazakhstan later, to be nearer the really big mountains.

What an amazing climber he was. Apart from the well-publicised 8000ers, he climbed over thirty 7000ers, many of them in record times.

In reply to all:

I thought "Into Thin Air" was a good read as is Joe Simpson's latest book. You can not accuse either of being badly written though you may disagree with some of the sentiment.

As for Krakauer I don't remember anything racist in there as there's nothing I like worse than a racist....

In reply to DougG:


What did he ever do at Stanage?

In reply to Tim: Just finished The Climb - personally, I don't think Krakauer is qualified to judge what was best. The point is that Anatoli did what had been agreed with Fisher before hand. Whether that was the right decision is neither here nor their given that no Mountain Madness clients died.

Anatoli sounds like a general mountain god. I wouldn't want to criticise him in a hurry!

In reply to francoise: I thought The Beckoning Silence was better than either Dark Shadows Falling or Storms of Silence. Pretty much on a par with This Game of Ghosts in fact, although he doesn't fall off anything. I particularly enjoyed his description of meeting Anderl Heckmair.

In reply to Martin W: I read Touching the Void which I thought was brilliant. I then read The Beckoning Silence and was not impressed.

As an author I don't rate Joe Simpson any more, but he did have an amazing story to tell.