Rating: 
Summary: Brutally honest portrayal of a tragedy.
Review: Krakauer details not only the story of the tragic '96expedition, but the reasons for its failure. He is brutally honestwith his own emotions regarding everest; he shouldn't have been there. "Into Thin Air" tells a story where a select few have attempted to buy their way to the summit. Unfortunately, some paid with their lives. It is as if the reader is right there on Everest, a part of the expedition. Thankfully, we are not. The writing is superb. If you start reading it, be prepared to finish it in one sitting.
Rating:
Summary: An excellent read!
Review: One of the best books I've read in a long time. I read it in one sitting. The author does an excellent job of explaining the history of Everest, the industry of climbing Everest and the culture of the climbers and Sherpa's. He doesn't get over dramatic but delivers a clear and engaging accounting of the events that transpired. My guess is one of the best if not the best of just such a situation.
My only complaint is that he glosses over the controversey with Sandy Pittman.
Bottom line: Great book! I'm going to read it a second time.
Rating:
Summary: An Epic Story Well Told
Review: As an amateur climber, I found the book balanced andthoughtful. John is a great story teller and this is a greatstory. Even my wife (who is horrified I do this sport) loved it. John, thanks for being welling to share it.
Rating:
Summary: Simply a fantastic book. . .
Review: "Into Thin Air" is absolutely fantastic.Well-written and compelling, it's a book that I couldn't put down.I've already recommended the book as one of the best I've read in the last 5 years. As for those who criticize Krakauer -- I really don't understand it. Yes, he's getting media attention, but so what? In this book, there are no villains, no heroes -- only real people. Krakauer takes more blame for himself than he tosses toward other people. "Into Thin Air" has it all -- a compelling story with meticulous research, fascinating characters, and written with wondrous stlye. Nicholas Sparks, author of THE NOTEBOOK.
Rating:
Summary: Never climb?...never crow
Review: JK review of the events that transpired on last years everestexpedition are without a doubt some of the clearest recolections oftime spent above 8,000 meters. As a longtime climber and one of the few who has been to Camp IV, I will tell all who feel the need to question the actions of last years expidition. Above 8,000m nothing is rational, nothing makes sense, only one thing is running through your brain. "how do I get out of here?", if people feel the need to blame JK for not helping his fellow climbers then I suguest you take a moment to listen to some words that apply "Only the strong will survive"
Rating: 
Summary: Good Book. Facts, with little analysis
Review: If I were to tell you that this book needed more photos of teammembers, you'd dismiss this as trite. But it's not, for this reason:In _Into The Wild_, Krakauer gave more of an emphasis on seeking to determine WHY McCandless embarked upon an ill-fated adventure. That work was developed, personified, analyzed. _Into Thin Air_ only gives a few of K's. speculations on why this major x. up was permitted to happen. What he wishes not to provide in full analysis and judgement, he makes up for with linear chronology that may claim greater objectivity. Krakauer assumes responsibility for his mistakes. He states he didn't wait the 2-3 years to write this to develop "perspective": it had to be written now. As such, it's NOT Norm McLean's _Young Men and Fire_, a painstaking analysis of research that so well analyzed the '49 fire at Mann Gulch, MT.. _Thin Air_ is good, but WHY this was permitted to happen, however, I feel, was left mostly unanswered. Do we look forward to his readdress in the future?
Rating:
Summary: An account of man's grandiosity and abject depravity
Review: As a non-climber, I am still amazed that Into Thin Air was ableto keep me riveted for two days until, finally, I took a deep breathand finished the book. Like some other readers, I felt stunned by the account of these climbers whose grandiosity would allow them to step over the bodies of comrades in order to attain the summit. These bodies were left behind, out in the open, some for decades even. Five more climbers have died on Mt. Everest this season. The mountain is more crowded than ever with climbers, but also with dead bodies. Only the most grandiose of ambition and the most abject depravity would allow someone to look the other way, to step over the bodies, and proceed to the top. This is a sport, folks, not a war!!!!! I view Krakauer's book as an extremely important sociological document. Also, by the way, fascinating reading.
Rating:
Summary: Storm and Arrogance
Review: Jon Krakauer is unquestionably one of the finest writersinvolved in mountaineering literature. What makes his writing great isperhaps responsible for the only fault I can find in his retelling of this gripping tale. Krakauaer possesses no affect, no ego is discernable in his writing. He tells the story with the simple honesty of a child. The story unfolds unselfconsciously, and non judgmentally, and yet the reader finds his bile rising at the arrogance and stupidity of guides who claim to have "Big E wired" with a "yellow brick road" to the summit. Krakauer tells of these events and personalities without ever making a negative reference to any of the personalities involved. Krakauer's judgments are saved for himself. In that is the only weakness of the book. Krakauer is a highly skilled alpinist. He may have been one of the most skilled of the amateur climbers on the mountain during those faithful days. However, due to the manner in which Rob Hall treated clients Krakauer and the remainder of the clients are reduced to mindless drones completely dependent on the guides, Sherpas, and fixed ropes to complete the climb. Krakauer blames himself for allowing this to happen to him. He feels that he is in part responsible for the tragic deaths and injuries that occurred on the mountain. This seems to be a part of Krakauer's existential need to beat himself up because he and his father never achieved closure (see Into the Wild). As a reader and climbing guide I felt particularly frustrated with Krakauer's willingness to forgive the guides for what to me represented incredible arrogance and unbelievable irresponsibility. Once you have reduced your clients to mindless drones you are totally responsible for them and their safety. Unless you prepare your clients to make judgment calls in advance you can not expect them to suddenly begin making them in the midst of disaster. The major axiom of mountaineering that good luck consists of being prepared is most relevant here. In truth, the parties on Everest were totally unprepared for anything but the uneventful ascents of the past years. They were caught completely unprepared for the storm that hit with no contingency plans in place and no one ready to accept the responsibility for leadership in the event the main leader, Rob Hall, became incapacitated. This is a superb book. It is frustrating and horrifying to imagine that so little seems to have been learned from the tragic events of 1996. The degradation of the world's highest mountain for the ego gratification of yuppies and the financial aggrandizement of the guides and governments of Nepal and China is unforgivable. Perhaps this book will begin the process of awaking a reaction to stop the decline.
Rating:
Summary: arrogant men vs. angry mountain
Review: This gripping book has become a lightening rod for criticism, most of it directed at the author, Jon Krakauer. I am surprised to hear people call Krakauer a hypocrite because I thought he took more than his fair share of the blame. He talks of being haunted by his experiences and living with the guilt of allowing others to die. (If you remember, Klev Schoenberg tells Krakauer that he feels no such guilt.) For those who accuse Krakauer of cashing in on the experience, I would argue that the man is a journalist, a writer, and he has never portrayed himself as anything else. In the book he talks about the extra pressure his presence put on the other climbers (he quotes Beck Weathers' comments to Turning Point) and he is honest about his intention to write about the experience. I would say that the nature of Krakauer's profession requires him to cash in on his experience. Also, he has been accused of being too hard on Sandy Hill Pittman, but if anything, he treated her more gently than other journalists did in their coverage of the disaster. He insists that she did not want to be carried by the sherpa and says that he doesn't understand why she has taken the brunt of the media's criticism.
All of this is beside the point, of course. Into Thin Air will keep you up at night. It made me think long and hard about how I would handle myself in a survival situation. And it made me wake up shivering.
Rating:
Summary: Non-climbers should not be so critical of Krakauer
Review: I have read the book three times in the last three days. Having recently climbed Mt. Ranier and Mt. Kilimanjaro on tour, and trekked in Nepal, I felt a special affinity to the narrative. In response to the reviews I have read I have a few comments. Krakauer shouldn't be judged so harshly. No one can comprehend what he went through on the mountain nor has anyone any right to judge him. As a journalist and a human, Krakauer must have felt compelled to tell the story, to set the record. I wager he would have done the book even if there was no renumeration. If there is anyone that can criticize Krakauer, I would like to hear what Beidleman, Groom, Madsen and Hutchison have to say.
I am surprised there hasn't been more to say about Boukreev. Among his many unforgivable sins, I think the worst was telling Fischer at the summit he was going down with Martin Adams (page 203) and then proceed to Camp Four alone. If Adams hadn't see Groom and Namba above him and corrected his course (page 205), he too would have died. Can anyone answer these questions?
1. Hansen arrived at the summit at 4:00. Why is there no mention of anyone passing him on the way down, especially Krakauer?
2. Did Lhapka Chhiri and the three other Sherpas try to locate tha bodies of Weathers and Namba (page 247) before Lhapka and Ang Dorje left to get Hall at 9:30 (page 232)? Why didn't someone leave earlier for Hall and Hansen????
3. Which four Sherpas on Halls team summited? Ang Dorje and Ngawang Norbu must have been right behind Krakauer (page 179) and summited. On page 177 it states that Kami and Lhakpa Chhiri turned around at 11:30 with Hutchison, Kasischke and Taske. But on page 233 it states that the two Sherpas, Ang Dorje and Lhapka were "wasted from climbing to the summit and back just the day before." And then on page 212 Krakauer states that "the other four Sherpas [other than the two waiting in reserve at Camp Four who were poisened] on our team were too cold and debilated from having gone to the summit." (And yet there were actually 7 climbing Sherpas on the team). Did Lhakpa and Kami turn around with the three clients as instructed by Hall or summit? 4. If the person in the red suit on the South Col spotted by Adams wasn't Krakauer, who was it? Boukreev
|
