Rating: 
Summary: Meters vs. Feet
Review: This is in response to the writer from Boulder who queries the use of meters. Does this reader not realize that although 99% of the people in the United States use feet, the rest of the world, which has a larger population than the U.S. uses meters? When, oh when will the United States catch up with the rest of the world?
Rating: 
Summary: Obviously more complicated than Boukreev vs. Krakauer
Review: The additional details provided by Boukreev in his account of the 96 Everest disaster are interesting, but the bottom line remains the same, the outcome resulted from a breakdown in logistics complexed with inexperience and topped with bad weather. I thought the events occuring during the descent were more thoroughly documented by Boukreev than by Krakauer. The Climb is also more descriptive with respect to the attempts to revive Fischer. Unfortunately, Boukreev tries to implicate the climbing sherpas as inept and unwilling to go beyond their job descriptions and pay. If Boukreev has enough energy to go back out into the storm, that is wonderful, but who is going to say the sherpas should have had the energy or that they would not have been lost in any rescue attempt. It was a judgement call that depends on up to the minute conditions. Boukreev needs to relax. I do not believe that the readers of Krakauer's book are holding him responsible. It is clear to me that only a multidemensional breakdown from logistical and personnel standpoints could lead to such tragic events. Finally, I did not see the factual content in Boukreev's recored testimony. The fragmented sentences and ideas are up to the interpretation of the reader
Rating: 
Summary: An self-glorifying, extremely biased account
Review: I awaited a long time for Boukreev's book, hoping it would fillin some of the gaps in Krakhour's book, but now that I've read it Ihave to say it is a huge disappointment: Boukreev is so obviously trying to rewrite history in his favor that his credibility is destroyed. He smugly points out everyone else's mistakes throughout the book, but refuses to admit any mistakes or errors in judgment in his own. And the book is filled with inconsistencies. At the beginning he boasts that he has never used Oxygen because he is stronger without it. Then, much later in the book, he lets slip that when the storm struck and everything was on the line he did in fact use oxygen during a failed attempt to rescue the missing climbers. Later still, in the book's epilogue, he admits that he used oxygen to summit Everest in 1997 because he wasn't feeling strong enough to use it that day. Another thing that bothered me about this book is that Boukreev repeatedly takes way too much credit for being the hero. END
Rating:
Summary: A Clearer Picture?
Review: If anyone is still interested in the events surrounding the 1996 Everest disaster, and apparently many still are ('The Climb' has reportedly sold out on its first run), then this book is for you. Having previously read the account featured in the book 'Into Thin Air' my conclusion is that 'The Climb' is less dramatic, less amitious, less fictionalized, and, if I may say so, less sensational.
This collaboration does not try to "mind read" any of the climbers and genrally focuses more on the Fischer team with direct quotes. The book of course suffers from not being the first published account in terms of public interest, however, it does benefit from a more methodical and sober perspective of what took place.
Many believe, including myself, that Boukreev was unfairly cast as a villain by Krakauer in his book 'Into Thin Air', as if the author, his publicist, and his publisher conspired to invent high treachery in an effort to sell more titles. Most conveniently a Russian to boot (Boukreev now hails from Kazakstan)! Not every book needs heros and villains, but it never has weakened sales either. As a result I looked forward to reading an additional and perhaps more balanced account.
In this account you will find plenty of extra beef to fill the story. Of particular interest was the mysterious 'star' that appeared over the mountain prior to the storm and the account that Krakauer had collapsed on the summit ridge and was near disaster (this was soft-peddled in the previous account). Readers will also find more details on the fate of those members that perished on the mountain and the reactions of loved ones.
Although the book fills many more holes it also is an opportunity missed in terms of offering a more throrough and final picture of the Everest disaster. The authors seemed to rely a bit too heavily on a relative few number of the climbers involved and Henry Todd (another expedition leader) who was totally out of the picture at a lower camp. There are also a few details out of place. For instance, it states that Fischer had climbed Lhotse in 1994 when in fact he had completed this climb previously.
No doubt this book will fail to charge the book charts as its predecessor 'Into Thin Air', and so in some ways it is unfortunate that this work did not appear first. Overall, this is not a quick summertime read like 'Thin Air' and it is unlikely to capture the spotlightit. In the long-run, though, I believe that most readers will conclude that 'The Climb' is a much sounder work of journalism than Krakuaer's work 'Into Thin Air'.
Rating: 
Summary: feet and meters
Review: Very interesting book, especially after reading Krakauer, but why do the authors show altitudes only in meters, and never in feet? In a story in which altitude is a critical component, it is incredibly irritating to have to pause at each altitude reference (many per page) and mentally calculate the equivalent in feet. Don't the authors realize 99% of the US public relates intuitively to feet, not meters, and that to make the story flow intelligibly they should use a familiar system of measurement? Does anyone share my views, or am I being to picky?
Rating:
Summary: Oh, that Everest
Review: I enjoyed "The Climb." I do think that the book would be more convincing if not a direct rebuttal to "Into Thin Air." I would rather hear Boukreev's side of the story unfettered from contensting the other book. It would have made for stronger tale. In both of these books, the authors focus on every little contributing factor that led to the incident. Boukreev's Indonesian ascent in '97 had similar hangups, which leads me to belive that the biggest cause to the carnage on the mountain was the number of climbers on the mountain in one day, not the experience level, etc. That aside I enjoyed a different perspective on the '96 Everest disaster.
Rating:
Summary: A good read if the Everest disaster fascinates you
Review: I first read Jon Krakauer's "Into Thin Air" simply because it was the first book published. I was extremely caught up in the emotion of the whole thing. Second I read "Everest--Mountain Without Mercy," a very good read with great photographs to boot. I enjoyed the perspective of the disaster from base camp. More emotion. And last I read "The Climb." A good read, but it actually left me asking what Anatoli Boukreev's motives really were. He claims to have written in rebutal to Jon Krakauer's accusations of improper guiding. Fine, if he's got a beef, let him air it. But I felt almost as though he were looking for sympathy from the reader. I came away feeling like he had been pleading for me to understand the harshness of his life and all the troubles he has experienced due to the fall of the Soviet Union and other reasons. But what it all comes down to is the decisions and actions that took place on the top of the world. Was he justified in heading down ahead of the rest of his party? His book didn't convince me that he was. I don't want to discredit the man or his heroics. The world has lost one of its premier high-altitude climbers and for that we should all be saddened. But as far as Mt. Everest on May 10-11, I'll always wonder, "What if?"
Rating:
Summary: A great read after you're done with Into Thin Air
Review: Many have read Into Thin Air by Jon Krakauer, the true story of a disastrous day on Mount Everest in May 1996, when several expeditions were caught in a storm that killed eleven people, including team leaders Scott Fisher and Rob Hall.
Krakauer's best-seller is a fantastic read that has inspired many. At the same time, while Krakauer acknowledges Russian mountain guide Anatoli Boukreev's heroic efforts to rescue fellow climbers, he criticizes many of his actions prior to the rescue. This situation motivated Boukreev and DeWalt's attempt to rectify the facts in The Climb.
Krakauer was climbing with the expedition of Hall's Adventure Consultants, and his account reflects in great part that point of view. Most casualties occurred in Hall's expedition, and Krakauer was on the front line to describe them. The Climb on the other hand tells the story from the point of view of Boukreev, who guided with the expedition of Fisher's Mountain Madness. Consequently, Boukreev spends less time on Hall's expedition, and more on his own, including an interesting account of his involvement with the preparation of the expedition.
Boukreev's point of view is that above 8,000 meters, you cannot be a guide anymore, at least not in the traditional sense of the term. You cannot constantly hold the clients by the hand. This is the basis of Boukreev's defense of his actions in the 1996 expedition. While he rarely shows any willingness to admit being wrong, he does recognize that his poor command of English at the time of the expedition became an obstacle on the mountain, a situation he had not anticipated.
What will convince the reader of Boukreev's professionalism is the long description of his expedition to Everest in 1997. In that expedition, as a "consultant" for an Indonesian team of climbers, he shows by example how the mistakes made by Fischer and Hall could be avoided with good planning. For example, he made sure that a Camp V would be installed and provided with enough oxygen on summit day (it turned out that Camp V was actually used by the descending team). He also insisted that he should have total control of the clients on the summit day.
Bad luck played a role in the 1996 expedition and appears to have led to Fisher's unexpected exhaustion, or even, as suggested in The Climb, HACE (High Altitude Cerebral Edema). However the book also points to the fact that the planning of Fisher and Halls's expeditions was sub-par (case in point, the fact that clients were still climbing after 2 PM on summit day, without a clearly communicated turnaround time, without radios, and without spare oxygen supply).
Fisher and Hall's deaths are utterly tragic. Both were good men and respected mountaineers, and Boukreev's admiration for them did not falter after the tragedy. But The Climb shows that as team leaders on the Everest in 1996, they probably deserve more criticism than Boukreev does as a guide. It is sad that Boukreev himself died in an avalanche in December 1997.
While most of the book is written by DeWalt, I was impressed by the amount of material narrated by Boukreev himself. These sections are edited from conversations between DeWalt and the guide. In addition, the crucial moments of the rescue on the South Col are presented as an unedited conversation between DeWalt and Boukreev. Content from the "debriefing tapes", recorded by nine expedition members a few days after the tragic events, is also directly quoted. There should be little doubt that DeWalt respects Boukreev's ideas.
The Climb is by no means as well written as Into Thin Air. It is also less dramatic, provides less historical and technical background on Mount Everest, and does not picture the general situation on the mountain in May 1996 as well as Krakauer does. For these reasons, it is probably a good idea to read Into Thin Air first, but The Climb remains an excellent and easy read that nicely complements Krakauer's opus.
Rating:
Summary: Amazing, Overwhelming... A Must Read
Review: As both a writer and amatuer climber, this book overwhelmed me with the depth of details and factual accounts. At no time during this book did I feel as though Boukreev wrote this as a mere rebuttal to "Into Thin Air." Instead it included the hard facts of climbing Everest, the mistakes made, and the efforts to save lives. Unlike other reviewers, I did not feel Boukreev pointed fingers at anyone else. He simply said these other climbers were spent, too broken or out of it to help. Much much different from Krakauer's attempts to portray the others in a poor manner.
This book gives everyone a chance to experience, through writing, what goes on during an expedition such as this. I commend the writers for their strong attention to detail and their use of multiple sources to clarify information. I read both "Into Thin Air" and "The Climb" at different points in my life. While "Into Thin Air" succeeds in the American way of trumped up passion, much like the movie... "The Climb" succeeds in telling readers the whole story and gives readers the chance to truly consider the lives lost and reasons why.
I'll never climb a mountain like these men have, but I will also never forget Anatoli Boukreev, the words from this book, and his memory in my endeavors.
Rating:
Summary: The Climb: Great Book
Review: If you love to read the opinion page in the newspaper then you'll love this book. This book is nothing more than a rebuttal to the Masterpiece "Into Thin Air". Anatoli Boukreev explains throughout the entire novel why he is not at fault for the 1996 tradgedy on Everest. He tells the side of only one expedition, his own.
Jon Krakauer gives an indepth account of the politics within each expedition party. He is clear not to place blame on any one person but more or less scatters it around. For example, he covers the actions of the Taiwanese team which had no business climbing to the summit the very day the tragedy occurs.
There is no ONE person to blame. It is a complicated story and I feel that "Into Thin Air" does an exceptional job of telling it. "The Climb" is even more narrow. I personally feel that Anatoli Boukreev should have been with the bulk of the clients myself. The clients paid good money for him to be there holding their hands and he wasn't. Anatoli Boukreev even states in his book that he had no respect for those that needed help up the mountain.
|
