Into Thin Air by Jon Krakauer

[Allshallbewell2021]

For the second time.

Fascinating book about the disastrous season on Everest in 1996.

This is a great book. There is a number of other books about same disaster and it's really interesting to read the different versions of the same event.

Which would you recommend next?

It’s a gripping book. Just dropping into this thread to say that a recent edition of 'The Reunion' on Radio 4 was about this expedition and they brought several of the participants together to remember it - Jon Krakauer had a couple of recorded contributions. If anyone wants to listen it’s here

I think the best book to read (back to back with Into Thin Air) is The Climb by Anatoli Boukreev to get another perspective on the who-did-what-and-why’s of the event.

Thank you Takemeto I will read that next.

I love the different versions of what happened and how completely baffling it is that Rob Hall and Scott Fischer effectively abandoned their groups when they should have turned around by 2 according to their own rules. Bizarre. And no system for deputising in the absence of the lead guide. And also clearly not enough radios(!).

I heard the Reunion too Terpsichore - great radio.

I thought this interview either Neal Beidleman was very good

I love climbing and mountain literature despite not being remotely athletic 😅

Mountains of the Mind by Robert Mcfarlane is good and I also love listening to Rheinhold Messner interviews.

Also Neal Beidleman seems like the kindest man in the world 😍

Brilliant book. I also liked Into the Wild, although it was a bit padded out to make it book length.

If you like survival books I recommend Skeletons on the Zahara.

@TakeMeToKernow The Climb is a great alternative telling of the story! It's an age since I read the books but I remember thinking Jon k was a but of a divvy

Thank you Lordsnot
*
Dogdays* 😂 interesting view of Krakauer !

It's a great film too

I enjoyed the film but the climbers featured her very annoyed about how they told the story don't they.

Interesting that Sandy Hill Pittman has given a recent interview which tells a unique version of events.

High Exposure: An Enduring Passion for Everest and Unforgiving Places by David Breshears.
He was part of the IMAX team in 96 but ended up having to help with the rescue.

Samdy Hill Pitman got a bit of a pasting in the men's memoirs.

I'd like to read her account of it.

I think "recollections may vary" is key here.

Apart from Hall and Fischer's catastrophic failure to lead their teams to descend on time there are sone very gnarly questions about why the ropes wee not set ready for ascent n time. Most versions say that a key Sherpa was 'short roping' Pittman up the mountain and failed to do his assigned task which was setting the ropes for their team's ascent. Krakauer's version at least admits where he failed. But Pittman's version seems unique to her

Definitely going to look up some of these other recommendations. I found Into Thin Air fascinating and harrowing at the same time. Not really sure why I have such an interest in the subject as never done any serious mountaineering myself!

I think that is the key point you made, recollections do vary - I found Krakauer's comments about Boukreev were not great and found reading Boukreev's book gave a better insight into what happened. IMO it was Boukreev going out to try and help saved even more lives.

I would also suggest reading Beck Weathers book Left for Dead. Not the greatest read, but does give his unique insight into how he actually survived, when he really should not have done.

Having read most of the books there are about what happened, my opinion was it was a swiss cheese model in play, there were so many holes, which eventually joined up and the worse happened.

Another great book about a mountaineering disaster is Touching the Void by Joe Simpson.

Not an Everest climb but a good read that has you questioning what you would do in that situation.

The White Spider is an excellent climbing book, and similar but different (as it does have an epic mountaineering section) is the Endurance story.

I enjoy Touching the Void but I'm fascinated how Joe Simpson remembers the specifics. I can barely remember what I did this morning.

I think facts never get in the way of a good story, and most of the time that's probably fine, but maybe not when the 1996 Everest season is written about because "differing recollections" become out and out accusations.

Andrew Greig’s summit fever is one of favourite mountaineering books.

I went through a phase of reading loads of them, I like mountains but only for a gentle hill walk so no idea why.

Greig is also a really underrated novelist

Schloss - good point I think Krakauer benefitted from being a professional writer and an experienced mountaineer. And getting his version in early. He also has corrected errors since in later editions.

I can broadly see Boukhreev's position - my reservations about his actions on the day are based on Krakauer and Beidleman's accounts which don't contradict each other nor do they paint themselves as perfect.
Beidleman corroborates Krakauer about the loss of the Sherpa from rope-setting to nursing Pittman up the slopes. Also Beidleman is clear that Boukhreev, despite being paid a lot by Fischer to guide the Mountain madness group (I think requiring him to use oxygen so he was available for clients) decided to climb without oxygen. This meant he had to ascend and descend very quickly leaving Beidleman alone to try to get the clients down.
Everyone agrees that Boukhreev was brave in the storm but Krakauer and Beidleman both emphasize that he had got down much earlier, missed the worst of the storm and had a bit recovery before he went out into it.
Given his experience and that he was paid he appears to just ignored his commitment.
It's clear that a number of people think he climbed like a solo climber that day (other than the rescued-having been paid to guide. This is why some struggle,
Also Rhenhold Messner is great on Krakauer/Boukhreev

There seems to be so many differing accounts about Boukhreev's choice to climb without O, he certainly was know as a climber who constantly did. I always think if he had not gone out to those stranded, he would have been 100% the fall guy for what happened.

Human nature, both good and bad, meant Rob Hall did not turn back at the cut off time, when he has previously and it did seem to be so out of character for him. Scott Fischer was clearly poorly and probably should never have left camp for the summit but the pressures of the commercial climbs seemed to affect decisions made.

The one thing I ascertained from ready all the different books on what happened, is it is clear that when at that altitude, what happened and what everyone recalls happened is likely to differ somewhat. I think each book has bits of the truth and each book has intepretations of what each writer thinks happened - no deliberate twisting of facts though.

I found Into Thin Air to be quite a "harsh" book - in that Krakauer comes across as a bit too school prefect for me, and I think he did choose to protect himself. I can partially understand why, it was such a event when many people made mistakes, I doubt any of the who survived really want to admit their mistake cost others their life.

I agree, this complexity of responsibility is probably why this disaster remains compelling; very like the Titanic sinking - a gathering of factors which made everyone too vulnerable to bad luck.

In an ascent where so many people were using one single lane up and down - the failure to fix ropes seems inconceivable to me given the importance of every minute of time at altitude and given the death toll was worse on descent.

The failure to turn around on the deadline and to have a deputising system is bizarre. Telling Beck Wethers to wait implied an assumption that nothing could happen to Hall. It was a weird combination of organisation and busking.

Also why not have a real compadre at base who has clout rather than someone so caring and supportive. They should have had an ass kicker on a central radio calling the increasingly deranged leaders down.

But obviously this is the view from an arm chair 😂

@Allshallbewell2021 Your comment about a view from an armchair is a key one, it is easy with hindsight, not being deprived of oxygen, being in a white out and very cold, plus having your trust in those who were there to make decisions (which are difficult to make at altitude), we can only summise how difficult it must have been.

Rob Hall and Scott Fischer were 2 capable high altitude mountaineers, but both with very different styles of man management. Rob Hall would have been the one everyone would have guaranteed to stick to the rigid times for turning back, yet his promise to Doug Hanson to get him to the summit seemed to cloud his judgement with the worst of outcomes. Doug Hanson being turned back from the summit on a previous climb, in addition to him not being one of the very rich who could afford another 60k to summit Everest, plus Rob's promise, turned sensible decisions upside down. Did Doug Hanson decide to go it alone when Rob said enough? Rob Hall probably could have saved himself by sacrificing Doug - high altitude climbing is brutal and deadly in equal measure, those who do it and survive tend to have an element of selfishness in them as a survival instinct. Yet something made Rob Hall make the decision to continue upwards past the cutoff time.

Beck Weathers had a number of offers of help to go down with other climbers, yet decided to stay and wait as he had been told.

Scott Fischer was ill, yet continued to climb.

Even casting aside the ropes had not been fixed, I am fascinated by the human mind as to why the decisions were made by all those involved.

There were positives from this though, weather forecasting was improved, permits for climbing were limited and there was a stepping back from the commercialisation of Everest.

Thank you for starting this thread OP, good to discuss a "good" book about an awful event.

.

I'm listening to 'The Climb' by Boukreev now.

I am a bit obsessed 😬
🏔️

🧗‍♂️