Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.82 AVERAGE
3.82 AVERAGE
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
inspiring
sad
medium-paced
Content Warnings
Graphic: Body horror, Death, Medical content, Grief
adventurous
challenging
emotional
hopeful
informative
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
adventurous
informative
medium-paced
It is unfortunate that Jon Krakauer beat everyone to the punch with "Into Thing Air" making it so that every other book written about 1996 on Everest must live in its shadow. That said, "The Climb" was a very interesting side of the story. While it lacked the story and characterization of Krakauer's book, by sticking to the facts it reveal some elements that had been less clear about these disastrous expeditions. No matter how much Krakauer tries to portray Boukreev as a villain, it is hard to fault a man who single-handedly saved his team by going on three separate rescue attempts. Boukreev's book is by no means perfect, but his side of the story is worth reading.
adventurous
dark
informative
sad
tense
medium-paced
While I absolutely adore Jon Krakauer's book, Into Thin Air, I had a hard time reconciling his presentation of Anatoli Boukreev with what others have said about the man's character. I was eager, then, to read about the 1996 Everest tragedy in Boukreev's own words. I feel like I came away from this book with a much better understanding of the events of that day, in part because Boukreev and Krakauer seldom crossed paths and their accounts are in many ways a complement to one another. All told, I think that Krakauer, while he presented as fair of an analysis of the events as I think is reasonable to expect, did Boukreev a bit dirty in his assessment of summit day, and Boukreev's heroics should not be discounted. It's unfortunate that, like so many other mountaineers of his caliber, Boukreev died so young.
This should be mandatory reading after Into Thin Air. I’m glad my curiosity got the better of me and I purchased and read this account of the ‘96 Everest expedition disaster. I didn’t have a very high opinion of Anatoli after reading Krakauer’s work and may have talked sh!t about Anatoli to anyone who would listen to me blab on about Everest. I am of a changed mind and opinion now. The whole o’s debacle makes sense as do most of the things Anatoli did that were heavily criticised In Krakauer’s book.
While this book lacked the clever articulation and prose of Into Thin Air this book is just as good, if not better IMO. I don’t think Anatoli is the villain we were led to believe he was.
While this book lacked the clever articulation and prose of Into Thin Air this book is just as good, if not better IMO. I don’t think Anatoli is the villain we were led to believe he was.
As Into Thin Air is one of my favorite books of all time, I thought it would prove interesting and instructional if I read an account of someone else's perspective on the same tragedy of that day in 1996 on Everest. Anatoli Boukreev's account was methodical, and I was surprised at how much he seemed to remember in the months and days leading up to the terrible events of that day in May. DeWalt is no Krakauer, so there are slow points and the writing is not as immersive. There's also the point that DeWalt was the writer here, after hundreds of hours of interviews with Boukreev and others, and like I've said before, the story is so much better when the writer has actually been on the mountain and part of the events unfolding. This is not to disparage DeWalt. He's fine, but there was just something extra missing.
From the picture that Anatoli paints, it sounds like things were falling apart before the climbing group even touched down in Nepal. Clients who weren't paying, equipment issues and oxygen supply problems were just a few of the problems mentioned. It also sounds like Scott Fischer had WAY too much on his plate and really wasn't prepared to lead an expedition of this magnitude.
I have read and watched quite a bit on this particular Everest disaster, and I believe that the reason for the loss of life that day was several fold and didn't lay on any one particular person's shoulders. The weather, the inexperience of the climbers and guides, the supply problems, the malfunctioning radios, and miscommunication all played a huge role of what happened. Anatoli was certainly a hero- he saved three people that day in that storm- that's just a fact. That being said: he and DeWalt insist that Scott gave him permission to descend ahead of the clients. I'm sure that's true. However, you have to remember that Scott was near delirious and almost entirely exhausted, and only hours away from collapsing and never getting up again. It's completely possible that he wasn't in his right mind, and if he was, he would have advised Anatoli differently- as in, wait for the clients and descend with them. I don't chastise Anatoli's choice to climb without oxygen- he had done so almost his whole life and was well equipped physically to tackle the mountain without it. However, again, you have to remember that on this particular outing, Anatoli was a guide, not an individual climber. He was responsible for more than just himself. He was also arrogant, not very helpful to the clients and stand-offish. He says so himself.
As for Krakauer's take on what happened that day, I can see why he wrote what he did and how he saw things from his perspective. I wish that, upon being given the correct information about Anatoli, he would have changed some things for his book and not stuck to his guns about certain things like the descent and the lack of bottled oxygen. Again, the distinct difference here is that Krakauer was a client, and Anatoli was a guide- and more was expected of the guide, which is why I believe Krakauer left his criticisms of Anatoli in place.
DeWalt spent way too much time lauding Anatoli and torpedoing Krakauer. I found this account interesting, and certainly the Russian climber deserves accolades for the lives he saved. It's a shame he's no longer alive to defend himself and his actions.
From the picture that Anatoli paints, it sounds like things were falling apart before the climbing group even touched down in Nepal. Clients who weren't paying, equipment issues and oxygen supply problems were just a few of the problems mentioned. It also sounds like Scott Fischer had WAY too much on his plate and really wasn't prepared to lead an expedition of this magnitude.
I have read and watched quite a bit on this particular Everest disaster, and I believe that the reason for the loss of life that day was several fold and didn't lay on any one particular person's shoulders. The weather, the inexperience of the climbers and guides, the supply problems, the malfunctioning radios, and miscommunication all played a huge role of what happened. Anatoli was certainly a hero- he saved three people that day in that storm- that's just a fact. That being said: he and DeWalt insist that Scott gave him permission to descend ahead of the clients. I'm sure that's true. However, you have to remember that Scott was near delirious and almost entirely exhausted, and only hours away from collapsing and never getting up again. It's completely possible that he wasn't in his right mind, and if he was, he would have advised Anatoli differently- as in, wait for the clients and descend with them. I don't chastise Anatoli's choice to climb without oxygen- he had done so almost his whole life and was well equipped physically to tackle the mountain without it. However, again, you have to remember that on this particular outing, Anatoli was a guide, not an individual climber. He was responsible for more than just himself. He was also arrogant, not very helpful to the clients and stand-offish. He says so himself.
As for Krakauer's take on what happened that day, I can see why he wrote what he did and how he saw things from his perspective. I wish that, upon being given the correct information about Anatoli, he would have changed some things for his book and not stuck to his guns about certain things like the descent and the lack of bottled oxygen. Again, the distinct difference here is that Krakauer was a client, and Anatoli was a guide- and more was expected of the guide, which is why I believe Krakauer left his criticisms of Anatoli in place.
DeWalt spent way too much time lauding Anatoli and torpedoing Krakauer. I found this account interesting, and certainly the Russian climber deserves accolades for the lives he saved. It's a shame he's no longer alive to defend himself and his actions.