All you ever needed to know about Jon Krakauer

[MikeWaters]

in one little article:
http://www.salon.com/wlust/feature/1...03feature.html

[Archaea]

Note:

That Krakauer describes himself as a haunted soul isn't surprising; nearly every climber who returned alive from Everest in 1996 talks about his or her mental state in similar terms. What is surprising is how bitter, how defensive and how wounded Jon Krakauer sounds these days. Much of this bitterness stems from this fact: Since "Into Thin Air" was published nearly two years ago, the book has been under almost constant sniper fire from a small and close-knit group of climbers, a few of whom were on Everest in 1996, who dispute some of his book's facts and interpretations. In their view, Krakauer didn't merely get things wrong -- he got things intentionally, maliciously wrong.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

in one little article:
http://www.salon.com/wlust/feature/1...03feature.html

This is old news and the sales of Banner show Krakauer came out of this controversy with his reputation more than intact. Here is what the linked article says about the rebuttal to "Into Thin Air":

"That said, the core document in the case against "Into Thin Air" is indisputably "The Climb," co-written by Boukreev, a flinty Russian climber who was the lead guide on Scott Fischer's team, and DeWalt, a little-known writer and investigative filmmaker. It is not a particularly impressive book, nor one that inspires deep confidence in its reportorial method. (Among other things, the book's co-authors did not, as Krakauer did, conduct independent interviews with either Mike Groom or Neal Beidleman, the only other professional guides who survived after being caught high on the mountain that day. DeWalt, whose account of the tragedy relies heavily on briefing tapes that were made shortly after the tragedy, says he tried vigorously to contact Beidleman.

"[I]t's an angry book, written in direct response to Krakauer's account. As one climber has put it, it's a book that reads more like a legal document, a brief for the defense, than an attempt to tell a straightforward tale."

"Into Thin Air" is a modern classic. This isn't a contest and Krakauer was admirably forthright in that book.

[SeattleUte]

Archaea quotes the conclusory assertions of Krakauer's enemies, summarized as a predicate to the Sonon article author's analysis, rather than the author's analysis. Classic.

[MikeWaters]

Krakauer admits freely that he changed his account from his Outdoor magazine article to his book, to not be as hard on Boukreev.

In other words, he acknowledged his own emotional bias against Boukreev.

Speaks volumes.

Krakauer literally and figuratively stepped over bodies on his way down to the bank.

[MikeWaters]

Damning, damning, damning.

http://dir.salon.com/story/travel/fe...8/07/featurea/

Who slept while Boukreev risked his life and saved three people?

Krakauer.

[MikeWaters]

Krakauer is going to hell for slandering this man. What a POS.

http://outside.away.com/peaks/fischer/anatoli.html

[Archaea]

Last paragraph, which Seattle hates to read,

Krakauer suggests now that "if he [Boukreev] had only lived, I think we could be sorting this thing out." I would ask Krakauer to remember that in the last paragraph of his first letter to Outside (July 31, 1996), Anatoli said: "I know Mr. Krakauer, like me, grieves and feels profoundly the loss of our fellow climbers. We both wish that events had unfolded in a very different way. What we can do now is contribute to a clearer understanding of what happened that day on Everest in the hope that the lessons to be learned will reduce the risks for others who, like us, take on the challenge of the mountains. I extend my hand to him and encourage that effort."

Again, read Ed Viesturs' Book, No Shortcuts to the top, which only in between the lines implies that Krakauer was being less than honest, although he bends over backwards not to create a controversy.

Ed's book doesn't focus exclusively upon the 1996 May expedition and is more even handed than any of the other books.

[MikeWaters]

http://outside.away.com/peaks/fischer/krakreply1.html

This is Krakauer's response.

The way K. judges this man, the only man to have even TRIED to rescue others, just boggles my mind.

B. was the ONLY ONE to attempt to rescue, which he did successfully. Yet, he gets the brunt of the criticism?

K. gall combined with his ignorance is stupefying. I wish I could punch him in the mouth myself. But I know that would be wrong. But maybe the Lord would give me a mulligan on that one.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Damning, damning, damning.

http://dir.salon.com/story/travel/fe...8/07/featurea/

Who slept while Boukreev risked his life and saved three people?

Krakauer.

Don't know where your comment about JK sleeping comes from, though he was just a reporter and not paid to look after anyone. In any event, per Beck Weathers and this letter, the only person who stepped over a body was Boukreev--Weathers'!

But this letter is so much ado about nothing. Here's the order of arguments: 1) Boukreev didn't use oxygen but he wasn't impaired; 2) Fischer authorized Boukreev's rapid descent; 3) Boukreev feels bad about failing to save a climber. Still, he admits he didn't use oxygen, and made a rapid descent. Glad we got that settled.

Going for the capillary.