|
|
|
|
clintoris
Jun 19, 2005, 7:54 AM
Post #1 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2004
Posts: 93
|
After having read "The Climb" and "Above the Clouds," as well as "Into Thin Air" by Jon Krakaur, I have become fascinated with Anatoli Boukreev. He was a Russian Alpinist who was without a doubt one of the best climbers to have ever lived.
http://www.boukreev.org/...cs/anatoliWeb216.gif
Trained in the Soviet Union Mountaineering Program in Kazahkstan, he was climbing 6,000ers in his teens. He was quickly at the top of his class and moved to the Himalayas.
When he died on Christmas day in 1997 on Annapurna, he had climbed eleven of the fourteen 8,000ers...all without the use of supplementary oxygen.
He summited Everest at least four times, I think more... and was planning on doing the Everest-Lhotse traverse, which has never been done.
http://www.risk.ru/.../letter/boukreev.jpg
He set records wherever he climbed. He once climbed four 8000 meter peaks in only 80 days.
He climbed Lhotse (8500m) in something like 21 hours...Denali in 10.5 hours, etc. Check out his accomplishments at the bottom of this page.
He was nothing short of amazing.
On the 1996 Everest tragedy, he was the only person who REPEATEDLY went looking for the missing climbers caught on the South Col after summiting Everest without oxygen. He saved everyone from his group, after going back out into the storm 3 times.
http://www.cinemovies.fr/.../news/e/everest2.jpg
He soloed Everest, Choy Oyo, Lhotse, and just about every other Himalaya peak out there.
Krakauer, although an amazing man himself, seemed to villianize Anatoli in his book and movie "Into Thin Air." He makes Anatoli look like a selfish egotist who was too eager to get down to camp after summiting Everest. Krakauer basically blames Anatoli for Mountain Madness lead guide Scott Fischer's death. He says Anatoli didn't do a good job making the clients feel at home, but that wasn't his job...PLUS...he didn't even really speak much english, but was trying to.
It is a shame that he died on Annapurna. He was setting up fixed lines for the steep descent ahead of time so he would have them when he was coming down. At that time, a huge, house sized serac broke free and tumbled down the slope. He was unable to escape its path and was killed on Christmas Day, 1997. That day, the world lost one of the finest alpinists ever to have lived. Had he lived, he would have undoubtedly become one of only 13 men to climb all of the 8000ers.
What are your thoughts on Anatoli Boukreev?
Here is a list of all of his accomplishments...it is really quite incredible!
1997
July 14, Gasherbrum II, 8035 meters. Solo Speed Ascent, Camp ABC (5800 meters) to Summit 9hrs. 30min.
July 7, Broad Peak, 8047 meters, Solo Ascent
May 23, Mount Lhotse, 8505 meters
April 23, Mount Everest, 8848 meters, Climbing Team Leader, Indonesian National Everest Expedition. (Supplemental O2 used)
This is four 8000 meter peaks in 80 days:
Click for the news story.
1996
Oct. 9, Shisha Pangma, 8008 meters, N. Summit, Ascended Alone
Sept. 25, Cho-Oyu, 8201 meters North Side, Ascended Alone
May 10, Mount Everest, 8848 meters. South Col Route
May 17, Mount Lhotse, 8505 meters. Speed Solo Ascent 21hrs. 16min.
1995
May 17, Mount Everest, 8848 meters. North Ridge Route
Oct. 8, Dhaulagiri, 8176 meters, 17 hours 15 min. Record Speed Assent
Dec 8, Manaslu, 8156 meters. Winter Ascent
June 30, Peak Abai, 4010 meters. Personal Guide for President of Kazakstan
1994
April 29, Makalu, 8460 meters. Guided Ascent of First Summit Tower
May 15, Makalu, 8476 meters. Speed Ascent 46 hours. Main Summit
1993
July 1-3, K2, Chogori, 8611 meters, German International Expedition
May 14, Mt. McKinley, 6193 meters. Guided Ascent with 70 year old American
1991
Oct. 7, Mt. Everest, 8848 meters. South Col Route First Russian — American expedition
May 10, Dhaulagiri, 8176 meters. West Wall New Route, First Kazakstan Himalayan Expedition
1990
Feb., Peak Pobeda, 7400 meters, first Winter Ascent
April, Mt. McKinley, 6193 meters. Guided Ascent, first Ascent with clients on Cassin Ridge Route
May, Mt. McKinley, 6193 meters, first Solo Speed Ascent West Rib 10.5 hrs
Aug., Khan Tengri, 7005 meters, first Solo Speed Ascent
Aug., Peak Pobeda, 7400 meters, first Solo Speed Ascent
1989
April 15, Kanchenjunga, 8556 meters. New Route
April 30 — May 2, Kanchenjunga, 8556 meters, New Route, First Traverse of the Four 8000 meter summits of Kanchenjunga Massif (from Ylung-Khang to South Summit). All used oxygen by order of expedition leader.
1988
First Traverse Pobeda Massif west summit to Peak Topografov
1987
First Round Trip Speed Ascent, Peak Lenin, 14 hrs Base Camp Summit Base Camp
1981 — 1993
Over thirty 7000 meter ascents
Two hundred other ascents in Tien Shan, Pamir, and Caucasus Ranges with the National Climbing Teams of USSR and Kazakhstan.
1980
Peak Communism, 7495 meters
Peak Lenin, 7137 meters; First 7000'ers
1974
First Experience in high-altitude mountains in Tien-Shan (5000 meters)
1970
Began Mountaineering in the Ural Mountains
|
|
|
|
|
belvedere
Jun 26, 2005, 12:49 AM
Post #2 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2005
Posts: 10
|
Amen!
I read The Climb too and thought it was a really engaging and powerfull story. He definatly inspired me with what seems like a humble passion for the mountains, he really came across as a nice person. Reading about people with that much skill gives you a great feeling of awe, I definatly think he should get more good press. And i also thought it abit sleezy, the way krankauer smeared him.
Also it says somthing about the good side of the soviet union with its human resouce development, the state should definatly pay for me to climb :-).
|
|
|
|
|
kyakdiver
Jun 30, 2005, 2:38 AM
Post #3 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2005
Posts: 2
|
I've read much as you have. From what i've read I keep getting the feeling that something was personal. If you consider that Scott was the only fatality from the Mountain Madness camp and that most of the mayhem was with the Hall group......
When I read into thin air all I keep thinking is....."what is his problem with a guide from another group other than his own".
It was a horrible day in mountaineering and also the loss of life. what is the point spending an entire book talking about another group when it would seem that the focus should have been focused on your own.... yourself and your leader.
Do you believe that your somewhat responsible for yourself in the mountains with a guide service or do you just do whatever your told to do.... F*ck that.
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Jun 30, 2005, 3:20 AM
Post #4 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
I never met Toli, but people who were close to him are close friends of mine. The soap opera BS surrounding all of those events should never have happened. The dead can bury the dead. Those books aren't ANAM, they're he said/she said, monday morning QB stuff. Whether ultimately right or wrong in his actions, Toli's understanding of the personal and group responsibilities that exist in the mountains was something deeper than any of us sitting around on our fat asses in front of computers will ever understand.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Jun 30, 2005, 3:21 AM
Post #5 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
It's a fools game to second guess others' decisions on a mountain, especially if you weren't there. I wasn't there and Krakauer was, but to the best of my knowledge, if it wasn't for Anatoli, there would have been two or three more dead people that day on Everest--two of them good friends.
Thanks Anatoli...I miss you.
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
match
Jun 30, 2005, 3:52 AM
Post #6 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2004
Posts: 136
|
Super good climber.. But, to jump in for Jon and Into Thin Air, I think hes right in saying that when you are suppose to be a Guide its not the best time to prove that you have impeccable style by not using bottled oxygen...
|
|
|
|
|
kyakdiver
Jun 30, 2005, 4:06 AM
Post #7 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2005
Posts: 2
|
I personally don't see the sense into.."into thin air". It's a book about a bad day on a mountain by someone who was there... I suppose it's factual in as much as it can be....
Could have been a story about Rob Halls clients and the deaths that followed.. from someone who was with them or well at least in his tent. Instead it focused on another team of climbers.
While Anatoli was saving lives.. I really don't give a shit is he had good style or not. He saved lives while others could not help.
JM2centsW.
|
|
|
|
|
greenketch
Jun 30, 2005, 5:13 AM
Post #8 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2005
Posts: 501
|
I agree with you Clint on the man Anatoli. I seem to recall that he did, during that terrible day, use O2 in some of his rescue attempts. He climbed at how he felt and was cool with himself.
I have very much admired his change of heart after 96 to never "guide" again. He stated that a paid guide was required to do what the client wanted. He would consult and lead but would not sucumb to the clients desires over safetyagain. Awsome point of view.
|
|
|
|
|
clintoris
Jun 30, 2005, 5:23 AM
Post #9 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2004
Posts: 93
|
In reply to: Super good climber.. But, to jump in for Jon and Into Thin Air, I think hes right in saying that when you are suppose to be a Guide its not the best time to prove that you have impeccable style by not using bottled oxygen...
Match, he wasn't trying to showboat.
Read his book and his reasons for climbing without oxygen and you will realize he climbs much better without it.
THe reasoning is that when climbing with O2, you are strong enough...until it runs out. Then your body is SUDDENLY deprived of the steady flow of oxygen and you basically just collapse from fatigue and deprevation of O2.
For Anatoli, he was stronger without it due to his immense background at climbing in high elevations.
He did what was safest for himself and his clients.
Greenketch, I'm glad you agree with me. Anatoli is one of my role models. Not just in climbing, but in life in general.
|
|
|
|
|
adimiro
Jul 15, 2005, 2:04 AM
Post #10 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2005
Posts: 3
|
I have also read the books regarding Anatoli Boukreev's mountaineering biography and believe that his superlative athletic abilities were a 2-edged sword.
Undoubtedly, his natural mountaineering talents and endurance saved lives during the Everest disaster.
On the other hand, during this and other fatal accidents in which he was part of a "team", Anatoli's natural speed up and down summits, excluded him from potentially assisting other (slower) team members. His climbing modus operandi seemed somewhat self-centered. Despite my admiration for his accomplishments as well as his talents and skills, I don't think I would have wanted him as a climbing partner or guide.
|
|
|
|
|
okie_redneck
Jul 15, 2005, 3:21 AM
Post #11 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2004
Posts: 303
|
It's my understanding Fisher was MUCH more interested in 'Toli's skills as rope gun than in his social skills. In his book, Climb, Boukreev said, "I asked him (Scott), with my concerns and in my position what did he want me to do?- What did he say?- We discussed the need to have support below. We talked about my descent. He said that he considered it a good plan. That everything was good at the moment. My position was that it would not be good if I stood around freezing, waiting. I would be more useful if I returned to Camp IV in order to take oxygen to the returning climbers. Or to help them if some became weak during the descent. If you are immobile at that altitude, you lose strength in the cold, and then you become unable to do anything."
After reading Krakauer's article, he said, "I had no clear idea that the weather was a potential problem until I was well down the mountain. My concern, as was Scotts, was that the climbers' oxygen supplies would run out. I did the job Scott wanted me to do. If I had been further up the mountain when the full force of the storm hit, I think it is likely I would have died with the clients. I honestly do. I am not a superman. In that weather, we all could have possibly died."
Thank god Anatoli's judgement in the death zone was better than Krakauer's. He ended up having to do EXACTLY what Scott hired him for. The only reason several people are alive today is that he went down when he did and was the only person on the mountain with the strength to go out into the storm and rescue the clients. Two guides stayed up high and ended up losing their lives. What happened was a tragedy, but it would certainly have been worse had Boukreev done anything differently.
|
|
|
|
|
okie_redneck
Jul 15, 2005, 3:23 AM
Post #12 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2004
Posts: 303
|
It's my understanding Fisher was MUCH more interested in 'Toli's skills as rope gun than in his social skills. In his book, Climb, Boukreev said, "I asked him (Scott), with my concerns and in my position what did he want me to do?- What did he say?- We discussed the need to have support below. We talked about my descent. He said that he considered it a good plan. That everything was good at the moment. My position was that it would not be good if I stood around freezing, waiting. I would be more useful if I returned to Camp IV in order to take oxygen to the returning climbers. Or to help them if some became weak during the descent. If you are immobile at that altitude, you lose strength in the cold, and then you become unable to do anything."
After reading Krakauer's article, he said, "I had no clear idea that the weather was a potential problem until I was well down the mountain. My concern, as was Scotts, was that the climbers' oxygen supplies would run out. I did the job Scott wanted me to do. If I had been further up the mountain when the full force of the storm hit, I think it is likely I would have died with the clients. I honestly do. I am not a superman. In that weather, we all could have possibly died."
Thank god Anatoli's judgement in the death zone was better than Krakauer's. He ended up having to do EXACTLY what Scott hired him for. The only reason several people are alive today is that he went down when he did and was the only person on the mountain with the strength to go out into the storm and rescue the clients. Two guides stayed up high and ended up losing their lives. What happened was a tragedy, but it would certainly have been worse had Boukreev done anything differently.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jul 15, 2005, 3:31 AM
Post #13 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
Toli was probobly not the best choice for a guide. As has been said before it was like useing a race horse to pull a milk wagon. that was not tolis fault. It was scots decision to put him in that job. he should have been used only as a ropegun and rescue person. he did more than could be asked from anyone . maby Krakauers beef with Toli came from guilt at his own failuer to rescue any of his team mates? seems that all krakuer was able to do was save his own butt and then cower in his tent while Toli was out there pulling super human effort to save others lives.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jul 15, 2005, 3:41 AM
Post #14 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
Everyone has their place in life. Anatoli's place was to perform super human feats. climb higher, faster and stronger than most others. The perfect ropegun and the man that you would want to pull you out of a tight place. he was not well suited to be a babysitter though. krakauer on the otherhand is a great writer and climber that excels at keeping the readers attention and sucking you into the story to the point that you feel his pain and suffering and totaly relate to his angst. everyone has their place.
|
|
|
|
|
timd
Jul 15, 2005, 4:54 AM
Post #15 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2003
Posts: 862
|
Good call Skibby!, Krakauer just wanted to sound like a hero and put everyone down. In fact he didn't do shit!
|
|
|
|
|
iclimbtoo
Jul 15, 2005, 5:28 AM
Post #16 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 10, 2002
Posts: 645
|
"The mountains are not stadiums in which I satisfy my ambitions to achieve. They are my cathedrals; the houses of my religion."
-Anatoli Boukreev
Pretty amazing dude.
|
|
|
|
|
oleg-17
Deleted
Jul 15, 2005, 3:57 PM
Post #17 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
Hey Clint,
You started an interesting discussion here. I thought a lot about Boukreev. For me, Russian, he resembles an old Russian climbing school, which I am trying to replicate climbing here in the US. It is a different topic though. I agree, he was an admirable athlete and had a "soul" for the mountains. We all must remember that we see this figure with the eyes of media who always delivers inaccurate image of a person. What I feel is that Boukreev possessed a great deal of fear and self-preservation. In many aspects he is a selfish figure, not fitting into classical standards of the russian climbing school. His personal ego was stronger than needed to climb as a team. He is not along - hundreds of fine russian athletes (and other professionals) left the country for money and fame ( I am one of them). That is why the US became extremely fruitful soil for him and his personal ambitions. It is not the point though. As Russians sais, if there is nothing in your heart, your muscles don’t matter. Would he cut his rope and die, when the life of his partner in jeopardy? I don’t know...
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
Jul 15, 2005, 5:39 PM
Post #18 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
I have read all of the 96 Everest books like many of you. While I agree that Anatoli is a great climber, he comes off as typically Russian and a poor guide.
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Jul 15, 2005, 6:18 PM
Post #19 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
I've read all the above books, and I'll have to jump on the Krakauer bashing bandwagon. IMHO he sounds like a selfish fool in his book, with an axe to grind. Who did he save? Himself, and that's it. Boukreev OTOH risked it all to save others. I know who I'd rather have been with when things got ugly. The Russian school of mountaineering doesn't fit nicely into our western view, but one of my best partners is Russian and I've climbed with other Russian folks, and you wouldn't find a better bunch of people anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
papounet
Jul 15, 2005, 10:39 PM
Post #20 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2003
Posts: 471
|
I have read most of the 96 Everest books like many of you and many other climbing books. While I agree that Anatoli was a great climber, he comes off as being truer to the spirits of mountaineering where the climber enters the climbing with full responsability. Anatoli did not pamper clients as perhaps some were expecting him to do. When the head guides, blinded by anorexia, greed and emotional commitment, made mistakes, he managed to keep his priorities right.
Anatoli comes off as less political, less commercial minded than other guides do.
There was a year ago (approx.) a very strong account in a climbing magazine by one of the leading french climber that explained his "moment of truth" which ocured climbing everest with his client. After a avalanche almost buried them, he decided to turn around. His client, a lady, was bent on bagging another of the 8000, but he stood by his opinion (even he knew he was going to suffer financially from that). The incident was the trigger for other changes in his life.
|
|
|
|
|
graniteboy
Jul 15, 2005, 11:49 PM
Post #21 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 1, 2001
Posts: 1092
|
Krakauer= Egocentric Idiot.
Spent his whole "literary" life milking and sensaionalizing others misfortunes. Piss poor writer, as well.
Anatoli; glad you walked the planet and were an inspiration to all of us.
Fischer: I knew when I watched you not helping your clients at 17,200 on Denali the year before you died, and the subsequent frostbite of that female client of yours in that big storm cycle, that you should never be allowed to hold a permit on Denali, much less take that same group on Everest.
That was your "Everest shakedown" trip, man, and you fucking BLEW it on a little 20,000 ft walk up peak. You were too self centered to be a good guide. And your clients suffered because of it. I discussed this with the NPS. They nodded their heads.
|
|
|
|
|
builttospill
Jul 16, 2005, 4:54 AM
Post #22 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 814
|
This post has nothing to do with Boukreev, since I don't know much about him. From what has been said here he's obviously a great climber, and also a fairly deep guy.
But I'm curious where all the enmity towards Krakauer comes from. I read Into Thin Air before I started climbing (school reading assignment) and have read it again since then. I never really understood where the charges of self-aggrandizement and selfishness came from. I honestly don't remember a single passage that made me think that about him, and only recall a couple that I could SEE people construing that way.
And graniteboy: although you may dislike Krakauer's style of writing, his writing is pretty good by most literary critic's standards (in terms of adventure literature--I'm not comparing him to the greats here). And have you read other material of Krakauer's? I can understand charges of sensationalism possibly (Under the Banner of Heaven, Into the Wild and Into Thin Air are all somewhat sensationalized), but capitalizing on the misfortunes of others? You're gonna have to indict a lot of famous writers, journalists, playwrights, photographers, and artists if you're painting with that wide of a brush.
|
|
|
|
|
rongoodman
Jul 16, 2005, 5:05 PM
Post #23 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 82
|
I'm glad Krakauer managed to save himself, but I've always thought he would have been better off not rushing the book out so quickly. It seems he could have done with a little more reflection about what happened before putting it down on paper.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 20, 2005, 4:45 PM
Post #24 of 30
(8910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I'm glad Krakauer managed to save himself, but I've always thought he would have been better off not rushing the book out so quickly. It seems he could have done with a little more reflection about what happened before putting it down on paper.
I think the beauty of that book is that he DID write it so quickly, while the emotional scars were still fresh, while his perspective was still skewed bythe reality of what happened up there. I think more mountaineering tales should be told that way.
Had he waited, the dispassionate tome that might have emerged would have paled in comparison.
He is faulted for leaping to judgement about things beyond his immediate experience, and for possibly besmirching the reputation of a well known and well liked Russian guide.
Too many times mountaineering accidents are reduced to textbook style analysis. Here we have a professional writer take part in and witness perhaps the most infamous mountaineering accident since Whymper omn the Matterhorn, and then writes about it while the wounds were still fresh.
I think Krakauer was brilliant in that book. I don't care if that offends Bourkeev groupies or not. My opinion isn't relevant to those events and people anyway, hehe.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
builttospill
Jul 22, 2005, 5:21 PM
Post #25 of 30
(8888 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 814
|
Wasn't Krakauer on Everest partially on assignment for Outside Magazine or some other publication? I'm pretty sure that was the case.....so that's probably why he came home and started writing immediately (or on the plane ride back).
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
