1. After reading Into Thin Air, which of the following statements would you identify with?
a. “I have the mountain climbing bug.” b. “I’ll take my chances with the sharks at the beach this summer.” c. “Why would anyone want to climb Mt. Everest?” d. “Sword fighting and Brahma Bull riding look like better hobbies.”
M: I will go with b. I have never had the mountain climbing bug, and this book makes that less likely. R: I’m leaning towards A. But that might (as in definitely) be because I read a good chunk of it with the Rockies on the horizon.
2. Krakauer describes any attempt to climb Mt. Everest as “an intrinsically irrational act.” Do you agree with him? Why or why not?
M: I would agree, but I think there is something to be said for us to engage in “intrinsically irrational acts” at times. We are wired to have some sort of quest in life. Climbing Everest ranks at the top of that in my book. While I would not endeavor to climb the world’s highest mountain, I certainly admire those who attempt it, whether or not they are successful. R: I would agree as well. And I like this idea of being wired for a quest. It reinforces the achievement trumping the irrationality. Whatever it may be—ingrained and deeply personal. Come hell or high water.
3. What does Into Thin Air suggest about the importance of leadership and teamwork? What does it imply about individual achievement?
M: This is a wonderful story about leadership and teamwork, albeit in the negative sense. I would argue that the main reason for this tragedy on Everest is a failure of leadership. We can’t control the storms that come in life, but we can prepare for them. While the leaders of the Everest expeditions appear to be great guys, they did not lead well and the results were disastrous. Leadership requires making unemotional decisions that are what’s best for the team. That didn’t happen on Everest in May 1996. The failure to lead well resulted in communication problems, lack of teamwork, and ultimately, the loss of life. So, the book suggests that leadership is crucial if you’re going to get your people from point A to point B. Also, teamwork is more important than individual achievement in my mind. Successful ventures are better when they are reached together with solid leadership. R: Krakauer makes some interesting observations about leadership. Whether Hall, or Fisher, or the Sherpas he shows much of leadership has to do with respect. He contrasts this with Boukreev, who was a great mountaineer but lacked the respect as a guide. This, in turn, makes the case for teamwork—how some in the group wouldn’t have reached the top without help via short roping or sharing bottles of oxygen. But what I found the most interesting is when Krakauer comments how though they were a group by definition, but when it came down to it was he himself that would make it to the top, with or without his campmates.
4. Which individual in the book did you sympathize with the most? Which did you admire the most? Which did you least admire?
M: I sympathized the most with Doug Hansen. To be so close to a goal and not achieve it is hard to stomach. While he did achieve on the second try, it cost him his life. Tragic! I admire Beck Weathers the most. His courage and strong will to live are great examples for us as we face difficult moments in life. You couldn’t keep him down! The persons I least admired in the book were the Japanese climbers who left the Indian climber to die so they could reach the top of the mountain. Unbelievable that they could be so calloused! R: I agree with these, for sure. But when it comes to the least admirable, we can fathom what we would do in their situation, but we don’t know until the moment is upon us. Take Hutcheson, who was faced with the same level of triage, who left Weathers under a similar justification. The hard choice isn’t always the right choice, but it had to be made and he made it. Right or wrong, it’s admirable.
5. Whose actions would be considered the most heroic in the book? Why?
M: I would have to go with Andy Harris on this one. Impaired and fatigued, he tried to save Hall and Hansen when others would not. It was an extremely unselfish act on his part. It cost him his life, but I have admiration and respect for him for attempting to save his friends. R: When it comes to ‘most heroic’ I’d lean towards Harris as well. But there were so many small acts of kindness and humanity that people wouldn’t consider their actions heroic, but were large in the grand scheme.
6. What is the significance of the fact that more guides than clients were lost on Mt. Everest during the expedition?
M: It’s significant in a couple of ways in my mind. First, while the guides made leadership mistakes that resulted in tragedy, most of them tried to get their clients down the mountain before things got worse. Many of them failed in this attempt, but it wasn’t because they were self-seeking. On the other hand, you could make the case that their failure to lead properly cost them their lives. R: I think it goes to show the unpredictability of life.
7. One of the criticisms of the book is that Krakauer used a tragedy to cash in and gain notoriety for himself. Do you agree or do you see Into Thin Air work as something different?
M: I personally do not agree with this. Krakauer is a writer, and this story needed to be told. This is especially true in light of the fact that he was a major participant in the story. Who better to tell it than him? I think some of the criticism comes from those who were not presented in a good light in the book. It’s only natural that they would attack Krakauer in response. R: I’d agree. I think it was a cathartic act, a way to deal with a firsthand tragedy, and what better way to clear, organize, and cope than through writing? His heart was heavy and could only be eased with a pen.
8. Did you like the book? Would you recommend it? Why or why not?
M: This is second time I have read it. It is one of my favorite books. I would give it 5 stars on Goodreads without any reservations. R: I thought it was fantastic. This is my first experience reading Krakauer, and his style, plotting, and how he conveys information made me a fan. This one gets the high 5 from me as well.
a. “I have the mountain climbing bug.”
b. “I’ll take my chances with the sharks at the beach this summer.”
c. “Why would anyone want to climb Mt. Everest?”
d. “Sword fighting and Brahma Bull riding look like better hobbies.”
M: I will go with b. I have never had the mountain climbing bug, and this book makes that less likely.
R: I’m leaning towards A. But that might (as in definitely) be because I read a good chunk of it with the Rockies on the horizon.
2. Krakauer describes any attempt to climb Mt. Everest as “an intrinsically irrational act.” Do you agree with him? Why or why not?
M: I would agree, but I think there is something to be said for us to engage in “intrinsically irrational acts” at times. We are wired to have some sort of quest in life. Climbing Everest ranks at the top of that in my book. While I would not endeavor to climb the world’s highest mountain, I certainly admire those who attempt it, whether or not they are successful.
R: I would agree as well. And I like this idea of being wired for a quest. It reinforces the achievement trumping the irrationality. Whatever it may be—ingrained and deeply personal. Come hell or high water.
3. What does Into Thin Air suggest about the importance of leadership and teamwork? What does it imply about individual achievement?
M: This is a wonderful story about leadership and teamwork, albeit in the negative sense. I would argue that the main reason for this tragedy on Everest is a failure of leadership. We can’t control the storms that come in life, but we can prepare for them. While the leaders of the Everest expeditions appear to be great guys, they did not lead well and the results were disastrous. Leadership requires making unemotional decisions that are what’s best for the team. That didn’t happen on Everest in May 1996. The failure to lead well resulted in communication problems, lack of teamwork, and ultimately, the loss of life. So, the book suggests that leadership is crucial if you’re going to get your people from point A to point B. Also, teamwork is more important than individual achievement in my mind. Successful ventures are better when they are reached together with solid leadership.
R: Krakauer makes some interesting observations about leadership. Whether Hall, or Fisher, or the Sherpas he shows much of leadership has to do with respect. He contrasts this with Boukreev, who was a great mountaineer but lacked the respect as a guide. This, in turn, makes the case for teamwork—how some in the group wouldn’t have reached the top without help via short roping or sharing bottles of oxygen. But what I found the most interesting is when Krakauer comments how though they were a group by definition, but when it came down to it was he himself that would make it to the top, with or without his campmates.
4. Which individual in the book did you sympathize with the most? Which did you admire the most? Which did you least admire?
M: I sympathized the most with Doug Hansen. To be so close to a goal and not achieve it is hard to stomach. While he did achieve on the second try, it cost him his life. Tragic! I admire Beck Weathers the most. His courage and strong will to live are great examples for us as we face difficult moments in life. You couldn’t keep him down! The persons I least admired in the book were the Japanese climbers who left the Indian climber to die so they could reach the top of the mountain. Unbelievable that they could be so calloused!
R: I agree with these, for sure. But when it comes to the least admirable, we can fathom what we would do in their situation, but we don’t know until the moment is upon us. Take Hutcheson, who was faced with the same level of triage, who left Weathers under a similar justification. The hard choice isn’t always the right choice, but it had to be made and he made it. Right or wrong, it’s admirable.
5. Whose actions would be considered the most heroic in the book? Why?
M: I would have to go with Andy Harris on this one. Impaired and fatigued, he tried to save Hall and Hansen when others would not. It was an extremely unselfish act on his part. It cost him his life, but I have admiration and respect for him for attempting to save his friends.
R: When it comes to ‘most heroic’ I’d lean towards Harris as well. But there were so many small acts of kindness and humanity that people wouldn’t consider their actions heroic, but were large in the grand scheme.
6. What is the significance of the fact that more guides than clients were lost on Mt. Everest during the expedition?
M: It’s significant in a couple of ways in my mind. First, while the guides made leadership mistakes that resulted in tragedy, most of them tried to get their clients down the mountain before things got worse. Many of them failed in this attempt, but it wasn’t because they were self-seeking. On the other hand, you could make the case that their failure to lead properly cost them their lives.
R: I think it goes to show the unpredictability of life.
7. One of the criticisms of the book is that Krakauer used a tragedy to cash in and gain notoriety for himself. Do you agree or do you see Into Thin Air work as something different?
M: I personally do not agree with this. Krakauer is a writer, and this story needed to be told. This is especially true in light of the fact that he was a major participant in the story. Who better to tell it than him? I think some of the criticism comes from those who were not presented in a good light in the book. It’s only natural that they would attack Krakauer in response.
R: I’d agree. I think it was a cathartic act, a way to deal with a firsthand tragedy, and what better way to clear, organize, and cope than through writing? His heart was heavy and could only be eased with a pen.
8. Did you like the book? Would you recommend it? Why or why not?
M: This is second time I have read it. It is one of my favorite books. I would give it 5 stars on Goodreads without any reservations.
R: I thought it was fantastic. This is my first experience reading Krakauer, and his style, plotting, and how he conveys information made me a fan. This one gets the high 5 from me as well.