With the reading of Fallen Giants the history part of Mountaineering comes into sharp focus. No doubt an angle change from looking at metaphorical mountains and no longer are we studying the mountains of English and Petrarchan poems and works but actual concrete mountains in all of their glory. The angle of time is now starting to change on the fearful and mysterious mythos that once surrounded mountains but are starting to see a post-Enlightenment and Industrial era perspective. Mountains are a part of nature, and nature is a resource and thing to be exploited with the use of tools, innovation, and sheer iron will. Or rather it is something that humanity can overcome quite literally. The main objective is no longer to avoid or find ways around these tall pinnacles but to map every inch and reach the top of each one; or at least is the impression that I am getting from these readings.

The metaphorical mountain however has not disappeared at this point. The mountain has turned into an opponent to be defeated. The “Polar Method” or laying siege to the mountain is employed and disputed but shows the Great War mentality that is going into the climbs on Everest. Everest is the ultimate obstacle. Perhaps by climbing it the British in particular can prove that there is nothing that is not within their reach if sheer will and dogged determination are employed. What baffles me is that the British above everyone are simply captivated by the Himalaya. Yes we see Germans, a smattering of Americans, and even an Italian Duke, but there is something in the British mindset that is fixated on the Himalaya and Everest in particular that I do not quite understand. We have discussed this a bit in seminar but it still alludes me what is so captivating about mountains to the British? For that matter why is it so disinteresting to Americans. If Americans like anything it is certainly picking apart something challenging, yet at this point in history Americans are all but absent from the Himalaya. We see the haughty attitudes of Fanny Bullock Workman and her husband pass impatiently through the Himalya, and then a couple of climbs by Houston and American collegiates, but no A team of climbers being assembled to tackle Everest, or any real attempt on K2 – just a scouting to find a possible way up.

Also the British seem entitled to Everest, like it should be a given they be allowed to access the mountain and have exclusive rights to being the first to summit it. Is this an imperial mindset? Is it their mindset of cultural superiority that entitles them to the mountain, or is it perhaps driven by nationalism – keeping the British Empire on top of the world figuratively and literally?

Also I found particularly interesting the British apprehension to adapt tools into climbing, thinking it was unsportsmanlike. There are reasonable doubts about the efficiency of early air canisters weighing down a person by fifty pounds. Does it help in high altitudes or make the strain worse under the added encumbrance? As questionable as air canisters might be crampons and ice picks seem irreplaceable. Cutting steps out of solid ice in my opinion at sea level would be a challenge not to mention with the sparsity of oxygen at the roof of the world. It is not a wonder to me why all of these early attempts on the Gaints were unsuccessful. They may have had the manpower but I think the real break in the case was the wider use and advancement of equipment. I suppose we shall see how the history progresses in the near future.