<\/p>\n
When assembling the team, Robert Bates writes that the climber\u2019s character is more important than their climbing ability. They were looking for humble men; men who would not put their own personal glory above the expedition. I believe that they found the men they were looking for. Peppered throughout the book are instances in which the climbers looked after others wellbeing instead of their own. In fact, the book focused less on the techniques used to climb, and more on the personalities and tender mercies of that the team members exhibited. The glory of the success of the expedition was\u00a0to go to the whole party, not the first\u00a0person to place boots on the summit. Houston\u00a0writes that all he wanted base camp to know about the summit\u00a0was that “two men reached the top”, this speaks volumes to the genuine character of the aspirants and their dedication to the expedition as a whole.<\/p>\n
The politics on the expedition were impressing. It was not authoritarian, like we saw with the Herzog expedition up Annapurna. The political structure was that of a democracy. Major decisions were held to a vote; such was the case when the team was deciding whether to descend the mountain or wait out the storm. It was strange to me that the party\u00a0worried about what type of boots the company would use. \u201cEach man finally used the type of soul he thought best\u201d. Is this typical for expeditions? Do modern-day\u00a0explorers dictate what the exact gear that each participant can take? It would seem to only restrain the expeditions success by equipping\u00a0each climber in foreign gear.<\/span><\/p>\n The difference between The Savage Mountain<\/em> and the previous mountaineering accounts used in this class, is that it had multiple writers sharing the same experience. This helped keep the integrity of the expedition by weeding out any false illusions\u00a0that a\u00a0team member would have about their experience. It also gives the reader more ease of mind. These last couple weeks we have read some very intense accounts, only to learn later that the writer was embellishing or cherry picking their accomplishments, similar to Imperial<\/em> Ascent<\/em>. I do not believe this will be the case\u00a0this week.<\/p>\n (Personal story alert!) I felt awkward while reading Shit Happens.<\/em> I am guilty of being one of the \u201cweekend warrior\u201d climbers that Palmer discussed. I learned to rock climb using YouTube; this often got me injured. On more than one occasion I salesmen would not allow me to purchase equipment, because it was obvious that I had no idea what I was doing and the salesmen did not want my blood on their hands. I was sent away with a how-to-books instead. This was my only motivation in learning the language and tactics needed to buy the gear (although, I only learned enough to get through the door). This informal\u00a0red tape\u00a0was the only roadblock\u00a0between me and the crag. I could have been seriously hurt, and with out the skills to survive while injured. I knew the risks involved, yet I still had the \u201cIt won\u2019t happen to me\u201d attitude. Needless to say, this class has successfully scared me off of the mountain.<\/p>\n Shit does happen, but not in the same way Palmer describes. What Palmer is meaning to say is ignorance happens. When I think of \u201cshit\u201d happening, I think about instances where the trek could have been successful but was otherwise held up. The K2 expedition could have been a success, but the storm hit, and well\u2026 shit happens. If it were not for the storm the expedition would have left footprints on the top of K2 that season.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When assembling the team, Robert Bates writes that the climber\u2019s character is more important than their climbing ability. They were looking for humble men; men who would not put their own personal glory above the expedition. I believe that they found the men they were looking for. Peppered throughout the book are instances in…<\/p>\n