Herzog and Blum take very different approaches to recounting their expeditions. Herzog’s account of conquering Annapurna utilizes a militaristic approach to illustrate the team overpowering Annapurna. The first way this comes through is his discussion of reconnaissance, attack, conquering, and retreat. Furthermore throughout most of the narrative he projects himself as a firm leader who is in complete control of the expedition, at least while climbing Annapurna. Finally in Herzog’s discussion the team members he primarily discusses their contributions to the group. This single-minded analysis of how each part fits into the whole reminds me of recounting of military operations. On the other hand, Blum’s discussion of the American expedition has a significantly different feel. First off, while she at one point mentions the siege technique the military imagery is largely absent from her account. In considering Blum’s recounting her leadership style she does not appear to be fully in control of the expedition. This can be seen from her continual feeling that they should turn back, the Sherpa strike, and Vera W. and Alison’s second summit attempt despite Blum’s protests. Also, where Herzog largely demonstrates his expedition overcoming the mountain and pushing through obstacles, Blum’s narrative largely feels reactionary in the way their logistics were continually being rewritten to deal with mountain conditions. Finally, the way that Blum discusses her team members is very different than Herzog. Where Herzog discussed people largely by role and skills, Blum spends a lot of time discussing less tangible things like personality and emotional states. This difference helped the readers better understand the emotional state of the leader but also made the team seem less effective or efficient. Overall I preferred Herzog’s account of conquering Annapurna due to the apparent control Herzog and his expedition had over the mountain.