The portrayal of leadership in Into Thin Air presents a very different view of it than in the
other novels we’ve read. Krakauer detailed it extensively when he described the
relationships between climbers and their guides. One of the compelling aspects
of this book is navigating the “obligations” throughout it, such as guide-to-client
and climber-to-climber obligations, and speculating about what could have
happened. Trying to determine who is obligated to do what, and who is supposed
to take responsibility in different situations generates the controversy in
this book, because it’s impossible to determine who or what was the cause of
this disaster.
Comparing Rob Hall and Anatoli Boukreev creates two
different representations of obligation and responsibility. I don’t mean to
condemn or defend either Hall or Boukreev’s actions, and Krakauer does an
excellent job detailing the strengths and weaknesses of both climbers. Both
Hall and Boukreev end up in similar situations on the mountain, but made
different decisions on how to handle it. They have to make a choice – between obligation
to client and obligation to self. Hall decided to stay on the mountain with
Doug. While it is apparent to the reader that Doug never would have made it
down, Hall decides to stay with his client. He believes it would be irresponsible
to go down without him, and thereby condemns himself to death. Boukreev, as
Krakauer argues, decides to descend the mountain because he may have not been
feeling good. If he had remained on the mountain he could have endangered both
his life and his clients, so he chose obligation to self. Ignoring the fact
that he chose not to use oxygen and therefore started this problem, he is alive
because he chose to save himself instead of helping the people he was hired to
protect.
So I ask this, what obligation is the highest when
climbing mountains? Krakauer has trouble with this himself. He feels guilty
after the climb that he didn’t intervene and try to save the other climbers
lives, even though he wasn’t a guide. He chose to save himself instead of
saving another person’s life. Is it
better to be heroic and risk death, or to maintain self-preservation?
As I guide I think part of your obligation to your clients is taking care of yourself. If you end up killing or injuring yourself, your clients are placed in much more danger. As I climber I would expect the guides to not only watch over me, but keep themselves safe. I think each person has a different order/combination of what they believe are their obligations and what they believe others' obligations are. This difference is more often exaggerated at a commercial level because of contrasting benefits and goals or lack of communication. Even on Blum & Herzog's trips there seemed to be a little lack of a common goal of the team, but there was more of a unification than on Krakauer's trip.
ReplyDelete