In his afterword “Ten Years On…”, Simpson writes: “I wrote
this book in the hope that, by telling the story ‘straight,’ it might nip in
the bud any harsh or unfair criticism of Simon. The rope cutting clearly
touched a nerve… until I wrote it down as honestly as I could” (206). While we
often talk about motivations behind mountain climbing and inspirations of
adventure, we haven’t really touched on the author’s motivations to write and
record their personal stories about these topics. While Krakauer describes that
he wrote his book in order to come to terms with what happened and Blum wrote
her text because she felt it was something she had to do, Simpson wrote this
book as a tool for justification and clarification. Some authors that we have
read for this class seem to write for themselves and recount their stories as a
personal memoir, others write to proclaim the glory of their actions and brag
about their adventures, like Herzog. Simpson admits here that he is writing
because even though he and Simon do not “(pay) much attention to (‘secondhand
opinions’) after the accident” (206), Simpson still feels the need to defend
his companion against the critics. This begs the question: do adventure writers
and their works originate from an inherent need to prove themselves and their
actions? Many writers that we have read so far describe their decision to climb
as highly personal and for themselves (except for Herzog, who climbs for
France). If this is the case, then how can a reader reconcile these highly
personal ideals with the very public decision to write a book?
No comments:
Post a Comment