Tim wasn't incompetent ... he chose to stay behind and comfort his girlfriend Charlotte. Then, after Anatoli whisked Charlotte away, he chose to stay behind and comfort Sandy. Anatoli had left him, and Sandy, with a bottle of O2 and some hot tea.
Boukreev is controversial because Jon Krakauer decided to turn him into the villain of "Into Thin Air", and then the book became intensely successful. Based on all the accounts of what happened that I've read, it starts to sound suspiciously like the major cause of the disaster (beyond bad luck with the weather), was that the expedition leaders for the two main teams felt extreme pressure to successfully get clients to the summit. They pushed on when they shouldn't have, and didn't have enough support resources. Why would two experienced mountaineers have made risky decisions like that? Could it have had something to do with the presence of a journalist? The article that Krakauer was going to right could have had huge economic consequences for the businesses of both expedition leaders, depending on how they came off. I'm not suggesting that Krakauer is to blame for what happened. However, remembering that he was a participant, not just an observer, starts to make some of his attacks on Boukreev sound like projection. For example, framing Boukreev as "abandoning" his clients because he descended quickly, which allowed him to act as support and rescue for climbers in trouble later... when by the account of another climber who was dealing with vision issues, he begged Krakauer to help him descend, and was ignored. It is just... completely absurd that the man who risked his life multiple times to save others, who rescued three fellow climbers, who went back up the mountain the day after summitting in the hopes that his friend might still be alive and could be helped, who begged others at the high camp to come with him in rescue efforts, and went out alone when no one else would come... is somehow remembered by many as having caused the disaster by making choices that allegedly left him *physically unprepared*.
I've read the book and he wasn't villainised. It's just not a black and white situation. The fact that he acted with incredible courage after things went south doesn't remove the fact that it was inappropriate and irresponsible of him to be climbing without oxygen while working as a guide for amateur clients. Leaving another guide alone with the clients was also probably not something he should have done (and in the other guide's opinion it certainly wasn't). It's not like he knew what would happen later. Better to avoid needing to rescue people in the first place than to be rested for it.
@@trinityj1 If you're interested in the topic, I'd highly suggest reading some of the other primary sources. Particularly Boukreev's own "The Climb", there's also Beck Weathers' "Left for Dead" and the transcripts of the base camp interviews taken afterwards. There are several places where Krakauer is at best misleading and at worst openly dishonest about events. I've heard many people come away from "Into Thin Air" with the main belief being that the main human responsibility for what happened was Boukreev's choices, and in that way it frames him as the villain. As far as the issue of leaving the clients, for example, the evidence is very strong that Boukreev was told to do so by the head of the expedition (who was also there with the clients, not just a single guide). It also doesn't really hold up to suggest that it was irresponsible of Boukreev to climb without oxygen. The argument would be that the choice weakened him, somehow, but his extraordinary actions later that night indicate that he was in no way impaired by the choice. There was also a shortage of available oxygen near the summit due to issues with preparation, and Boukreev even gave his emergency oxygen bottle to the other guide at one point, something he would not have been able to do unless climbing unassisted himself. This has turned into a bit of a novel. But I actually finished "Into Thin Air" with the same interpretation as you did; it was only when I started reading other perspectives from people with more professional knowledge that I saw the holes in Krakauer's account, and the harm he has done to the public understanding of what happened.
I, too, have read Into Thin Air. Several times actually, as I discovered the book shortly after surviving a workplace shooting in which five of my coworkers were killed…. it kind of got into my head and helped me in some weird way in the struggle to deal with my survivor guilt and PTSD. I thought Jon Krakauer did a good job of covering all the issues-the competition, the pressure to summit, the additional pressure of having a journalist along to write about it, poor planning and/or execution of fixing the ropes, the marginal qualifications of some of the climbers, the Sherpas being overburdened with hauling all of Pittman’s “vanity gear” (my phrase) and failing to fix the ropes ahead of time, etc. He included himself in his assessment of how they had “utterly failed” Beck Weathers and how badly he felt about it. It even seemed to me that he was trying not to demonize anyone. I think a lot of people just always need something/someone specific to blame when a tragedy like this happens, and since Boukreev was a guide who seemed more interested in his own summit than in guiding others there, he was a convenient target. It is indeed commendable that Boukreev rescued the surviving climbers after he had rested in his tent for hours, but keep in mind that Neil Beidleman was the guy who got them close to camp, where they could be rescued, and told Boukreev where they were. If they had still been up near the death zone, none of them would’ve survived because no rescuers would’ve been able to get to them in time. Jon Krakauer was a journalist and paying client, it was in no way his responsibility to try to save others, especially when he was completely exhausted, and had barely made it back to camp alive himself. Of course the tragedy is not Boukreev’s fault, but I agree with Krakauer that his actions were irresponsible when working as a guide. Boukreev raced to the summit and didn’t help any clients get there, then turned around and went back to camp without helping any clients get back either. Scott Fisher is dead, so the only evidence that this was planned is Boukreev saying so. And this alleged plan simply doesn’t make sense….. why would you pay a guide thousands of dollars to summit and return without any clients? Particularly when it was common knowledge that Scott was ailing and not at his best. Anyone remotely familiar with mountaineering knows that when you go high altitude climbing without supplemental oxygen, timing is crucial. You must get back down as fast as possible before high altitude sickness has a chance to get you. I have great respect for the hearty souls who choose to climb without supplemental oxygen, but it is my opinion that when you are being paid to perform guide duties, you should absolutely be required to use oxygen so that your brain will be functioning as well as possible, and you will make good decisions for your clients. And of course, as usual, the real culprit is probably money. Nepal is a desperately poor nation, so they will basically sell climbing permits to virtually any idiot who has the extra money. The Sherpas need the jobs, and the adventure companies make a tidy profit from their ventures. I learned from an interview with Neil Bidleman that some clients have actually tried to sue the guides for not getting them to the summit! He feels that these incidents added to the pressure to achieve a successful summit. So I guess sometimes people are just jerks…. The guide makes the right decision for your safety, then you get to the bottom of the mountain and feel better, and then you sue them to try to get your money back.🙄 Ultimately, though, the responsibility for this tragedy is on the guides, the professionals who should’ve known better and should’ve abided by the turnaround time. RIP to all of them.😢 LOL….. I wrote a novel too….😂
@@nikiobrien5357 I'd say the guides are partly responsible, but equally responsible are the clients that put themselves in that position. If you can't take care of yourself above 8000m you usually die. The guides are in an impossible position. As long as clients are informed of the risk I think their safety is on them; just like all other aspects of adult life.
@@nikiobrien5357 I appreciate the thoughtfully written reply! The complexity of what happened, and the different perspectives from the survivors are probably a large part of why the event remains so fascinating as a topic even after all this time. I also try to remember (not always successfully) to keep in mind how much high altitude can impact brain function, so that memory is not always reliable, and decision-making may be impaired. I read a book recently about ascents of K2, and there was a gut-wrenching section where a group of highly experienced climbers decided to take a "rest day" at a camp above 8,000m. What? The body is not 'resting' at that altitude, it's dying! That's an objectively terrible decision, and yet it seemed like a good idea at the time to those who made it. So probably all of the climbers involved in the 1996 disaster have been unfairly judged at some points by others who weren't there (and I include myself in that). One of the frustrating things about Krakauer's account, however, is the way that he's dug in his heels, and refused to acknowledge any of the places where what he claims happened differs from the recollections of others. Sometimes in ways that can be objectively verified, and other times with things that are "they-said-they-said... at an altitude where your brain doesn't totally work". The lack of nuance in his account wouldn't be so much of an issue, but his skill as a storyteller means that his version of events has become the defining one for most people. "The Climb" is definitely worth it as an alternate perspective, imo. You're probably right about the role of money in all of this, and from recent years, it doesn't seem like that lesson was really learned.
He went back out time and again into that storm and saved 3 people. Been a hero of mine since I first read about it (which was in 98, while climbing and trekking in Solo Khumbu).
I read “Into Thin Air” when it first came out, and I thought even then, when I didn’t know all the facts, that his blaming Anatoli was unfair. If he hadn’t brought those 3 hikers back, they also would have died. It seemed to me that John didn’t like his personality so he was being overly critical.
it's human nature to always find someone to blame when there's an accident. even in the case of accidents, where a chain of events ultimately led to the fatal end. the first impression you have of a person is usually superficial and for most people it's difficult to admit that they were wrong about someone in the first place. i'm pretty sure that a lot of personal aversion played a role blaming boukreev. he never took his own life lightly, always fought hard. he was always aware of the dangers in the mountains and respected them. in the case of 1996; he not only risked his life by rescuing the three other climbers, but also in the run-up to where he used to descend to meet the climbers with fresh oxygen bottles again. only very few people would do that. and krakauer is definitely not one of those special humans.
@@Z0RDR4CK I agree with what you said. I have to say though that human tendency to blame someone when it’s clearly no ones fault is something I don’t have a lot of patience for personally.
I always thought John just blamed him and the rest for the drama to sell more books😢 IMO Boukreev was the rarest of humans…survived and conquered Meningitis.. Saved 3 souls at least, proly more through his travels, I’m sure😊survived and conquered Kazakhstan and U.S.S.R Such a great soul, like a few I’ve met in my travels. They never make a big deal, just help save lives cuz they can, they “must go” 😢 True sad tragedy…Rest in Paradise Anatoli Boukreev❤ may I hope to find such courage in despair
I’ve been treated much the same way. I quiet but confident and lead by example. More professionally than personally, but bc Im very direct, avoided small talk and honest it tends to rub the lazy and stupid the wrong way( in the USA that’s about 70-80 % the population). I expose them by simply being who I am. A lot these people thing they can blend in and just get by doing very little and almost never do things correctly. I simply have no time for that bullshit and never will capitulate to these people. A few times there was too high a percentage of these pieces of shit, so they were able to constantly lie and twist every possible situation against me. I could really give a shit bc I know what I’m capable of and wouldn’t want to be anywhere that the average employee/person is worthless The problem is(in the USA, I can’t speak on any other country) this was the exception when I was much younger but now this is the norm it’s only in a few professional circles(medicine/law/ etc) I have found tolerable. Exceptionalism use to be celebrated by most, now it’s shunned for making the majority look awful. This only improves a few ways most of which require tremendous pain/death/sacrifice. One of my favorite quotes “Hard times create strong men Strong men create easytimes Easy times create week men Weak men creat hard times” About to get rough fellas
Great summary. I read his book and was deeply impacted by his forthright tone and dedication to climbing. Really glad to find a TH-cam story dedicated to this amazing climber.
@@joshthemediocre7824 can I get some titles? I been looking more into him too. theres a documentary "unconquerable summit" by Vladimir tulkin, I couldnt find where I can watch it tho 😞
@@joshthemediocre7824 Hello Josh, same for me. If you have the time, I would appreciate the title(s) of additional reading material. Kind regards, Garret
I saw an interview with simon Moreno the one who survived at Annapurna and he had nothing but great things to say about anatoli. It says alot that the mountaineering community supported him and a journalist tried to make him the enemy. That's how Americans do things , idk if krakov was but it was America like.
Totally agree. It's honestly ridiculous that anyone would have the audacity to blame the one guy brave enough to go back and continue trying to save people.
@@ImmortalKat4ever Anatoli and Scott should have had a better mutual understanding of guides’ expectations prior to and during the Everest expedition. Had Anatoli stayed with the clients on the descent, the outcome may have been different. This is mostly where people have their disagreements. Personally I think he was heroic for venturing out into the storm above camp 4 several times, but that doesn’t mean that the best course of action was to descend far ahead of the clients to C4.
@@hodad924 He had to descend because he wasn't using oxygen. And that's the issue right there, he was working as a guide at the time. However blame really rests with the guiding company as they were the employer and therefore had a duty of care. Use of oxygen, or at least carrying it, should have been sop for the guiding staff.
My first encounter with this story was the movie "Everest". When I watched it, it felt for me like Anatoli was the one deserving the most respect out of all participants in the events. He was right in his judgments of the situation and he did incredible feats of heroism to save others. Now seeing more of the details, seems like the movie did a pretty good job at portraying him fairly. Anatoli's rough natural speed climbing style reminds me of Denis Urubko - you can see more about him in the documentary The Last Mountain (2019).
Boukreev is without a doubt a hero, and one of (the?) greater climbers ever. Krakauer was just looking for a villain for his story, and it's outrageous to me that he chose to vilify a man who risked his life to save three other people.
Krakauer did not entirely vilify Boukreev. In fact he praises him for his bravery and saving lives but does state that perhaps he was irresponsible by climbing with no oxygen when he was responsible for inexperienced and weaker climbers. Remember though, it was Neil Beidleman that brought down the climbers from high up on the mountain. It was Boukreev who did not help clients reach the summit nor did he help clients descend to Camp Four. The others responsible are Hall and Fisher who were leaders of separate expeditions. Fisher should have put a lid on Pittman and not allowed her to bring all her selfish and unnecessary vanity socialite equipment and should have insisted the Boukreev use oxygen as well as guide clients, which is what he was being paid for..... And both leaders should have adhered strictly to the 2pm turn around time. The other blame is the overcrowding on the mountain due to the greed of the Nepalese gov't to issue as many permits as possible. Greed wins, Lives lost. The fact that these expedition companies actually take inexpereinced or weaker climbers on their trips tells you what climbing has become. Another tourist trap. And Krakauer even blames himself, but there was no way anyone at Camp Four but Boukreev and some Sherpas were capable of safely saving people during that horrid time on Everest.
@@theworldisavampire3346 Almost everyone stayed in their tents, not just Krakauer, because they were totally exhausted from the climb. Even those who didn't summit and came down early.
Yes, Anatoli shouldn’t have climbed without oxygen since he was a guide, but he was the only one able to go out into the storm and subsequently saved the lives of three people who certainly would’ve died without him. He was an incredible human being.
Well Messner says that if a guide was climbing without oxygen through out the climb, they shouldn’t use oxygen in the final assent either, as it will alter their performance for the worse in case of a force major.. In his opinion Anatoly was able to save three people exactly because he chose not to use oxygen on the final assent 🤷♂️
@@splifstar85 Messner as great as he was, doesn't know everything. This is simply false. And Boukreev never should have been below all the people on the mountain. He really didn't function professionally at all. One can dispute many things of what happened on the fateful day as memories are unreliable especially at altitude, but there are certain facts. It is known where Boukreev was and when, it is known where many clients were and when. What the heck was he doing in the south col. He was paid, he was a guide. Doesn't matter what he said to rationalize.
@@michaelbrowder1759 ok.. I guess you have info that I (and Messner) don’t.. From you comment it would appear that you know technical aspects of climbing better than Messner as well as knowing what were the assigned roles of each guide.. Wow.. you must be an expert climber and must have inside knowledge from the surviving guides of Fisher’s team... (Or more likely, you are just another couch warrior and have absolutely no idea what you are talking about 🙈🙈🙈🙈)
He is most likely a person who is capable of feeling human emotions and feelings. That isn’t a myth. It’s more of a curse. But, he may be grumpy because he can feel others as if they were his emotions. Then I know he feels the suffering and knows he can help. So he reacts.
After reading his and Lene Gammelgaard's book, I don't get the feeling he was moody. He just didn't coddle clients or sita around and socialize too much. He was more serious for sure. But Lene found his softer side and really showed his humanity. She adored and respected him.
This guy, and Ueli Steck.. are two guys who are legends in that sport... but especially Anatoli. He performed rescues, at that height too. Mind blowing
For me its kind of simple, in Anatoly's team, all clients were alive and pretty much unharmed after the accident. So he did his job as a guide in the end, nothing to blame.
I mean they were alive because Neal had dragged them (and people from Rob’s team) all the way to South Col, located the camp and proceeded to get help from Anatoli, who was in his tent drinking tea. All that in the middle of the storm. Neal also implied Anatoli descending early wasn’t part of the plan. He made up a story to try and justify his actions. What he did was remarkable and he was one of the greatest climbers of his generation. But he didn’t do his job as a guide, that would have been Neal.
@@ferreira8649stop saying like he was drinking tea for his pleasure ffs, he was recovering, and without him all this brought down by Neal would die near the camp, jeez
He didnt use oxygen on many of his successful summits, he saved three people during the everest disaster. He climbed Denali in 10.5 hours when it usually takes 3-4 days for an experienced climber. He went up K2 and came back the only surviving member of the expedition. He was a beast.
Boukreev was one of those athletes who could become one with the elements they endure and adapted well... and he used that excellent skill he was born with to save lives and give other people the great views and priceless experiences. I think he was a hero.
He might be the most Heroic Climber in History. Also, the strongest climber in history. Rescuing another soul is a lot harder and more dangerous than just climbing in such bad weather conditions. I read the Krakauer book, and even from Jon's own account Anatoli's heroism stands out. As well as Jon's own decision not to help out. He was too tired to help he reasoned. Anatoli was a real world hero.
@@johnandrews3547 Heroic and Best are two different things. Understand what you're reading. Duh. It's just an opinion that some share. Don't let it shatter your fragile mind.
I agree with having new, rigorous requirements before allowing prople to register to climb Everest. The bottlenecks caused by overcrowding is a problem. I am not a climber, but have watched many of these videos. It is obvious, even to me, that too many unprepared, unqualified people are on that mountain, taking too long and endangering other climbers by their presence. They need to get out of the way of the people who belong there. These sight-seers cause delays for other climbers who have to wait while the mountain and weather become unstable. You gotta get out of the death zone before it gets too late. It would be so annoying to have a novice in front of you, delaying your progress or compelling you to risk your own life to save them (causing you to give up your own summit and lose money).
I agree that it's a horrible system, but the problem is there's no one to enforce any improvements such as those you suggest. The companies certainly won't institute new or more rigid requirements, as it cuts into their bottom line, and they make money whether people summit or not. The local population also profits from, if not relies on, this industry, and I doubt they'd support any restrictions that would deprive them of the money they need to survive. Obviously the sherpas have the highest risk, as they risk injury and death due to the ignorance/ineptness of those wealthy idiots who think they can buy their way to the top of the world.
You sound terrible. How do you think people become the ones who "belong to be there." At one point everyone is a novice. Clearly on top of mount Everest isnt the place to be a novice, but its not because of the other people "belong." What kinda classist, gatekeeping shit is this?
@@Missconduct044 - A perfect example on that fateful expedition was Sandy "Princess" Pittman. I'm sure you've seen all the documentaries of that climb. She hired the world's 4 most experienced climbers, had to be short roped to a Sherpa guide and injected with a mild stimulant because she was crying that she was too tired and too exhausted. She also agreed with the rest of the climbers before hand not to talk to the press until the climb had ended. Nonetheless she rented a private helicopter to take her and 2 other members to their destination while she stayed in a luxury hotel by the poolside sipping on drinks and couldn't call reporters quick enough. I believe she did reach the summit but never would have achieved this goal without the help of her well paid, hired mountaineers. She was on the brink of death during her decent where she had to be short roped due to her failing health. I also dont think with all the help she received and/or paid for, hardly qualifies her to be credited with reaching the summit. There have been 1 or 2 amazing women who did reach the Everest summit without ANY OXYGEN whatsoever and did the entire climb with little or no help whatsoever. That to me anyway, definitely credits you for completing the expedition. Sorry for the long text. LOL
Anatoli sounds like he was a very special person in his attitude and by the selfless actions he took to save the lives of others despite having summited Everest and even when no one else wanted help him.
Anatolia feels like a blunt person who actually cared about all the climbers regardless if they were in MM or in another group. He was and is never forgotten as a hero for saving 3 people and trying to help as much as he could before the storm came
@@nataliesutherland7222 "You've got something in your teeth" -- (7 months later) _did you grasp what the OP was trying to convey? You did, didn't you? So please spare us the corrections and fuckwittery._
@@llYossarian and just FYI, it was such a small spelling error that it was clear what they were trying to say, my recommendation is to leave those comments for ppl who say jerky stuff, not something that’s heartfelt.
Anatoli was the stud on the mountain in '96. Best shape of any of them. Hero. Amazing how the accounts of what happened are so different. He was the man out of all of them.
Thank you for putting this biography of Anatoli together. I read Into thin Air by Jon and saw the movie Everest in 2015. Shame on Jon for not recognizing Anatoli’s brave act in his book. R.i.P. Anatoli 🌿❄️
Read the book again... Krakauer does commend Anatoli, but also blames him: Krakauer did not entirely vilify Boukreev. In fact he praises him for his bravery and saving lives but does state that perhaps he was irresponsible by climbing with no oxygen when he was responsible for inexperienced and weaker climbers. Remember though, it was Neil Beidleman that brought down the climbers from high up on the mountain. It was Boukreev who did not help clients reach the summit nor did he help clients descend to Camp Four. The others responsible are Hall and Fisher who were leaders of separate expeditions. Fisher should have put a lid on Pittman and not allowed her to bring all her selfish and unnecessary vanity socialite equipment and should have insisted the Boukreev use oxygen as well as guide clients, which is what he was being paid for..... And both leaders should have adhered strictly to the 2pm turn around time. The other blame is the overcrowding on the mountain due to the greed of the Nepalese gov't to issue as many permits as possible. Greed wins, Lives lost. The fact that these expedition companies actually take inexpereinced or weaker climbers on their trips tells you what climbing has become. Another tourist trap. And Krakauer even blames himself, but there was no way anyone at Camp Four but Boukreev and some Sherpas were capable of safely saving people during that horrid time on Everst.
@@theworldisavampire3346 Jon knew he couldn't help even if he wanted to. He was not a great mountaineer himself although he had climbed somewhat. He admitted that and would have only endangered more people.....
“Mountains are not Stadiums where I satisfy my ambition to achieve, they are the cathedrals where I practice my religion.” “Mountains have the power to call us into their realms and there, left forever, are our friends whose great souls were longing for the heights" ---Anatoli Boukreev (The Climb) highly recommend this book. It's on Audible. With 2 kids It was one of the first books I started listening to on the way to drop them off and pick them up from school or running errands. I am still a book reader, as in paper books, but this was a joy to listen to
By far one of my favorite story telling channels. Many channels cover stories I've heard a million times. Your content is generally completely new for me, well researched, well presented. Absolutely adore your content and manner of presenting information. It is also refreshing, it feels presented in such a respectful way. I hope for many more videos!!
This man is a hero for saving three human beings... Brave beyond measure... He developed extraordinary physical abilities through sheer determination and gutsy training after being told that he would never be able to pursue his dreams of mountaineering... His skill were superbly honed... I don't give a damn if he was "grumpy" or "aloof"... Did anyone try speaking to him in his mother tongue instead of insisting that he speak English... His generosity towards his students and an inherent sense of giving rather than receiving or taking...makes him a rarity...a good person... I am disappointed in anyone attempting to smear this man's reputation... 🇿🇦
This is a wonderful piece. Thank you so much. I remember reading Into Thin Air…(everyone read it)….and also remember Jon K. inferring this one Russian guide as the fault of the deaths. I know nothing of climbing but I also knew how could ONE man who tried his best to save others and go UP Everest on several occasions over maybe 36 hours to save and help be inferred to as the reason why the disaster happened. And Jon’s book very much painted “blame.” I thought at the time that it was very unprofessional to do this to ONE man. The next year I bought a First Edition of Anatole’s book, “The Climb” which I’m very proud to own.
I read "Into Thin Air", and I didn't get that Krakauer blamed Boukareev for the accident. He was indeed critical of Boukareev's actions on the climb, especially not taking oxygen and leaving the clients at the summit. The latter which he had to do because he wasn't using oxygen. I am not sure what I would have thought if I was one of his clients, struggling up the Hillary Step at 1pm, and he passed me on his way down with a "Hi, ho, I'm off for a cup of tea". And every experienced climber since always seem to have the same two opinions - a guide should be using oxygen and should stay with the clients. He also should have turned Fischer around when he got to him.
Very interesting analysis thank you. Lovely to hear about Linda Riley’s obvious devotion to Anatoli and I agree, he was the unsung hero in all of this. 👍
They were the ones that got the large group down close enough for Toli to rescue. They intended to go back for the others but had spent so much energy (Beidleman had done extra duty that day and spent the longest time at alititude and cold) that they crashed at the camp with nothing left. Toli was rested so he was the one that when back for the others. All heros. The real fault was the decisions to summit late.
@@rodneysmith9177 Actually, at the balcony or a little thereafter, Doug wanted to turn around but Rob talked him out of it. Rob was a warrior and a legend, but at that very moment he sealed his own fate. It's sad but definitely possible that most of them survive if Doug never summits.
Neil failed to turn the group around by the 2:30pm time, he just sat on the summit with them wasting time. His and the team's incompetence at not starting to descend on time is what got them caught up later on in the day. He made the mess, he cleared some of it up. I certainly wouldn't want him as my guide.
Even more than Neil and Mike, EVERYONE forgets the heroism of Andy Harris who could have gotten himself down to camp 4 but instead when Rob and Doug reported over the radio that they were in trouble and needed help, Andy went back up the mountain, into the heart of the storm, carrying bottles of oxygen to try to help Rob Hall and Doug Hanson. And he not only tried, but he made actually made it to them, as Rob Hall reported that he was there, but that he had disappeared during the night. He was never seen again.
Thank you for this! I so look forward to your videos and love how much work you put into them. Years back I read "the climb" ..but seeing all the videos they make of the 96 everest disaster they rarely touch on Anatoli's bravery and stamina much less his amazing ability to climb without using bottled oxygen. He deserves much more respect for his bravery than he's been given. So for that ,I thank you. I was already a fan of your channel but this was an unexpected surprise to see this upload from you. Anatoli Boukreev is a real hero. A hero that does good for the sake of doing good. I always thought their should be an in depth video on him but the fact that it came from a channel I already love is more than a plus! Amazing work!
Very good video, as usual. A couple things: I think anyone on the slopes of Everest should be called a climber, not a hiker, and surely you mean Anatoli reached the summit at 1 P.M.not 1 A.M. Thank you for what you do!
Your channel have quickly become my absolute favourite! Thank you for telling exciting stories about events that most of us in the Western part of the world haven't heard of before. You are doing a fantastic job! Keep up the amazing work! I really, really, *really* appreciate the amount of detail you present in all of your videos. *Peace, love and my deepest respect to You!* /a Swede in Norway
I can answer that question in 3sec. He is controversial because he is russian. Its just the way the west works. If he was american, australian or english, he would have hat 10 monuments build by now. People that are into mountains never give up, no matter what. They are the coolest, hardest and most amazing people with the most bad ass drive.
@@THE_BEAR_JEW that's exactly what I came to say. How many Americans have statues in Russia? I doubt they even mention American heroes there. I'm not blaming the Russian citizens, it's the Russian government that's to blame. But trust me, my American government isn't much better.
An outstanding job on this video. Very well put together and outstanding narration!! This channel is TH-cam’s hidden gem. Deserves way more subs & likes than it has now. Best wishes to you for great success with your channel…may it happen soon!!! 👏👏👏❤️
Thanks your channel is awesome. I've always been fascinated with stories like this from Eastern Europe. Anatoli seems like a man in love with climbing and I hope he continues to find peace in the place he loves most.
How could Krakauer blame anotoli? He was a hero! Sandy Pittman is a lot to blame she had to be shortlined up by a sherpa an that sherpa was the one that was supposed to be setting lines but couldn't because he had to take care of her.
Nonsense. The fixed ropes should have been in place well before the summit attempt. The fact they were not had nothing to do with Pittman and everything to do with the negligence of Hall and Fischer.
Thank you for this I read “the climb” for the true story so many people haven’t and are blinded by crackaurs terrible account , it’s so good to have this as a reminder well done sir
Very interesting personality. Definitely a loner, not a team player, and seems to have fought his own personal demons. However, he proved his merit by risking his life to save others. So his life was of great value to those he saved, who I hope repaid his generosity by never getting on another mountain again!
Just as they teach Shackleton in business schools, they should teach Everest 5/10/96. Both Hall and Fischer seem to have been extremely impaired and whatever mountaineering, and managerial skills they had really evaporated in the thin oxygen and compromised communication capabilities. Both teams were very strung out and jammed up in critical spots. Bukreev’s “speed climbing” style - essential for climbing without bottled oxygen - does not seem to have been a good match for a guiding model based on close contact between guides and clients. That is an error on Fischer’s part IMO. The following year Bukreev guided a smaller group, placed his highest camp above the old Camp-4, stocked it with ample oxygen and they still failed to summit but at least everyone survived.
I imagine using events like these as case studies make lessons (taught and learned!) more accessible and meaningful, not to mention interesting and engaging. Is this model, with the same cases, a standard among business programs (seems like from what you wrote) or did you have a particularly awesome instructor? It never occurred to me that these would be part of a business curriculum, but good to know, so thanks for mentioning it.
Hello everyone, Only recently have I started researching and getting into climbing and discovered Mr. Boukreev and had no idea he was the hero of the 1996 disaster from back when I was still a child. It’s tragic how this hero perished not even a year later doing what he loved best. Does anyone here remember any media coverage and tributes to him around that time?
Rob Hall convinced Doug Hansen to try to climb again because the year before Doug was his customer too and couldn’t peak this is why he felt responsible and stayed with him ultimately paying with his life that should be mentioned too
إضافة تعليق... I didn't know anything about Anatoli But while watching the movie I said to myself this man is a hero And truly he was People talk trash all the time its either they're vary far or on the safe side His heroic atcs talk it self RIP Mey god have mercy on his soul
Krakauer book vilified Toli. In The Climb, he indicated his English was minimal. He couldn't understand why he is actions in 96 were being questioned. He said Scott told him it was fine for him to go up and go down in case someone needed help. He saved 3 people. He didn't believe in "babysitting" other climbers. Saving them was what he saw as his role. There was so many things that went wrong 5-10-96. Especially the the back up on the step. Late turnaround times and the storm he was a 100% no b.s.Russian.
He is not your buddy to use a nickname that you managed to write incorrectly. Use his full name. At least try to be respectfull to a person you seemingly sympathise with.
@@ar_tseg653 She meant Tolya. There's nothing wrong with that. Anatoly is official, and Tolya is in everyday life. By saying "Tolya", she does not disrespect him.
This was such a huge story worldwide especially losing the number of climbers but losing the GREATS of MOUNTAINEERING was unimaginable… then Jon Krakauer came out with his book in 1996, the IMAX film, and i was hooked! Anatoli is a HERO ❤️ 🙏
Very interesting. I saw PBS Storm Over Everest several times. SOE was based on Into Thin Air by Jon Krakauer so it was good to hear from other perspective. I had no idea Jon Krakauer was in camp 4 along with others. Funny how he criticized Anatoli who actually went out to rescued people while he stayed in his warm tent. Not that it was Jon's obligation to go out and save people since he's not a professional guide. Given Beck Weathers' cryptic criticisms of individuals who did not come out and help, I would not be surprised that one of them includes Jon. The moral of the story of that 1996 disaster is that everyone needs to take responsibility of themselves. When the cut off time comes, it's one's responsibility to haul ass back to camp 4 no ifs and buts. Professional guides can only help so much at that altitude.
I have the same conclusions as you do. Jon K. sleeps in his tent yet criticizes the only rescuer that night just to find a good villain for his book. Beck W. shouldn't expect anybody to rescue him. In that situation the others could lose their lives in doing so. The two owners of the business are extremely irresponsible and broke their own protocol by not turning back around 2-3 pm. Rob H. even drags Doug H. to the summit neglecting his ill health. Sandy P. (short roped to the summit so she could brag about it) who was rescued by Anatoli said it was his job........what a biatch. These people were a disaster team to begin with!
This was another fascinating video. "Into Thin Air" is one of my favorite books, and because the story of this tragedy struck me so deeply, I read and watched as many other accounts of it as I could find. I even sat through that Hollywood garbage Everest movie; well, most of it. It is interesting to me that your video and some of the commenters stated that Krakauer made Boukreev out to be the villain, because I recall thinking the worst, most at-fault individuals were Sandy Pittman and the Asian climbing team that were clogging up the lines and doing things selfishly. I will have to go back and read the book again because I am not doubting what you said, but I always thought highly of Boukreev.
Agreed, need to re-read "into thin air". Boukreev is undoubtedly, undeniably a hero and a great great climber. I tend to think communication/language difference lead to Jon's misunderstanding/misreading of the overall situation. That said, I don't blame Krakauer for not going back out, at night, in a storm when he was NOT a professional climber. He understood his limits. Clearly, as 2nd to summit, Jon trained well for his climb and was not a burden on the guides or other climbers in the group...that effort was expected for all in the group...he did his part...others fell far short. But, to mainly blame Boukreev for this tragedy is just wrong.
I can imagine what the members of this expedition experienced. I have had a similar experience, though no way comparable to Everest. Six of us had hiked out to a rock outcrop about 1 mile off trail . A freak snowstorm suddenly set in, and if not for one person we surely would never found our way back to camp. He is my Anatoli Buukerev.
@@saund102 I can barely handle those spring days when it’s sunny and warm and feels like summer has arrived only to have the temp drop 20 degrees ahead of a totally normal, forecast thunderstorm. Like you’re wearing shorts, flip flops and maybe even a sweatshirt when you went IN to Target and when you come back OUT it’s suddenly full blown coat/pants/real shoes weather again and you’re freezing and feel like an idiot for jumping the gun when you should know better. Luckily, however, those events are largely survivable. Given that I can’t be bothered to dress appropriately for the weather or carry an extra layer for these totally foreseeable situations, I would surely fail if it happened out in the wild in an analogous, but greatly amplified, situation when the stakes are much higher and include the potential of becoming an added liability to the people with me. On the up side, I’ve clearly made at least one good decision in life by declining to pursue hobbies/activities in environments I can’t handle!
@@roamingirl I had to hike another half mile through the Alaskan terrain (carrying a pack) frozen in my wet clothes in hail. I had dry clothes in my pack so when I got to camp I changed. It was hard to think when you're soo cold, though. There still was hail and I didn't want to also get my dry clothes wet, either. I'll never forget when I got to camp someone handed me a mug of hot tea. I drank the tea then was finally able to figure out how I was gonna get into my dry clothes, still keeping them dry, in hail. I can still feel the relief of slipping into those toasty dry clothes! Either I had to get my tent up or more likely I had to borrow someone's tent. Sounds simple but it actually involved some thought process.
@@saund102 that sounds horrible but the sense of relief at the same level must have been amazing and a great memory allowing you to feel a burden that heavy lifted again and again - at least at first. I would say you were thinking clearly enough if you had the sense to think through the clothing situation - able to weigh the risk/benefit of your choices and obviously you chose well because you survived. That’s not to say it was “best” decision - who knows what was going to happen? Maybe you endured less comfort this way but you’ll never know, just having the understanding in the moment that you needed to think it through instead of immediately going for what could have been temporary relief at the expense of ??? later means you made the right choice in a situation where there wasn’t really a “right” answer at the time. I’d be obnoxiously proud of myself after I was able to consider everything once I’m no longer operating under “human survival mechanisms: triggered” status. But that’s just me…☺️ so humble. The whole experience would be a great foundation for one of those job interview questions we all hate all that start with “tell me about a time when you had to...” make a critical decision under pressure/had an unforeseen setback/in an unfamiliar situation that had to be revolved immediately/without consulting X blah blah blah. Would be good for whichever way that question ends, I’d think. 🤷🏻♀️ There you go - you’re set for at least one interview question for life! 😅
@@roamingirl That would probably be my seventh or eighth most interesting story from that Alaska trip. Get back to me sometime if you want and I'll explain them! Definitely No 1. was "the bear who almost ate me." No. 2 was "Happening upon the Aurora Borealis." No. 3 occurred while kayaking in the Prince William Sound it's called "The Huge Tusks and Angry Face of an Angry Walrus." Lol. No. 4 "How to climb out of a 20' crevasse you just fell into with just one ice axe (because you forgot to tighten your crampons.)" No. 5 "The Sea Otter endlessly amused by a bunch of dumb humans." No. 6 "The Ballsy Caribou who wanted to Join us."
The Dutch female climber wrote a very good synopsis of the event as well as Anatolia and it countered what krahour had to say plus I think there were others but I can’t remember them all - there was competition between hall and Fischer posing problems
This guy was a effin hero. It is amazing (or alarming) how many people have little experience in the mountains of Nepal height and think they are safe. There is an interesting mix of people way over prepared for lower elevation walks(I am of the school was bring the bare minimum) and ones sadly underprepared. When I went there I was in peak shape and had been up in the mountains for a long time and knew how my body would react to oxygen depravation, plus have been trained for being a mountaineering guide although I have never been a (paid) one. I have also a training to be a yoga teacher and have never been one, I just like to learn things. This chap was under a lot of pressure to get these people who paid a lot to get that shot on the top and was trying to help people achieve their dream and also keep them alive, a tough call. May they all rest in peace.
Annapurna yeah, had forgotten about that. I have been there, a stellar area and imo better than Everest. I have a deep understanding of this man and wish he was still with us. I also think he did nothing wrong and a lot more right on that day and in mountaineering in general.
@@canterburytail2294 Total agreement with you there. People say that as a guide he shouldn't have climbed without oxygen, but he was perfectly able to do his duties without supplemental oxygen. In fact he faired better on that mountain than the people who did climb with oxygen. He was a guide, not the team leader. It was his responsibility to help the clients and he did that. The team leaders screwed up and he did his best to save who he could. Guy was a bloody legend.
Anatoli, as intelligent as he was, he knew what mountain can give or take. Even in early ages. He was pro, rock solid. For him death was just one part of life on a mountain. That's why he just came out of tent to save others without any thinking.
I wonder if you even read John krakouers book. He didn't blame Anatoli for the tragedy at all. There was a cascade of a number of events which led to the disaster which he clearly documents in the book. He also praises Anatoli's courage in going back and rescuing the others. It was good to learn more about Anatoli's life before 1996 though, so good job with that
I concur with Evelinda GP. This is a really great summary. Appreciate the work you did to get the facts, as well as providing some of the back story. As you point out, Anatoli's actions have been supported by the mountaineering community, calling the accuracy of the first book into question. Thanks!!
Keakauer was not a guide. I read his book, and he blamed the tragedy on a confluence of things. I do not think it fair to say he blamed Anatoli. The gist for me was that Anatoli was aloof as a guide. Most ppl think his actions heroic once events began. That should be enough to allow for opposing opinions on what happened leading up to everything.
Anatoli never ever thought of himself as a guide. he was there just to assist Fisher, not guide them up the mountain...he was for support, fix ropes etc etc...that's why people mistakenly throw controversy at him, saying he failed as a guide, when, he never was a guide in the first place. That was not his job on that trip
This. In addition, if Krakauer was trying to make Boukareev the "villain" why would he have included the rescues effected by Boukareev and the fact that he himself was unwilling/ incapable of helping? Having read both books, I feel like the real issue as far as Boukareev (there were SO MANY issues that had nothing to do with Boukareev) was actually a misunderstanding of expectations between Boukareev and Fischer. Fischer seems to have thought he hired a guide, Boukareev seems to have thought he was being hired as an assistant.
@@kch7051 I find it a little perplexing that if Anatoli's job was to fix ropes, etc, why weren't the ropes already fixed when they set out to summit? That delay contributed hugely to the tragedy. I don't want to minimize Anatoli's effort in saving lives, but what was he being paid for if it wasn't to guide clients and he didn't fix the ropes in advance (the Sherpas were supposed to do it?)? It seems that a professional climber who ascends and descends on their own doesn't add much value to the team. If he descended alone so he could retrieve additional O2 bottles and bring them back up the mountain, why didn't he just bring them up with him during his ascent? Some of this doesn't make any sense.
thanx for an fair interpretation...maybe Anatoli was not a great guide and lousy babysitter, but he was a great climber...and great climbers never leave people in distress on mountain till the last atom of their strength...Krakauer is not a person who understands that...
I think it's worth noting that after he published Into Thin Air, Krakauer would later add a preface to it saying that his recollections were affected by trauma and anger. He and Boukreev basically called a ceasefire on their grudge, but unfortunately Boukreev would perish in another tragedy before they ever made true peace. Both men were stubborn and participated in traumatic events that they only had their own recollections of - it's unsurprising but saddening that this would up causing such a conflict, and that Krakauer's - who had a platform as an established journalist - side of the story blew up, while Boukreev - who was only well known in the mountaineering and adventuring space and didn't speak fluent English - didn't have enough of a platform to refute it. Hopefully history will be kinder to all survivors of the disaster. Everything those people went through is truly unfathomable.
Krakauer threw blame at many people...except himself. He was one of the people who got to the tents and would not go out to look for people. And he probably would have died had he done so...but Boukreev DID. Krakauer also put a lot of blame on Sandy Pitman. Essentially saying she was a spoiled socialite who required that Sherpas carry her cappuccino machine. He also said that the reason the ropes had not been put out properly was because Scott Fischer gave priority to his richest most connected client ' Sandy Pitman ' getting the constant personal attention of the Sherpas (who, one notes, are never even given a name or a face, which is pretty damn disgusting). Krakauer asserted that Pitman was wholly without the skills to make the climb, and that the strongest Sherpa (again, no name) was told, by Fischer, that he must CARRY Pitman whenever she felt tired. This meant that the Sherpas were unable to do the jobs of putting out the ropes for everyone else properly. I have zero idea how much of any of this is true. THough I do know that many people disagreed about his criticisms of Broukreev. He certainly never explained that Boukreev had agreed the plan to go back to the nearest camp to obtain more bottled oxygen. Ironically...Krakauer himself ran out, because he'd decided it was too heavy for him to carry, & thought the climb would go faster..which must have meant others had made the same decision and had the same problem. Krakauer was essentially complaining about the commercialization of climbing Everest. Well, that was bound to happen. When climbing became heavily used by equipment makers to sell their gear, it made the activity into an aspirational sport. Krakauer liked Hall, but was quite critical of the Mountain Madness group - certainly that is a remarkable immature name. He believed that people who weren't capable were just being able to flash money and get their chance. But that has always rather been the case with everything. In truth, people who pay to make such climbs have made their decision to risk their lives. If they are happy with it...then why should the rest of us be upset if they die in a manner that they decided they were okay with. I think the really BAD part is the way that the Sherpas and porters are treated. They are badly paid.. And they end up dying far too often because they are told to go back up a mountain to try to save people who shouldn't be there. Nepal is so poor, and their families have so many needs, that the Sherpas essentially are paid a pittance for their lives. I think the should all unionize in order to get proper pay and create proper rules about what they can be told to do...ie No more forcing them to go die on mountains to try to save rich people who made their own choice freely.
Just finished Jon's book Into Thin Air, Your video leaves out way too much info about how Jon actually praised Anatoli's effort and skill that day and the ones that followed. Jon's wrote that Anatoli should have used oxygen if he was guiding clients and that Fisher would have never agreed to have any guide reach the summit and then go back down only to return for oxygen. Two trips for any person lacks clear thinking for anyone who is getting paid two bring people who are inexperienced up Everest. I encourage anyone who wants to see what happen those tragic days read both books and then decide. No doubt Anatolis saved lives and made tremendous effort to save more. But Fisher even question his role and told others that Anatoli was not totally in a guides role days earlier. No guide should be the first one back to camp when so many others were still up there.
Krakauer was a journalist. He wasn't being paid tens of thousands of dollars to assist in an expedition. Yes, Boukreev was a hero. Yes, he was also useless as a guide, acting more like an independent climber and making no attempt to stay with or monitor the people he was being paid to guide. Reinhold Messner says Krakauer's description of Boukreev's personality and attitude is extremely accurate.
@@remycallie Simone Moro’s reference to the author Krakauer: “You are American; he was Russian. You were new to 8000 meter peaks; he was the best of all time at these altitudes… in my opinion you were like a man who, after reading a book about medicine, pretends to teach one of the world’s most famous and capable surgeons how to be a doctor. When judging the decisions made by Anatoli in 1996 you must remember this: no clients on his team died.” Anatoli paved the way. He wasn’t there to hand hold clients. This was known and wasn’t his job.
@@Trish.Norman First of all, the analogy is not to someone who read a book about medicine and then tells a doctor how to do surgery. That would be the analogy if Krakauer had been criticizing Boukreev's technique or telling him how to climb. The analogy is to someone, regardless of their medical training, who feels that a doctor is failing to care for their patients. The guy who hired him (Scott Fisher) absolutely felt that Boukreev was hired to hand hold clients and wrote about how unhappy he was with his failure to do so. None of Boukreev's clients died, because he went out and saved them from a situation they should never have gotten into in the first place. That was heroic, but doesn't excuse his other actions. You can praise the one and still criticize the other.
While I understand Kraukauer's comment on Anatoli using oxygen, villifying him was not it. Anatoli's logic does make sense. He didnt want to use it because he usually never did and that if he used it and ran out, it would lead to him feeling worse than if he hadn't. He did carry a bottle just in case which he gave up to Neil. That man did not deserve to be scrutinized after he saved multiple dying people.
There's no question that Anatoli was one of the strongest climbers ever. I heard a rare interview where Anatoli said the 96 storm was very bad, but not the worst he had ever seen. It's very likely he had seen worse as he loved winter expeditions. Which is extremely dangerous because of the increased snow & cold. Unfortunately that's why he lost his life on Annapurna on Christmas day in 1997. th-cam.com/video/49pThlU74SE/w-d-xo.html
Number one: he was not even a guide for Fisher’s team, he was an assistant guide. He had above super trained physique and normally teams took him as a first in the line to do the physical effort through the snow. So his job was to quickly made a path a return. Fisher and the other guy were the guides of the team. And the second team ran by kiwi guy (which Krakauer belonged to) had their own guides and sherpas. So Bukreev had no responsibility to that team whatsoever. Second: Bukreev did not use oxygen because it was safer in his role, if oxygen is over it means death, if one is goes without oxygen there is a chance to survive. Obviously he probably was the most acclimatized person in the group as he pretty much lived in the high altitude. So oxygen rules for him were different. Third: there were strategic mistakes made by all 3 groups (including Taiwanese): physical level and training level of customers, commercial aspect, which made difficult for heads to say “no” and return customers back after 2 pm and competition between Fisher and kiwi. Bukreev was doing crisis management after organizers brought the groups to disaster. This is how I can see it as a professional business administration specialist. If it was business and I was making decisions in crisis I would not allow Bukreev to do his life saving trips. It would be plain “no” irrespective of his skills, physique and desire for help. Too many unknowns were in that crisis. He may end up losing his life while not saving anyone. It’s also interesting that the guy who was assessed as dead but managed to return back to the camp doesn’t leave negative comments about Bukreev, but Krakauer who had climbing skills and refused to go with Anatoly, does.
Mc Kinley is now Denali. Nice to hear more about Anatoli. The climb is gonna be my next book, after I read Lene Gammelgard's. I guess that video was not ment to be objective. And that is ok. I read Krakauer's book at least 10 times and never got the impression he blamed s/o specifically. Imo he was just trying to figure out how this could happen. He also questioned the decisions of Hall, Harris and Fisher. And he also talked about his own mistakes and what he could had done better. And I guess it is not quite fair to compare a guide to a client, who does not have the same experience and knowledge. And to blame climbers at that altitude to not risk their lives is bs. But yes at this moment was Anatoli the hero. No doubt.
Climbers really need to take the advice of their guides. Had they descended at 2PM as advised, they would not have lost and risked lives. No fault of the guides or sherpas, except for being too softhearted when letting them try to achieve their ambition.
This movie is not just interesting. It is amazing, 100% truthful documentary about 1996 expedition and Anatoli himself. The author managed in 36 minutes perfectly tell the story to the audience who knew a lot about this tragedy as well as to the people who maybe never heard about this great world-class mountaineer. Thank you, Archie!
Thanks for the video about Anatoly. He's too sparsely mentioned and only in relation to the 1996 Everest fiasco. He deserves more. The true mountaineer - may he rest in peace there!
The fact that Boukreev went up the route despite knowing the danger in a blizzard on mt Everest to save people is just so impressive and professional. It does not matter what he did before he DID save 3 people and he did go back for Scott Fischer and thats not a easy thing to do when you have just climbed to the summit yourself. Do not call him a villain for what he did. Because he was the one using his brain to rest up before going back up to do something no one else was risking to do. He will always be a hero in my book.
I’ve never understood why Into Thin Air has been so glorified and is probably where the majority of non climbers get their information about this tragedy. Anatoli has always been a legend in my opinion and his actions during May of 96 were nothing short of superhuman!
There seem to be some inaccuracies here. Neil beidelman was left on the summet with clients when Boukreev descended. Beidelman had to try to lead the group down alone and it was he who guided those who were mobile enough to camp 4 when the weather broke enough to see the way. It was also Neil who told Boukreev where the missing clients were. Some of the mountain madness clients were stranded on the mountain above camp 4 along with Rob Hall's. Boukreev was certainly extremely brave to venture out to find the missing clients but it can be argued that a guide should not summit without using oxygen and maybe should not have left Beidelman alone with clients on top of the mountain. Ultimately, the weather and the number of climbers on the slopes are surely the cause of this tragedy, not individual people be they clients, guides or journalists.
I have seen and heard all the documentaries, interviews, podcasts and books in English and Russian about this story, and still cannot take sides in the controversy. It's just a bunch of fatalities and bad decisions made by each participant and multiplied by unfortunate weather. But worst of all, of course, is Rob Hall, whose decisions directly killed several people, terribly maimed one physically and mentally injured many people. If he had not died then, he would have been condemned by both the law and society. I admit that he could understand this and did not try to survive.
He was able to save three total incompetents by going out alone in a storm like hell. In itself this is proof of his qualities beyond any doubt.
Tim wasn't incompetent ... he chose to stay behind and comfort his girlfriend Charlotte. Then, after Anatoli whisked Charlotte away, he chose to stay behind and comfort Sandy. Anatoli had left him, and Sandy, with a bottle of O2 and some hot tea.
@@saund102 so 2 useless women and a man who risked his life for them
Exactly my thoughts.......
Krakauer has only one irrefutable point, and that is no human can climb above 8000 meter without oxy.
@@palkulcsar2074 nonsense
Boukreev is controversial because Jon Krakauer decided to turn him into the villain of "Into Thin Air", and then the book became intensely successful. Based on all the accounts of what happened that I've read, it starts to sound suspiciously like the major cause of the disaster (beyond bad luck with the weather), was that the expedition leaders for the two main teams felt extreme pressure to successfully get clients to the summit. They pushed on when they shouldn't have, and didn't have enough support resources.
Why would two experienced mountaineers have made risky decisions like that? Could it have had something to do with the presence of a journalist? The article that Krakauer was going to right could have had huge economic consequences for the businesses of both expedition leaders, depending on how they came off.
I'm not suggesting that Krakauer is to blame for what happened. However, remembering that he was a participant, not just an observer, starts to make some of his attacks on Boukreev sound like projection. For example, framing Boukreev as "abandoning" his clients because he descended quickly, which allowed him to act as support and rescue for climbers in trouble later... when by the account of another climber who was dealing with vision issues, he begged Krakauer to help him descend, and was ignored.
It is just... completely absurd that the man who risked his life multiple times to save others, who rescued three fellow climbers, who went back up the mountain the day after summitting in the hopes that his friend might still be alive and could be helped, who begged others at the high camp to come with him in rescue efforts, and went out alone when no one else would come... is somehow remembered by many as having caused the disaster by making choices that allegedly left him *physically unprepared*.
I've read the book and he wasn't villainised. It's just not a black and white situation. The fact that he acted with incredible courage after things went south doesn't remove the fact that it was inappropriate and irresponsible of him to be climbing without oxygen while working as a guide for amateur clients. Leaving another guide alone with the clients was also probably not something he should have done (and in the other guide's opinion it certainly wasn't). It's not like he knew what would happen later. Better to avoid needing to rescue people in the first place than to be rested for it.
@@trinityj1 If you're interested in the topic, I'd highly suggest reading some of the other primary sources. Particularly Boukreev's own "The Climb", there's also Beck Weathers' "Left for Dead" and the transcripts of the base camp interviews taken afterwards. There are several places where Krakauer is at best misleading and at worst openly dishonest about events.
I've heard many people come away from "Into Thin Air" with the main belief being that the main human responsibility for what happened was Boukreev's choices, and in that way it frames him as the villain.
As far as the issue of leaving the clients, for example, the evidence is very strong that Boukreev was told to do so by the head of the expedition (who was also there with the clients, not just a single guide).
It also doesn't really hold up to suggest that it was irresponsible of Boukreev to climb without oxygen. The argument would be that the choice weakened him, somehow, but his extraordinary actions later that night indicate that he was in no way impaired by the choice. There was also a shortage of available oxygen near the summit due to issues with preparation, and Boukreev even gave his emergency oxygen bottle to the other guide at one point, something he would not have been able to do unless climbing unassisted himself.
This has turned into a bit of a novel. But I actually finished "Into Thin Air" with the same interpretation as you did; it was only when I started reading other perspectives from people with more professional knowledge that I saw the holes in Krakauer's account, and the harm he has done to the public understanding of what happened.
I, too, have read Into Thin Air. Several times actually, as I discovered the book shortly after surviving a workplace shooting in which five of my coworkers were killed…. it kind of got into my head and helped me in some weird way in the struggle to deal with my survivor guilt and PTSD.
I thought Jon Krakauer did a good job of covering all the issues-the competition, the pressure to summit, the additional pressure of having a journalist along to write about it, poor planning and/or execution of fixing the ropes, the marginal qualifications of some of the climbers, the Sherpas being overburdened with hauling all of Pittman’s “vanity gear” (my phrase) and failing to fix the ropes ahead of time, etc. He included himself in his assessment of how they had “utterly failed” Beck Weathers and how badly he felt about it. It even seemed to me that he was trying not to demonize anyone. I think a lot of people just always need something/someone specific to blame when a tragedy like this happens, and since Boukreev was a guide who seemed more interested in his own summit than in guiding others there, he was a convenient target.
It is indeed commendable that Boukreev rescued the surviving climbers after he had rested in his tent for hours, but keep in mind that Neil Beidleman was the guy who got them close to camp, where they could be rescued, and told Boukreev where they were. If they had still been up near the death zone, none of them would’ve survived because no rescuers would’ve been able to get to them in time. Jon Krakauer was a journalist and paying client, it was in no way his responsibility to try to save others, especially when he was completely exhausted, and had barely made it back to camp alive himself.
Of course the tragedy is not Boukreev’s fault, but I agree with Krakauer that his actions were irresponsible when working as a guide. Boukreev raced to the summit and didn’t help any clients get there, then turned around and went back to camp without helping any clients get back either. Scott Fisher is dead, so the only evidence that this was planned is Boukreev saying so. And this alleged plan simply doesn’t make sense….. why would you pay a guide thousands of dollars to summit and return without any clients? Particularly when it was common knowledge that Scott was ailing and not at his best. Anyone remotely familiar with mountaineering knows that when you go high altitude climbing without supplemental oxygen, timing is crucial. You must get back down as fast as possible before high altitude sickness has a chance to get you. I have great respect for the hearty souls who choose to climb without supplemental oxygen, but it is my opinion that when you are being paid to perform guide duties, you should absolutely be required to use oxygen so that your brain will be functioning as well as possible, and you will make good decisions for your clients.
And of course, as usual, the real culprit is probably money. Nepal is a desperately poor nation, so they will basically sell climbing permits to virtually any idiot who has the extra money. The Sherpas need the jobs, and the adventure companies make a tidy profit from their ventures. I learned from an interview with Neil Bidleman that some clients have actually tried to sue the guides for not getting them to the summit! He feels that these incidents added to the pressure to achieve a successful summit. So I guess sometimes people are just jerks…. The guide makes the right decision for your safety, then you get to the bottom of the mountain and feel better, and then you sue them to try to get your money back.🙄
Ultimately, though, the responsibility for this tragedy is on the guides, the professionals who should’ve known better and should’ve abided by the turnaround time. RIP to all of them.😢
LOL….. I wrote a novel too….😂
@@nikiobrien5357 I'd say the guides are partly responsible, but equally responsible are the clients that put themselves in that position. If you can't take care of yourself above 8000m you usually die. The guides are in an impossible position. As long as clients are informed of the risk I think their safety is on them; just like all other aspects of adult life.
@@nikiobrien5357 I appreciate the thoughtfully written reply! The complexity of what happened, and the different perspectives from the survivors are probably a large part of why the event remains so fascinating as a topic even after all this time. I also try to remember (not always successfully) to keep in mind how much high altitude can impact brain function, so that memory is not always reliable, and decision-making may be impaired.
I read a book recently about ascents of K2, and there was a gut-wrenching section where a group of highly experienced climbers decided to take a "rest day" at a camp above 8,000m. What? The body is not 'resting' at that altitude, it's dying! That's an objectively terrible decision, and yet it seemed like a good idea at the time to those who made it.
So probably all of the climbers involved in the 1996 disaster have been unfairly judged at some points by others who weren't there (and I include myself in that). One of the frustrating things about Krakauer's account, however, is the way that he's dug in his heels, and refused to acknowledge any of the places where what he claims happened differs from the recollections of others. Sometimes in ways that can be objectively verified, and other times with things that are "they-said-they-said... at an altitude where your brain doesn't totally work". The lack of nuance in his account wouldn't be so much of an issue, but his skill as a storyteller means that his version of events has become the defining one for most people. "The Climb" is definitely worth it as an alternate perspective, imo.
You're probably right about the role of money in all of this, and from recent years, it doesn't seem like that lesson was really learned.
He went back out time and again into that storm and saved 3 people. Been a hero of mine since I first read about it (which was in 98, while climbing and trekking in Solo Khumbu).
Can you imagine what a stud he was? 3 times not once while no one including the idiot who wrote the book did anything.
*I Thought that we were SuPPosed to BLame it ALL on Sandy HiLL Pittman ???*
I read “Into Thin Air” when it first came out, and I thought even then, when I didn’t know all the facts, that his blaming Anatoli was unfair. If he hadn’t brought those 3 hikers back, they also would have died. It seemed to me that John didn’t like his personality so he was being overly critical.
it's human nature to always find someone to blame when there's an accident.
even in the case of accidents, where a chain of events ultimately led to the fatal end.
the first impression you have of a person is usually superficial and for most people it's difficult to admit that they were wrong about someone in the first place.
i'm pretty sure that a lot of personal aversion played a role blaming boukreev.
he never took his own life lightly, always fought hard.
he was always aware of the dangers in the mountains and respected them.
in the case of 1996;
he not only risked his life by rescuing the three other climbers, but also in the run-up to where he used to descend to meet the climbers with fresh oxygen bottles again.
only very few people would do that.
and krakauer is definitely not one of those special humans.
@@Z0RDR4CK I agree with what you said. I have to say though that human tendency to blame someone when it’s clearly no ones fault is something I don’t have a lot of patience for personally.
I always thought John just blamed him and the rest for the drama to sell more books😢
IMO Boukreev was the rarest of humans…survived and conquered Meningitis.. Saved 3 souls at least, proly more through his travels, I’m sure😊survived and conquered Kazakhstan and U.S.S.R
Such a great soul, like a few I’ve met in my travels.
They never make a big deal, just help save lives cuz they can, they “must go” 😢
True sad tragedy…Rest in Paradise Anatoli Boukreev❤ may I hope to find such courage in despair
I’ve been treated much the same way. I quiet but confident and lead by example. More professionally than personally, but bc Im very direct, avoided small talk and honest it tends to rub the lazy and stupid the wrong way( in the USA that’s about 70-80 % the population). I expose them by simply being who I am. A lot these people thing they can blend in and just get by doing very little and almost never do things correctly. I simply have no time for that bullshit and never will capitulate to these people.
A few times there was too high a percentage of these pieces of shit, so they were able to constantly lie and twist every possible situation against me.
I could really give a shit bc I know what I’m capable of and wouldn’t want to be anywhere that the average employee/person is worthless
The problem is(in the USA, I can’t speak on any other country) this was the exception when I was much younger but now this is the norm it’s only in a few professional circles(medicine/law/ etc) I have found tolerable.
Exceptionalism use to be celebrated by most, now it’s shunned for making the majority look awful.
This only improves a few ways most of which require tremendous pain/death/sacrifice.
One of my favorite quotes
“Hard times create strong men
Strong men create easytimes
Easy times create week men
Weak men creat hard times”
About to get rough fellas
*I Thought that we were SuPPosed to BLame it ALL on Sandy HiLL Pittman ???*
He carried 3 (stupid) people through hurricane level wind, at high altitude in a whiteout. He risked his life 3 times. He is a hero in my book.
What's the title of your book? Are you selling it?
Such a terribly sad ending to such a feat 😞💔🙏🏼🕊
Not stupid unlucky
Not to diminish what he did, but to provide some context, they were 400 meters from camp IV, not on the summit ridge
@@arrowintheknee9956one needs a book to hold an opinion? 😂😂😂 You silly fool
Great summary. I read his book and was deeply impacted by his forthright tone and dedication to climbing. Really glad to find a TH-cam story dedicated to this amazing climber.
There are several more if you look around, not based on anatoli but telling his side of the story.
@@joshthemediocre7824 can I get some titles? I been looking more into him too. theres a documentary "unconquerable summit" by Vladimir tulkin, I couldnt find where I can watch it tho 😞
@@joshthemediocre7824 Hello Josh, same for me. If you have the time, I would appreciate the title(s) of additional reading material.
Kind regards,
Garret
I saw an interview with simon Moreno the one who survived at Annapurna and he had nothing but great things to say about anatoli.
It says alot that the mountaineering community supported him and a journalist tried to make him the enemy.
That's how Americans do things , idk if krakov was but it was America like.
No it’s not an “American” thing, it’s a “cynical and mean to their core” thing. Those kinds of people can be anywhere and from ANY country
Anatolia saved alot of people,he should be thought of as a hero
Totally agree. It's honestly ridiculous that anyone would have the audacity to blame the one guy brave enough to go back and continue trying to save people.
@@ImmortalKat4ever Anatoli and Scott should have had a better mutual understanding of guides’ expectations prior to and during the Everest expedition. Had Anatoli stayed with the clients on the descent, the outcome may have been different. This is mostly where people have their disagreements. Personally I think he was heroic for venturing out into the storm above camp 4 several times, but that doesn’t mean that the best course of action was to descend far ahead of the clients to C4.
@@hodad924 He had to descend because he wasn't using oxygen. And that's the issue right there, he was working as a guide at the time. However blame really rests with the guiding company as they were the employer and therefore had a duty of care. Use of oxygen, or at least carrying it, should have been sop for the guiding staff.
@@uilleachan 100% agree.
Right, that's why I'll never watch the 2015 film Everest: it's a shitty movie that add fuel to the fire and makes Krakauer a hero
If he was in the military, he would have surely gotten the medal of honor for putting his life aside to save others. Hero
May you Rest In Power, Anatoli... You are a Hero, of the Mountains. ⛰️⛰️⛰️
My first encounter with this story was the movie "Everest". When I watched it, it felt for me like Anatoli was the one deserving the most respect out of all participants in the events. He was right in his judgments of the situation and he did incredible feats of heroism to save others. Now seeing more of the details, seems like the movie did a pretty good job at portraying him fairly. Anatoli's rough natural speed climbing style reminds me of Denis Urubko - you can see more about him in the documentary The Last Mountain (2019).
Boukreev is without a doubt a hero, and one of (the?) greater climbers ever. Krakauer was just looking for a villain for his story, and it's outrageous to me that he chose to vilify a man who risked his life to save three other people.
I wonder if being Russian has anything to do with it. Always vilify Russians. And he was dead and couldn't defend himself.
Krakauer didn’t try to save anyone, he needs to shut up.
Krakauer did not entirely vilify Boukreev. In fact he praises him for his bravery and saving lives but does state that perhaps he was irresponsible by climbing with no oxygen when he was responsible for inexperienced and weaker climbers. Remember though, it was Neil Beidleman that brought down the climbers from high up on the mountain. It was Boukreev who did not help clients reach the summit nor did he help clients descend to Camp Four. The others responsible are Hall and Fisher who were leaders of separate expeditions. Fisher should have put a lid on Pittman and not allowed her to bring all her selfish and unnecessary vanity socialite equipment and should have insisted the Boukreev use oxygen as well as guide clients, which is what he was being paid for.....
And both leaders should have adhered strictly to the 2pm turn around time. The other blame is the overcrowding on the mountain due to the greed of the Nepalese gov't to issue as many permits as possible.
Greed wins, Lives lost. The fact that these expedition companies actually take inexpereinced or weaker climbers on their trips tells you what climbing has become. Another tourist trap.
And Krakauer even blames himself, but there was no way anyone at Camp Four but Boukreev and some Sherpas were capable of safely saving people during that horrid time on Everest.
Especially interesting because Krakauer helped NO ONE himself
@@theworldisavampire3346 Almost everyone stayed in their tents, not just Krakauer, because they were totally exhausted from the climb. Even those who didn't summit and came down early.
Yes, Anatoli shouldn’t have climbed without oxygen since he was a guide, but he was the only one able to go out into the storm and subsequently saved the lives of three people who certainly would’ve died without him. He was an incredible human being.
He wasn't a guide, he made it clear to Fischer he would fix ropes and be his climbing Sidar but not a guide
Well Messner says that if a guide was climbing without oxygen through out the climb, they shouldn’t use oxygen in the final assent either, as it will alter their performance for the worse in case of a force major..
In his opinion Anatoly was able to save three people exactly because he chose not to use oxygen on the final assent 🤷♂️
@@splifstar85 Messner as great as he was, doesn't know everything. This is simply false. And Boukreev never should have been below all the people on the mountain. He really didn't function professionally at all. One can dispute many things of what happened on the fateful day as memories are unreliable especially at altitude, but there are certain facts. It is known where Boukreev was and when, it is known where many clients were and when. What the heck was he doing in the south col. He was paid, he was a guide. Doesn't matter what he said to rationalize.
They knew there was a bad storm coming. They are ALL to blame for those deaths.
@@michaelbrowder1759 ok.. I guess you have info that I (and Messner) don’t..
From you comment it would appear that you know technical aspects of climbing better than Messner as well as knowing what were the assigned roles of each guide..
Wow.. you must be an expert climber and must have inside knowledge from the surviving guides of Fisher’s team...
(Or more likely, you are just another couch warrior and have absolutely no idea what you are talking about 🙈🙈🙈🙈)
He might have been moody, but he had a heart of gold! Rest in Peace. 🕊️
He is most likely a person who is capable of feeling human emotions and feelings. That isn’t a myth. It’s more of a curse. But, he may be grumpy because he can feel others as if they were his emotions. Then I know he feels the suffering and knows he can help. So he reacts.
After reading his and Lene Gammelgaard's book, I don't get the feeling he was moody. He just didn't coddle clients or sita around and socialize too much. He was more serious for sure. But Lene found his softer side and really showed his humanity. She adored and respected him.
This guy, and Ueli Steck.. are two guys who are legends in that sport... but especially Anatoli. He performed rescues, at that height too. Mind blowing
Did he pull all this off w/o O2, as well? That alone makes it much harder
This man is a HERO! ❤️ NOT CONTROVERSIAL AT ALL.
For me its kind of simple, in Anatoly's team, all clients were alive and pretty much unharmed after the accident. So he did his job as a guide in the end, nothing to blame.
I mean they were alive because Neal had dragged them (and people from Rob’s team) all the way to South Col, located the camp and proceeded to get help from Anatoli, who was in his tent drinking tea. All that in the middle of the storm.
Neal also implied Anatoli descending early wasn’t part of the plan. He made up a story to try and justify his actions.
What he did was remarkable and he was one of the greatest climbers of his generation. But he didn’t do his job as a guide, that would have been Neal.
Without Neal all of the clients that summited would have died.
@@ferreira8649stop saying like he was drinking tea for his pleasure ffs, he was recovering, and without him all this brought down by Neal would die near the camp, jeez
He didnt use oxygen on many of his successful summits, he saved three people during the everest disaster. He climbed Denali in 10.5 hours when it usually takes 3-4 days for an experienced climber. He went up K2 and came back the only surviving member of the expedition. He was a beast.
HE DID WHAT AT DANALI??, I THOUGHT HE WAS A LEDEND BEFORE BUT DAMN
Boukreev was one of those athletes who could become one with the elements they endure and adapted well... and he used that excellent skill he was born with to save lives and give other people the great views and priceless experiences. I think he was a hero.
I pressed the post button too soon, his and Lynda's relationship and that butterfly story = ♡♡♡♡♡
He might be the most Heroic Climber in History. Also, the strongest climber in history. Rescuing another soul is a lot harder and more dangerous than just climbing in such bad weather conditions. I read the Krakauer book, and even from Jon's own account Anatoli's heroism stands out. As well as Jon's own decision not to help out. He was too tired to help he reasoned. Anatoli was a real world hero.
that title would go to Rheinhold Messner. Full stop.
Why Rheinhold? because he never even died ...not even once.
@@johnandrews3547 Yeah. He saved himself. Not anyone else three times. So that kinda counts him out for being heroic.
@@swangonzalez4797 Are you questioning Messner as the best climber to ever live? If you are, you know nothing about climbing.
@@johnandrews3547 Heroic and Best are two different things. Understand what you're reading. Duh. It's just an opinion that some share. Don't let it shatter your fragile mind.
I agree with having new, rigorous requirements before allowing prople to register to climb Everest. The bottlenecks caused by overcrowding is a problem. I am not a climber, but have watched many of these videos. It is obvious, even to me, that too many unprepared, unqualified people are on that mountain, taking too long and endangering other climbers by their presence. They need to get out of the way of the people who belong there. These sight-seers cause delays for other climbers who have to wait while the mountain and weather become unstable. You gotta get out of the death zone before it gets too late. It would be so annoying to have a novice in front of you, delaying your progress or compelling you to risk your own life to save them (causing you to give up your own summit and lose money).
I feel like this is an obnoxious rich person problem. They believe if they throw enough money out, they can buy their way to the summit.
I agree that it's a horrible system, but the problem is there's no one to enforce any improvements such as those you suggest. The companies certainly won't institute new or more rigid requirements, as it cuts into their bottom line, and they make money whether people summit or not. The local population also profits from, if not relies on, this industry, and I doubt they'd support any restrictions that would deprive them of the money they need to survive. Obviously the sherpas have the highest risk, as they risk injury and death due to the ignorance/ineptness of those wealthy idiots who think they can buy their way to the top of the world.
@@loldoctor , I feel worst for the sherpas. They risk so much.
You sound terrible. How do you think people become the ones who "belong to be there." At one point everyone is a novice. Clearly on top of mount Everest isnt the place to be a novice, but its not because of the other people "belong." What kinda classist, gatekeeping shit is this?
@@Missconduct044 - A perfect example on that fateful expedition was Sandy "Princess" Pittman. I'm sure you've seen all the documentaries of that climb. She hired the world's 4 most experienced climbers, had to be short roped to a Sherpa guide and injected with a mild stimulant because she was crying that she was too tired and too exhausted. She also agreed with the rest of the climbers before hand not to talk to the press until the climb had ended. Nonetheless she rented a private helicopter to take her and 2 other members to their destination while she stayed in a luxury hotel by the poolside sipping on drinks and couldn't call reporters quick enough. I believe she did reach the summit but never would have achieved this goal without the help of her well paid, hired mountaineers. She was on the brink of death during her decent where she had to be short roped due to her failing health. I also dont think with all the help she received and/or paid for, hardly qualifies her to be credited with reaching the summit. There have been 1 or 2 amazing women who did reach the Everest summit without ANY OXYGEN whatsoever and did the entire climb with little or no help whatsoever. That to me anyway, definitely credits you for completing the expedition. Sorry for the long text. LOL
Anatoli sounds like he was a very special person in his attitude and by the selfless actions he took to save the lives of others despite having summited Everest and even when no one else wanted help him.
I feel like Anatoli would be such a humble person to meet. RIP, not a climber but appreciate those who act in times of need.
Anatolia feels like a blunt person who actually cared about all the climbers regardless if they were in MM or in another group.
He was and is never forgotten as a hero for saving 3 people and trying to help as much as he could before the storm came
_Anatoli_ -- "Anatolia" is a region in Turkey
@@llYossarian did you grasp what the OP was trying to convey? You did, didn't you? So please spare us the corrections and fuckwittery.
@@nataliesutherland7222 "You've got something in your teeth" -- (7 months later) _did you grasp what the OP was trying to convey? You did, didn't you? So please spare us the corrections and fuckwittery._
Well put!
@@llYossarian and just FYI, it was such a small spelling error that it was clear what they were trying to say, my recommendation is to leave those comments for ppl who say jerky stuff, not something that’s heartfelt.
Anatoli was the stud on the mountain in '96. Best shape of any of them. Hero. Amazing how the accounts of what happened are so different. He was the man out of all of them.
Boukreev was NOT the only guide who survived: So did Neal Beidleman from MM and Mike Groom from AC
Excellent and enlightening video. I’m glad you honored Anatoli - he was very deserving.
Thank you for putting this biography of Anatoli together.
I read Into thin Air by Jon and saw the movie Everest in 2015.
Shame on Jon for not recognizing Anatoli’s brave act in his book.
R.i.P. Anatoli 🌿❄️
Read the book again... Krakauer does commend Anatoli, but also blames him:
Krakauer did not entirely vilify Boukreev. In fact he praises him for his bravery and saving lives but does state that perhaps he was irresponsible by climbing with no oxygen when he was responsible for inexperienced and weaker climbers. Remember though, it was Neil Beidleman that brought down the climbers from high up on the mountain. It was Boukreev who did not help clients reach the summit nor did he help clients descend to Camp Four. The others responsible are Hall and Fisher who were leaders of separate expeditions. Fisher should have put a lid on Pittman and not allowed her to bring all her selfish and unnecessary vanity socialite equipment and should have insisted the Boukreev use oxygen as well as guide clients, which is what he was being paid for.....
And both leaders should have adhered strictly to the 2pm turn around time. The other blame is the overcrowding on the mountain due to the greed of the Nepalese gov't to issue as many permits as possible.
Greed wins, Lives lost. The fact that these expedition companies actually take inexpereinced or weaker climbers on their trips tells you what climbing has become. Another tourist trap.
And Krakauer even blames himself, but there was no way anyone at Camp Four but Boukreev and some Sherpas were capable of safely saving people during that horrid time on Everst.
And Jon NEVER lifted a finger to assist ANYONE. That's fine as long as you don't pen a best seller making so many people look badly.
@@theworldisavampire3346 Jon knew he couldn't help even if he wanted to. He was not a great mountaineer himself although he had climbed somewhat. He admitted that and would have only endangered more people.....
Legend of mountains ⛰️
Best Mountaineer to walk the Earth 🌎
R.I.P ..respect from India 🇮🇳
No. That would be Rheinhold Messner. Universally accepted as the best ever and he's still alive.
“Mountains are not Stadiums where I satisfy my ambition to achieve, they are the cathedrals where I practice my religion.” “Mountains have the power to call us into their realms and there, left forever, are our friends whose great souls were longing for the heights"
---Anatoli Boukreev (The Climb) highly recommend this book. It's on Audible. With 2 kids It was one of the first books I started listening to on the way to drop them off and pick them up from school or running errands. I am still a book reader, as in paper books, but this was a joy to listen to
If mountains are the cathedrals where one can go and practice their religion then I am quite happy to be an atheist.
By far one of my favorite story telling channels. Many channels cover stories I've heard a million times. Your content is generally completely new for me, well researched, well presented. Absolutely adore your content and manner of presenting information. It is also refreshing, it feels presented in such a respectful way. I hope for many more videos!!
This man is a hero for saving three human beings...
Brave beyond measure...
He developed extraordinary physical abilities through sheer determination and gutsy training after being told that he would never be able to pursue his dreams of mountaineering...
His skill were superbly honed...
I don't give a damn if he was "grumpy" or "aloof"...
Did anyone try speaking to him in his mother tongue instead of insisting that he speak English...
His generosity towards his students and an inherent sense of giving rather than receiving or taking...makes him a rarity...a good person...
I am disappointed in anyone attempting to smear this man's reputation...
🇿🇦
This is a wonderful piece. Thank you so much. I remember reading Into Thin Air…(everyone read it)….and also remember Jon K. inferring this one Russian guide as the fault of the deaths. I know nothing of climbing but I also knew how could ONE man who tried his best to save others and go UP Everest on several occasions over maybe 36 hours to save and help be inferred to as the reason why the disaster happened. And Jon’s book very much painted “blame.” I thought at the time that it was very unprofessional to do this to ONE man. The next year I bought a First Edition of Anatole’s book, “The Climb” which I’m very proud to own.
Wonder if he did that because he felt guilt that he himself didn't do more, trying to put the blame on someone else.
I read "Into Thin Air", and I didn't get that Krakauer blamed Boukareev for the accident. He was indeed critical of Boukareev's actions on the climb, especially not taking oxygen and leaving the clients at the summit. The latter which he had to do because he wasn't using oxygen. I am not sure what I would have thought if I was one of his clients, struggling up the Hillary Step at 1pm, and he passed me on his way down with a "Hi, ho, I'm off for a cup of tea". And every experienced climber since always seem to have the same two opinions - a guide should be using oxygen and should stay with the clients. He also should have turned Fischer around when he got to him.
I love Archie's Archive so much! I'm genuinely excited when you guys upload. Thank you
Very interesting analysis thank you. Lovely to hear about Linda Riley’s obvious devotion to Anatoli and I agree, he was the unsung hero in all of this. 👍
Neil beaderman was a guide on his team and he survived as well . I think Neil and Mike Groom need to be recognized in this tragedy also !!!
They were the ones that got the large group down close enough for Toli to rescue. They intended to go back for the others but had spent so much energy (Beidleman had done extra duty that day and spent the longest time at alititude and cold) that they crashed at the camp with nothing left. Toli was rested so he was the one that when back for the others. All heros. The real fault was the decisions to summit late.
@@rodneysmith9177 Actually, at the balcony or a little thereafter, Doug wanted to turn around but Rob talked him out of it. Rob was a warrior and a legend, but at that very moment he sealed his own fate. It's sad but definitely possible that most of them survive if Doug never summits.
Neil failed to turn the group around by the 2:30pm time, he just sat on the summit with them wasting time. His and the team's incompetence at not starting to descend on time is what got them caught up later on in the day. He made the mess, he cleared some of it up.
I certainly wouldn't want him as my guide.
Even more than Neil and Mike, EVERYONE forgets the heroism of Andy Harris who could have gotten himself down to camp 4 but instead when Rob and Doug reported over the radio that they were in trouble and needed help, Andy went back up the mountain, into the heart of the storm, carrying bottles of oxygen to try to help Rob Hall and Doug Hanson. And he not only tried, but he made actually made it to them, as Rob Hall reported that he was there, but that he had disappeared during the night. He was never seen again.
And Andy Harris, who lost his life after arriving to camp safely, turning around and climbing back up to offer help.
Thank you for this! I so look forward to your videos and love how much work you put into them. Years back I read "the climb" ..but seeing all the videos they make of the 96 everest disaster they rarely touch on Anatoli's bravery and stamina much less his amazing ability to climb without using bottled oxygen. He deserves much more respect for his bravery than he's been given.
So for that ,I thank you.
I was already a fan of your channel but this was an unexpected surprise to see this upload from you.
Anatoli Boukreev is a real hero. A hero that does good for the sake of doing good. I always thought their should be an in depth video on him but the fact that it came from a channel I already love is more than a plus! Amazing work!
I truly believe that he’s a hero. These people wouldn’t be alive without him
Very good video, as usual. A couple things: I think anyone on the slopes of Everest should be called a climber, not a hiker, and surely you mean Anatoli reached the summit at 1 P.M.not 1 A.M. Thank you for what you do!
I've done everest. It's very little climbing.
I'm Russia they refer to mountaineering hiking a lot so his choice of wording makes sense
Nah, some of the clients barely deserved the title of hiker.
Maybe you're thinking of rock or ice _climbing_ but most "mountain climbing" is indeed just hiking...
@@llYossarian imo if you are using ropes to prevent from falling you aren't just hiking.
Your channel have quickly become my absolute favourite!
Thank you for telling exciting stories about events that most of us in the Western part of the world haven't heard of before. You are doing a fantastic job! Keep up the amazing work!
I really, really, *really* appreciate the amount of detail you present in all of your videos.
*Peace, love and my deepest respect to You!*
/a Swede in Norway
I can answer that question in 3sec. He is controversial because he is russian. Its just the way the west works. If he was american, australian or english, he would have hat 10 monuments build by now.
People that are into mountains never give up, no matter what. They are the coolest, hardest and most amazing people with the most bad ass drive.
hi
correct
Are there any monuments of American, English, and Australian heroes in Russia?
Only an insecure russian will say that, if you read the comments we all think highly of him
@@THE_BEAR_JEW that's exactly what I came to say. How many Americans have statues in Russia? I doubt they even mention American heroes there. I'm not blaming the Russian citizens, it's the Russian government that's to blame. But trust me, my American government isn't much better.
He’s amazing! What a person! Will always be remembered!! Soooo sad he is no longer with us! Rest forever in peace.
So pleased to watch this documentary that praises Anatoli's bravery. Thank you
Wow what a guy. He was a hero for saving those people.
An outstanding job on this video. Very well put together and outstanding narration!! This channel is TH-cam’s hidden gem. Deserves way more subs & likes than it has now. Best wishes to you for great success with your channel…may it happen soon!!! 👏👏👏❤️
Thanks your channel is awesome. I've always been fascinated with stories like this from Eastern Europe. Anatoli seems like a man in love with climbing and I hope he continues to find peace in the place he loves most.
How could Krakauer blame anotoli? He was a hero! Sandy Pittman is a lot to blame she had to be shortlined up by a sherpa an that sherpa was the one that was supposed to be setting lines but couldn't because he had to take care of her.
Nonsense. The fixed ropes should have been in place well before the summit attempt. The fact they were not had nothing to do with Pittman and everything to do with the negligence of Hall and Fischer.
Pittman didn't ask to be short roped, didn't need it. Lopsang did that in his own because he thought that is what Scott would want.
yess finally, been waiting for a video from you for ages. thanks x
Me too! Love this channel
Thank you for this I read “the climb” for the true story so many people haven’t and are blinded by crackaurs terrible account , it’s so good to have this as a reminder well done sir
Your quality is amazing. Not into mountaineering but your channel got me interested in this topic
Very interesting personality. Definitely a loner, not a team player, and seems to have fought his own personal demons. However, he proved his merit by risking his life to save others.
So his life was of great value to those he saved, who I hope repaid his generosity by never getting on another mountain again!
Just as they teach Shackleton in business schools, they should teach Everest 5/10/96.
Both Hall and Fischer seem to have been extremely impaired and whatever mountaineering, and managerial skills they had really evaporated in the thin oxygen and compromised communication capabilities. Both teams were very strung out and jammed up in critical spots. Bukreev’s “speed climbing” style - essential for climbing without bottled oxygen - does not seem to have been a good match for a guiding model based on close contact between guides and clients. That is an error on Fischer’s part IMO.
The following year Bukreev guided a smaller group, placed his highest camp above the old
Camp-4, stocked it with ample oxygen and they still failed to summit but at least everyone survived.
I imagine using events like these as case studies make lessons (taught and learned!) more accessible and meaningful, not to mention interesting and engaging.
Is this model, with the same cases, a standard among business programs (seems like from what you wrote) or did you have a particularly awesome instructor?
It never occurred to me that these would be part of a business curriculum, but good to know, so thanks for mentioning it.
Hello everyone,
Only recently have I started researching and getting into climbing and discovered Mr. Boukreev and had no idea he was the hero of the 1996 disaster from back when I was still a child. It’s tragic how this hero perished not even a year later doing what he loved best. Does anyone here remember any media coverage and tributes to him around that time?
nada.
Krakauer managed to poison many minds in the aftermath and Toli was haunted he couldn't do more
He wrote a book to provide his point of view. The Climb. Read it
Rob Hall convinced Doug Hansen to try to climb again because the year before Doug was his customer too and couldn’t peak this is why he felt responsible and stayed with him ultimately paying with his life that should be mentioned too
Great story and amazing Anatoly! Thank you for information, I would like to know more about this guy👍
You're my favourite for creating this genre of videos, hope the algorithm picks this new one up !! Thanks
إضافة تعليق...
I didn't know anything about
Anatoli
But while watching the movie
I said to myself this man is a hero
And truly he was
People talk trash all the time its either they're vary far or on the safe side
His heroic atcs talk it self
RIP
Mey god have mercy on his soul
He seems to have grown into the tallest man in most pics!❤ thanks for telling his story with so much detail!🎉😊
Krakauer book vilified Toli. In The Climb, he indicated his English was minimal. He couldn't understand why he is actions in 96 were being questioned. He said Scott told him it was fine for him to go up and go down in case someone needed help.
He saved 3 people. He didn't believe in "babysitting" other climbers. Saving them was what he saw as his role.
There was so many things that went wrong 5-10-96. Especially the the back up on the step. Late turnaround times and the storm he was a 100% no b.s.Russian.
He is not your buddy to use a nickname that you managed to write incorrectly. Use his full name. At least try to be respectfull to a person you seemingly sympathise with.
@@ar_tseg653 She meant Tolya. There's nothing wrong with that. Anatoly is official, and Tolya is in everyday life. By saying "Tolya", she does not disrespect him.
This was such a huge story worldwide especially losing the number of climbers but losing the GREATS of MOUNTAINEERING was unimaginable… then Jon Krakauer came out with his book in 1996, the IMAX film, and i was hooked! Anatoli is a HERO ❤️ 🙏
This Man shouldn't be criticized. After much reading , his friends loved and praised him.
Stop with criticism. They are all gone now
Rest In Peace
Never heard of the Ice Pick Tradition before and I've watched many Mountain Climbing documentaries and Films. Thanks very much Archie.
Very interesting. I saw PBS Storm Over Everest several times. SOE was based on Into Thin Air by Jon Krakauer so it was good to hear from other perspective. I had no idea Jon Krakauer was in camp 4 along with others. Funny how he criticized Anatoli who actually went out to rescued people while he stayed in his warm tent. Not that it was Jon's obligation to go out and save people since he's not a professional guide. Given Beck Weathers' cryptic criticisms of individuals who did not come out and help, I would not be surprised that one of them includes Jon. The moral of the story of that 1996 disaster is that everyone needs to take responsibility of themselves. When the cut off time comes, it's one's responsibility to haul ass back to camp 4 no ifs and buts. Professional guides can only help so much at that altitude.
I have the same conclusions as you do. Jon K. sleeps in his tent yet criticizes the only rescuer that night just to find a good villain for his book. Beck W. shouldn't expect anybody to rescue him. In that situation the others could lose their lives in doing so. The two owners of the business are extremely irresponsible and broke their own protocol by not turning back around 2-3 pm. Rob H. even drags Doug H. to the summit neglecting his ill health. Sandy P. (short roped to the summit so she could brag about it) who was rescued by Anatoli said it was his job........what a biatch. These people were a disaster team to begin with!
@@valleychatter2195I think Anatoli realized that they were flirting with disaster early on.
This was another fascinating video. "Into Thin Air" is one of my favorite books, and because the story of this tragedy struck me so deeply, I read and watched as many other accounts of it as I could find. I even sat through that Hollywood garbage Everest movie; well, most of it. It is interesting to me that your video and some of the commenters stated that Krakauer made Boukreev out to be the villain, because I recall thinking the worst, most at-fault individuals were Sandy Pittman and the Asian climbing team that were clogging up the lines and doing things selfishly. I will have to go back and read the book again because I am not doubting what you said, but I always thought highly of Boukreev.
Agreed, need to re-read "into thin air". Boukreev is undoubtedly, undeniably a hero and a great great climber.
I tend to think communication/language difference lead to Jon's misunderstanding/misreading of the overall situation. That said, I don't blame Krakauer for not going back out, at night, in a storm when he was NOT a professional climber. He understood his limits. Clearly, as 2nd to summit, Jon trained well for his climb and was not a burden on the guides or other climbers in the group...that effort was expected for all in the group...he did his part...others fell far short. But, to mainly blame Boukreev for this tragedy is just wrong.
Give the guy a break...He went above and beyond anybody else there...He is a hero.
I can imagine what the members of this expedition experienced. I have had a similar experience, though no way comparable to Everest. Six of us had hiked out to a rock outcrop about 1 mile off trail . A freak snowstorm suddenly set in, and if not for one person we surely would never found our way back to camp. He is my Anatoli Buukerev.
I got caught in a freak hailstorm hiking in Alaska. To instantly go from sweating to freezing is scary!
@@saund102 I can barely handle those spring days when it’s sunny and warm and feels like summer has arrived only to have the temp drop 20 degrees ahead of a totally normal, forecast thunderstorm. Like you’re wearing shorts, flip flops and maybe even a sweatshirt when you went IN to Target and when you come back OUT it’s suddenly full blown coat/pants/real shoes weather again and you’re freezing and feel like an idiot for jumping the gun when you should know better.
Luckily, however, those events are largely survivable.
Given that I can’t be bothered to dress appropriately for the weather or carry an extra layer for these totally foreseeable situations, I would surely fail if it happened out in the wild in an analogous, but greatly amplified, situation when the stakes are much higher and include the potential of becoming an added liability to the people with me.
On the up side, I’ve clearly made at least one good decision in life by declining to pursue hobbies/activities in environments I can’t handle!
@@roamingirl I had to hike another half mile through the Alaskan terrain (carrying a pack) frozen in my wet clothes in hail. I had dry clothes in my pack so when I got to camp I changed. It was hard to think when you're soo cold, though. There still was hail and I didn't want to also get my dry clothes wet, either. I'll never forget when I got to camp someone handed me a mug of hot tea. I drank the tea then was finally able to figure out how I was gonna get into my dry clothes, still keeping them dry, in hail. I can still feel the relief of slipping into those toasty dry clothes! Either I had to get my tent up or more likely I had to borrow someone's tent. Sounds simple but it actually involved some thought process.
@@saund102 that sounds horrible but the sense of relief at the same level must have been amazing and a great memory allowing you to feel a burden that heavy lifted again and again - at least at first.
I would say you were thinking clearly enough if you had the sense to think through the clothing situation - able to weigh the risk/benefit of your choices and obviously you chose well because you survived. That’s not to say it was “best” decision - who knows what was going to happen? Maybe you endured less comfort this way but you’ll never know, just having the understanding in the moment that you needed to think it through instead of immediately going for what could have been temporary relief at the expense of ??? later means you made the right choice in a situation where there wasn’t really a “right” answer at the time.
I’d be obnoxiously proud of myself after I was able to consider everything once I’m no longer operating under “human survival mechanisms: triggered” status. But that’s just me…☺️ so humble.
The whole experience would be a great foundation for one of those job interview questions we all hate all that start with “tell me about a time when you had to...” make a critical decision under pressure/had an unforeseen setback/in an unfamiliar situation that had to be revolved immediately/without consulting X blah blah blah. Would be good for whichever way that question ends, I’d think. 🤷🏻♀️
There you go - you’re set for at least one interview question for life! 😅
@@roamingirl That would probably be my seventh or eighth most interesting story from that Alaska trip. Get back to me sometime if you want and I'll explain them! Definitely No 1. was "the bear who almost ate me." No. 2 was "Happening upon the Aurora Borealis." No. 3 occurred while kayaking in the Prince William Sound it's called "The Huge Tusks and Angry Face of an Angry Walrus." Lol. No. 4 "How to climb out of a 20' crevasse you just fell into with just one ice axe (because you forgot to tighten your crampons.)" No. 5 "The Sea Otter endlessly amused by a bunch of dumb humans." No. 6 "The Ballsy Caribou who wanted to Join us."
The Dutch female climber wrote a very good synopsis of the event as well as Anatolia and it countered what krahour had to say plus I think there were others but I can’t remember them all - there was competition between hall and Fischer posing problems
This guy was a effin hero. It is amazing (or alarming) how many people have little experience in the mountains of Nepal height and think they are safe. There is an interesting mix of people way over prepared for lower elevation walks(I am of the school was bring the bare minimum) and ones sadly underprepared. When I went there I was in peak shape and had been up in the mountains for a long time and knew how my body would react to oxygen depravation, plus have been trained for being a mountaineering guide although I have never been a (paid) one. I have also a training to be a yoga teacher and have never been one, I just like to learn things. This chap was under a lot of pressure to get these people who paid a lot to get that shot on the top and was trying to help people achieve their dream and also keep them alive, a tough call. May they all rest in peace.
Annapurna yeah, had forgotten about that. I have been there, a stellar area and imo better than Everest. I have a deep understanding of this man and wish he was still with us. I also think he did nothing wrong and a lot more right on that day and in mountaineering in general.
@@canterburytail2294 Total agreement with you there. People say that as a guide he shouldn't have climbed without oxygen, but he was perfectly able to do his duties without supplemental oxygen. In fact he faired better on that mountain than the people who did climb with oxygen. He was a guide, not the team leader. It was his responsibility to help the clients and he did that. The team leaders screwed up and he did his best to save who he could. Guy was a bloody legend.
This man's accomplishments are mind blowing.
Amen
I watched your videos over and over again lol. Really cool story telling and unmatched content in the genre. I cant wait for more!
Anatoli, as intelligent as he was, he knew what mountain can give or take. Even in early ages. He was pro, rock solid. For him death was just one part of life on a mountain. That's why he just came out of tent to save others without any thinking.
If that was true he would've accepted their deaths. There's a bit of humanity that plays into it as well. Imo anyway.
The real wonder is how that man got anywhere with those massive titanium balls. He saved 3 people's lives, what a badass
I wonder if you even read John krakouers book. He didn't blame Anatoli for the tragedy at all. There was a cascade of a number of events which led to the disaster which he clearly documents in the book. He also praises Anatoli's courage in going back and rescuing the others. It was good to learn more about Anatoli's life before 1996 though, so good job with that
I concur with Evelinda GP. This is a really great summary. Appreciate the work you did to get the facts, as well as providing some of the back story. As you point out, Anatoli's actions have been supported by the mountaineering community, calling the accuracy of the first book into question. Thanks!!
Keakauer was not a guide. I read his book, and he blamed the tragedy on a confluence of things. I do not think it fair to say he blamed Anatoli. The gist for me was that Anatoli was aloof as a guide. Most ppl think his actions heroic once events began. That should be enough to allow for opposing opinions on what happened leading up to everything.
Anatoli never ever thought of himself as a guide. he was there just to assist Fisher, not guide them up the mountain...he was for support, fix ropes etc etc...that's why people mistakenly throw controversy at him, saying he failed as a guide, when, he never was a guide in the first place. That was not his job on that trip
This. In addition, if Krakauer was trying to make Boukareev the "villain" why would he have included the rescues effected by Boukareev and the fact that he himself was unwilling/ incapable of helping? Having read both books, I feel like the real issue as far as Boukareev (there were SO MANY issues that had nothing to do with Boukareev) was actually a misunderstanding of expectations between Boukareev and Fischer. Fischer seems to have thought he hired a guide, Boukareev seems to have thought he was being hired as an assistant.
@@kch7051 I find it a little perplexing that if Anatoli's job was to fix ropes, etc, why weren't the ropes already fixed when they set out to summit? That delay contributed hugely to the tragedy.
I don't want to minimize Anatoli's effort in saving lives, but what was he being paid for if it wasn't to guide clients and he didn't fix the ropes in advance (the Sherpas were supposed to do it?)? It seems that a professional climber who ascends and descends on their own doesn't add much value to the team. If he descended alone so he could retrieve additional O2 bottles and bring them back up the mountain, why didn't he just bring them up with him during his ascent? Some of this doesn't make any sense.
thanx for an fair interpretation...maybe Anatoli was not a great guide and lousy babysitter, but he was a great climber...and great climbers never leave people in distress on mountain till the last atom of their strength...Krakauer is not a person who understands that...
Thanks for providing a different viewpoint from Krakauer's book - Anatoly sounds like a hero!
I think it's worth noting that after he published Into Thin Air, Krakauer would later add a preface to it saying that his recollections were affected by trauma and anger. He and Boukreev basically called a ceasefire on their grudge, but unfortunately Boukreev would perish in another tragedy before they ever made true peace. Both men were stubborn and participated in traumatic events that they only had their own recollections of - it's unsurprising but saddening that this would up causing such a conflict, and that Krakauer's - who had a platform as an established journalist - side of the story blew up, while Boukreev - who was only well known in the mountaineering and adventuring space and didn't speak fluent English - didn't have enough of a platform to refute it.
Hopefully history will be kinder to all survivors of the disaster. Everything those people went through is truly unfathomable.
Krakauer threw blame at many people...except himself. He was one of the people who got to the tents and would not go out to look for people. And he probably would have died had he done so...but Boukreev DID.
Krakauer also put a lot of blame on Sandy Pitman. Essentially saying she was a spoiled socialite who required that Sherpas carry her cappuccino machine. He also said that the reason the ropes had not been put out properly was because Scott Fischer gave priority to his richest most connected client ' Sandy Pitman ' getting the constant personal attention of the Sherpas (who, one notes, are never even given a name or a face, which is pretty damn disgusting). Krakauer asserted that Pitman was wholly without the skills to make the climb, and that the strongest Sherpa (again, no name) was told, by Fischer, that he must CARRY Pitman whenever she felt tired. This meant that the Sherpas were unable to do the jobs of putting out the ropes for everyone else properly.
I have zero idea how much of any of this is true. THough I do know that many people disagreed about his criticisms of Broukreev. He certainly never explained that Boukreev had agreed the plan to go back to the nearest camp to obtain more bottled oxygen.
Ironically...Krakauer himself ran out, because he'd decided it was too heavy for him to carry, & thought the climb would go faster..which must have meant others had made the same decision and had the same problem.
Krakauer was essentially complaining about the commercialization of climbing Everest. Well, that was bound to happen. When climbing became heavily used by equipment makers to sell their gear, it made the activity into an aspirational sport. Krakauer liked Hall, but was quite critical of the Mountain Madness group - certainly that is a remarkable immature name. He believed that people who weren't capable were just being able to flash money and get their chance.
But that has always rather been the case with everything.
In truth, people who pay to make such climbs have made their decision to risk their lives. If they are happy with it...then why should the rest of us be upset if they die in a manner that they decided they were okay with.
I think the really BAD part is the way that the Sherpas and porters are treated. They are badly paid.. And they end up dying far too often because they are told to go back up a mountain to try to save people who shouldn't be there.
Nepal is so poor, and their families have so many needs, that the Sherpas essentially are paid a pittance for their lives.
I think the should all unionize in order to get proper pay and create proper rules about what they can be told to do...ie No more forcing them to go die on mountains to try to save rich people who made their own choice freely.
F---! the unions... look where the world is going with all these unions... Behave and you don't need union...
he is a beast in human form. just wild how old way vs modern. just sucks not a sport run but a tourist event now
Just finished Jon's book Into Thin Air, Your video leaves out way too much info about how Jon actually praised Anatoli's effort and skill that day and the ones that followed. Jon's wrote that Anatoli should have used oxygen if he was guiding clients and that Fisher would have never agreed to have any guide reach the summit and then go back down only to return for oxygen. Two trips for any person lacks clear thinking for anyone who is getting paid two bring people who are inexperienced up Everest. I encourage anyone who wants to see what happen those tragic days read both books and then decide. No doubt Anatolis saved lives and made tremendous effort to save more. But Fisher even question his role and told others that Anatoli was not totally in a guides role days earlier. No guide should be the first one back to camp when so many others were still up there.
Mas thanks a lot for this vídeo and all the videos you've uploaded!!! You're channel is one of the best on TH-cam! Keep up the amazing job!!!!!
How many people did Krakauer rescue?
Jewish-sounding name, "Krakauer".
@@katemoon7476 found the antisemite
Krakauer was a journalist. He wasn't being paid tens of thousands of dollars to assist in an expedition. Yes, Boukreev was a hero. Yes, he was also useless as a guide, acting more like an independent climber and making no attempt to stay with or monitor the people he was being paid to guide. Reinhold Messner says Krakauer's description of Boukreev's personality and attitude is extremely accurate.
@@remycallie Simone Moro’s reference to the author Krakauer: “You are American; he was Russian. You were new to 8000 meter peaks; he was the best of all time at these altitudes… in my opinion you were like a man who, after reading a book about medicine, pretends to teach one of the world’s most famous and capable surgeons how to be a doctor. When judging the decisions made by Anatoli in 1996 you must remember this: no clients on his team died.”
Anatoli paved the way. He wasn’t there to hand hold clients. This was known and wasn’t his job.
@@Trish.Norman First of all, the analogy is not to someone who read a book about medicine and then tells a doctor how to do surgery. That would be the analogy if Krakauer had been criticizing Boukreev's technique or telling him how to climb. The analogy is to someone, regardless of their medical training, who feels that a doctor is failing to care for their patients. The guy who hired him (Scott Fisher) absolutely felt that Boukreev was hired to hand hold clients and wrote about how unhappy he was with his failure to do so. None of Boukreev's clients died, because he went out and saved them from a situation they should never have gotten into in the first place. That was heroic, but doesn't excuse his other actions. You can praise the one and still criticize the other.
While I understand Kraukauer's comment on Anatoli using oxygen, villifying him was not it. Anatoli's logic does make sense. He didnt want to use it because he usually never did and that if he used it and ran out, it would lead to him feeling worse than if he hadn't. He did carry a bottle just in case which he gave up to Neil. That man did not deserve to be scrutinized after he saved multiple dying people.
There's no question that Anatoli was one of the strongest climbers ever. I heard a rare interview where Anatoli said the 96 storm was very bad, but not the worst he had ever seen. It's very likely he had seen worse as he loved winter expeditions. Which is extremely dangerous because of the increased snow & cold. Unfortunately that's why he lost his life on Annapurna on Christmas day in 1997. th-cam.com/video/49pThlU74SE/w-d-xo.html
Yesss so happy to see a new upload from you!
A brave hero who saved many lives that fateful day. RIP.
Number one: he was not even a guide for Fisher’s team, he was an assistant guide. He had above super trained physique and normally teams took him as a first in the line to do the physical effort through the snow. So his job was to quickly made a path a return. Fisher and the other guy were the guides of the team. And the second team ran by kiwi guy (which Krakauer belonged to) had their own guides and sherpas. So Bukreev had no responsibility to that team whatsoever. Second: Bukreev did not use oxygen because it was safer in his role, if oxygen is over it means death, if one is goes without oxygen there is a chance to survive. Obviously he probably was the most acclimatized person in the group as he pretty much lived in the high altitude. So oxygen rules for him were different. Third: there were strategic mistakes made by all 3 groups (including Taiwanese): physical level and training level of customers, commercial aspect, which made difficult for heads to say “no” and return customers back after 2 pm and competition between Fisher and kiwi. Bukreev was doing crisis management after organizers brought the groups to disaster. This is how I can see it as a professional business administration specialist. If it was business and I was making decisions in crisis I would not allow Bukreev to do his life saving trips. It would be plain “no” irrespective of his skills, physique and desire for help. Too many unknowns were in that crisis. He may end up losing his life while not saving anyone. It’s also interesting that the guy who was assessed as dead but managed to return back to the camp doesn’t leave negative comments about Bukreev, but Krakauer who had climbing skills and refused to go with Anatoly, does.
Thank you for respecting Anatoly Boukreyeev in an excelent documentary. Appreciate.
Mc Kinley is now Denali.
Nice to hear more about Anatoli. The climb is gonna be my next book, after I read Lene Gammelgard's. I guess that video was not ment to be objective. And that is ok.
I read Krakauer's book at least 10 times and never got the impression he blamed s/o specifically. Imo he was just trying to figure out how this could happen. He also questioned the decisions of Hall, Harris and Fisher. And he also talked about his own mistakes and what he could had done better. And I guess it is not quite fair to compare a guide to a client, who does not have the same experience and knowledge.
And to blame climbers at that altitude to not risk their lives is bs. But yes at this moment was Anatoli the hero. No doubt.
Climbers really need to take the advice of their guides. Had they descended at 2PM as advised, they would not have lost and risked lives. No fault of the guides or sherpas, except for being too softhearted when letting them try to achieve their ambition.
This movie is not just interesting. It is amazing, 100% truthful documentary about 1996 expedition and Anatoli himself. The author managed in 36 minutes perfectly tell the story to the audience who knew a lot about this tragedy as well as to the people who maybe never heard about this great world-class mountaineer. Thank you, Archie!
Very good report. I have the same opinion the Anatoly was a misunderstand ed hero even by some partners of the same expedition, which is really sad!
Thanks for the video about Anatoly. He's too sparsely mentioned and only in relation to the 1996 Everest fiasco. He deserves more. The true mountaineer - may he rest in peace there!
You make some damn fine documentaries.
The fact that Boukreev went up the route despite knowing the danger in a blizzard on mt Everest to save people is just so impressive and professional. It does not matter what he did before he DID save 3 people and he did go back for Scott Fischer and thats not a easy thing to do when you have just climbed to the summit yourself. Do not call him a villain for what he did. Because he was the one using his brain to rest up before going back up to do something no one else was risking to do. He will always be a hero in my book.
Rest In Peace, Anatoli. 💔🙏
I’ve never understood why Into Thin Air has been so glorified and is probably where the majority of non climbers get their information about this tragedy. Anatoli has always been a legend in my opinion and his actions during May of 96 were nothing short of superhuman!
There seem to be some inaccuracies here. Neil beidelman was left on the summet with clients when Boukreev descended. Beidelman had to try to lead the group down alone and it was he who guided those who were mobile enough to camp 4 when the weather broke enough to see the way. It was also Neil who told Boukreev where the missing clients were. Some of the mountain madness clients were stranded on the mountain above camp 4 along with Rob Hall's. Boukreev was certainly extremely brave to venture out to find the missing clients but it can be argued that a guide should not summit without using oxygen and maybe should not have left Beidelman alone with clients on top of the mountain. Ultimately, the weather and the number of climbers on the slopes are surely the cause of this tragedy, not individual people be they clients, guides or journalists.
I have seen and heard all the documentaries, interviews, podcasts and books in English and Russian about this story, and still cannot take sides in the controversy. It's just a bunch of fatalities and bad decisions made by each participant and multiplied by unfortunate weather. But worst of all, of course, is Rob Hall, whose decisions directly killed several people, terribly maimed one physically and mentally injured many people. If he had not died then, he would have been condemned by both the law and society. I admit that he could understand this and did not try to survive.
Great Work Bro!.. Thanks for covering this sad event..