Everest - Themepark for affluent adrenaline junkies
Posted by: JWM on 05 October 2008
Everest Skydiving
Everest - in Nepalese 'Sagarmatha' (Head of the Sky) - is now littered with the detritus of affluent adrenaline junkies, and in some cases with the affluent adrenaline junkies themselves, dead.
This beautiful, awesome, and deadly mountain has been reduced to a themepark.
Hillary laments Everest changes - I think I tend to agree.
Everest - in Nepalese 'Sagarmatha' (Head of the Sky) - is now littered with the detritus of affluent adrenaline junkies, and in some cases with the affluent adrenaline junkies themselves, dead.
This beautiful, awesome, and deadly mountain has been reduced to a themepark.
Hillary laments Everest changes - I think I tend to agree.
Posted on: 05 October 2008 by Bob McC
well he started it.
Posted on: 05 October 2008 by Don Atkinson
quote:well he started it.
I think you'll find bits of left-over Mallory etc lying around, long before Hilary wondered that way. And plenty of others perished before Hilary made his sucessful attempt.
And what, precisely, is the point of a pristine wilderness if nobody, I mean no body, is allowed to visit it?
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 06 October 2008 by Bruce Woodhouse
Lots of factors at play here.
Firstly you cannot blame people who for trying to attain the highest peak, or indeed for it being the focus of all sorts of sporting endeavours. Nations are also guilty, every country on the planet wants to put a person on the summit. Nobody gets publicity sky-diving, skiing or bunny-hopping down any other mountain! You can also not blame Nepal (and the Sherpas in particular) from making a living from the mountain and its visitors. They have had to learn to preserve the mountains though, from removing the litter on the high slopes to trying to stop the loss of forestry by the sudden increase in demand for firewood. Everest has brought significant prosperity though, and with it a general improvement in the infrastructure and health across the district (rather than just a few wealthy individuals).
This image that droves of unfit bankers are dragged up the mountain by guides is an illusion (one largely created by John Krakauer in his book 'Into Thin Air'). It remains a very serious physical and to a degree a technical challenge. Lessons were learned after the events of that disaster, by those contemplating future ascents and by those selecting suitable clients. It will always be dangerous to climb at these altitudes and people will always die. Death rates amongst experienced climbers are still high.
The high mountians of the Himalaya and elsewhere remain largely wilderness, and in many places are still not fully explored. Climbers who wish to have new challenges far from the Everest circus can still do so.
I should perhaps note that one of my good friends has climbed a number of 8,000m peaks including Everest, he has also climbed and worked for the companies that guide on Everest, lived in the valley and was in fact involved in the incidents depicted (with considerable licence) by Krakauer.
Bruce
Firstly you cannot blame people who for trying to attain the highest peak, or indeed for it being the focus of all sorts of sporting endeavours. Nations are also guilty, every country on the planet wants to put a person on the summit. Nobody gets publicity sky-diving, skiing or bunny-hopping down any other mountain! You can also not blame Nepal (and the Sherpas in particular) from making a living from the mountain and its visitors. They have had to learn to preserve the mountains though, from removing the litter on the high slopes to trying to stop the loss of forestry by the sudden increase in demand for firewood. Everest has brought significant prosperity though, and with it a general improvement in the infrastructure and health across the district (rather than just a few wealthy individuals).
This image that droves of unfit bankers are dragged up the mountain by guides is an illusion (one largely created by John Krakauer in his book 'Into Thin Air'). It remains a very serious physical and to a degree a technical challenge. Lessons were learned after the events of that disaster, by those contemplating future ascents and by those selecting suitable clients. It will always be dangerous to climb at these altitudes and people will always die. Death rates amongst experienced climbers are still high.
The high mountians of the Himalaya and elsewhere remain largely wilderness, and in many places are still not fully explored. Climbers who wish to have new challenges far from the Everest circus can still do so.
I should perhaps note that one of my good friends has climbed a number of 8,000m peaks including Everest, he has also climbed and worked for the companies that guide on Everest, lived in the valley and was in fact involved in the incidents depicted (with considerable licence) by Krakauer.
Bruce
Posted on: 06 October 2008 by JWM
But it is also attempted by those who haven't got a cat in hell's chance of doing it (eg a well-known aging and overweight British actor a few years ago comes to mind). It is foolhardy - but of course lucrative - to encourage them.
Posted on: 06 October 2008 by scottyhammer
there will be a bloody mcdonalds up there soon !
Posted on: 06 October 2008 by winkyincanada
I once asked Jon Muir, the Australian adventurer who has been up Everest twice, Southpole, Northpole, alone across Australia etc etc about the best climbing in the Himalaya. His reply was, "any peak just less than 8000m. you'll have it all to yourself."
I'm inclined to agree. I don't get the fascination with the arbitrary nice round numbers and "highest peak" attraction. It isn't important what we "accomplish" in selfish endeavours like these (SFA in terms of significance) - it is surely about the experience, which can be profound. In my view, this can be greatly enhanced by simple solitude when in the wilderness.
Journey Vs destination etc...
I'm inclined to agree. I don't get the fascination with the arbitrary nice round numbers and "highest peak" attraction. It isn't important what we "accomplish" in selfish endeavours like these (SFA in terms of significance) - it is surely about the experience, which can be profound. In my view, this can be greatly enhanced by simple solitude when in the wilderness.
Journey Vs destination etc...