ahoi

Great achievements, good story, questionable facts

Revisado: 08-23-22

Let me preface this by saying that no one told or paid me to write this review and that usually do not write reviews, regardless of whether I like a book or not. In this case, though, I think listeners should be made aware that they are listening to what, in my view, is a pretty one-side and self-serving account when it comes to the events of 1996.

The "standard account" on the 1996 disaster obviously is Krakauers "Into Thin Air" - and indeed O'Dowd seems to feel the need to go up against Krakauer various times (even though she basically played no role in the actual disaster or the rescue attempts and overall is a very peripheral figure). Contrary to O'Dowd, Krakauer found himself smack in the middle of the catastrophe when it happened and hence he produces a detailed first-hand account. He doesn't take a particular side or team but criticizes people from many teams and organizations, including his own team, his own team leader and himself (even though he doesn't bear any formal responsibility as he wasn't a guide, didn't cause anyones death and, as is corroborated from other participants, did his utmost to help other mountaineers). By no means, however, does he simply critizise "everyone" as O'Dowd pretends, and his book is clearly informed not only by first-hand experience of the events but by thorough research in the aftermath as well. Anyone who has read the book and took the time to get familiar with the basic facts of the matter will see that, on the whole, Krakauer offers a thoughtful and pretty even-handed report. He may not necessarily get every detail 100% correct, which is probably impossible under the circumstances anyway, but he certainly tries and he actually is in a position to give a meaningful account. One can debate his issues with, for instance, Boukreev all day long but, in the end, Krakauer has no dog in this fight, aside from trying to understand what happened and why it did. Writing a bestseller about doesn't take away from that - it just means a good writer happened to be on the mountain that day.

O'Dowd on the other isn't exactly big on the details, which isn't surprising since she simply wasn't really "part of the action", as her own book clearly shows. Basically all she does is deflecting (actual or perceived) criticism on the South African expedition and particularly on Ian Woodall. This also is rather unsurprising, as, during the disaster, she became romantically involved with Woodall, then afterwards started a business with him and the two ultimately married. Most of the overwhelming evidence from multiple sources on Woodalls disagreeable personality, shady methods and numerous untruths (pretending to have commanded a British military unit that never existed, for once) simply isn't discussed. Almost everything she has to say about him concerns her personal feelings, first as an expedition applicant, then as a participant, ultimately as a lover. Similarly, she blames the obvious chaos reigning within the South African expedition not on Woodall (who, after all, was the expedition leader), but on an array of peripheral people, from a crazy doctor to an imperious newspaper publisher to a racist journalist. At no point does she acknowledge that it would have been Woodalls responsibility to deal with these people/issues and that he simply failed to do so. In fact, listening to her account largely corroborates the picture that Krakauer and others paint when it comes to the South African expedition: organized for lofty political aims (laudable as they may be), led by a shadowy figure, characterized by a lack of leadership and willingness to cooperate with other teams and a surplus of arguments and chaos. Inexplicably, O'Dowd not only feels the need to defend a very questionable man and his very questionable behavior but even to lash out randomly against further people, for instance condescendingly referring to client Doug Hansen as a "postman" (as if his profession was of any consequence and, of course, forgetful of the fact that he had been higher on the mountain the previous year than she had ever been in her life until that point, on any mountain) and repeatedly emphasizing that there was no "professional" rescue mission during the catastrophe (as if there was a rescue team on standby that could have simply been flown in during a blizzard to the upper slopes of Mt. Everest). Of course, even though many of the people fighting for their life or risking their life trying to save others were (much) more experienced than anyone on the South African team at the time, she very much tries to give the impression that this disaster was the result of a bunch of hopeless amateurs getting caught up in a storm and that there not only was nothing for her team to do about it, but that it simply wasn't their responsibility in the first place. All of this is not exactly in the spirit of mountaineering. But it is in the spirit of someone who has a romantic relationship and a business to protect. Listeners should keep that in mind.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Much thriller, not so much science

Revisado: 07-28-19

I get it - this is not a molecular biology textbook. Still, being a physician, I couldn't help but cringe at some of the descriptions that the author gave when it came to details of the viruses and diseases. Usually it was not plainly wrong but in some places it certainly bordered on actually being incorrect. And while some technical details may not be all that relevant to a popular science audience, some of them actually are in my view. After all, this is a topic that could well be relevant to a large proportion of humanity in the coming decades and it wouldn't hurt to get a clearer understanding of the particulars - this book, sadly, often sacrifices that aspect in favor of shiny/terrifying catchphrases. It is decent storytelling but I wouldn't recommend it to someone who actually wants to get a slightly more profound understanding of what happened and what might be about to happen some day. It's certainly not a terrible title but there are a number of popular science books which do a better job - solid and thorough scientific information and gripping storytelling are not mutually exclusive, there's many books out there who manage that (not necessarily on that particular subject but the general point stands). To summarize, I was a bit disappointed, I have to say - feels like a missed opportunity.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 49 personas