In the fog of war, as they say, the first casualty is the truth. And then there's that age-old question: "What is truth?"
In recounting battles, human struggles involving multiple and shifting individual perspectives -- from individuals focused intensely on their own pains, goals, survival fears and tunnel visions -- which of their accounts best tell a tale? This perpetual conundrum, it seems, applies just as equally to the avocation of mountaineering, typically a group activity where humans are struggling to conquer in the face of great suffering. When you're struggling up a vertical ice glacier, trying merely to keep a toe hold and not fall to your death, can you see much of what's going on around you? After the famous disaster on Mt. Everest in 1996, a slew of books from different participants on that fatal tragedy all presented their own takes; different fingers pointed different ways. Who were the heroes and who were the villains depended on which witness you asked. One, as a reader, has to consider the kaleidoscope through different prisms to settle on one's own version of what happened.
For decades, this Ur-text of the mountaineering literature, Annapurna... by French mountaineering leader, Maurice Herzog, was the only book about the famous 1950 expedition and successful summiting of Annapurna in the Himalayan range, the first conquest of an 8,000-meter peak in history. It told the story entirely from Herzog's view, with his prejudices, his self-serving motivations, his perspective on what it meant to climb and to relate to others, both his French companions and the "backward" locals. The book held generations of mountaineering aspirants in thrall. In the days before mountaineering books became as common as vampire romances, there wasn't much to choose from, and this book held sway among the sparse pickings. It's easy to see why it made such an impression. It's flavorful, highly detailed, sometimes exciting, often banal in the way that detailed things can be, occasionally wryly humorous, and variable in its quality. Herzog can be a poet one minute and a dullard the next. As a non-writer, he did pretty well, all told.
Years later, controversy emerged as historians, mountaineers and others affiliated with the Herzog expedition began to discount large parts of his story. Much of it seems to center around Herzog taking too much credit for things other people did, or for being a less chivalrous leader than he depicted himself to be. The recent book, True Summit purports to deflate some of these alleged myths and offer a more balanced account of the adventure. Until I've read it, I can't proffer a judgment. I can only work with the book at hand.
Reading this, Herzog seems to take great pains to be charitable and fair to his companions. Maybe this is a kind of bluster or false humility, but I can't quite see it.
I'm not gonna lie, the first half of the book is a bit of a slog. After awhile, the details of traversing this pass or that pass become kind of generic. Herzog's crew wandered into virgin territory for Western men; the maps they were using sucked and they had no idea where they were or how to actually get to Annapurna. Their first plan to scale the even-taller Dhaulagiri I, was thwarted by their failure to find a feasible approach, necessiting a shift toward Annapurna. All this mucking about caused them to lose so much time that by the time they'd found a way to Annapurna they were too far behind schedule, and the monsoon season they feared was only days away. This, as it happened, turned out to be a big problem.
The second half of the book is best. The actual climb up Annapurna and the even more hazardous descent, that led to severe frostbite and the sacrifice of a lot of fingers and toes to amputation and painful treatments at crude field hospitals, is the best prose in the book.
The book can't escape the casual racism common to Western accounts of other lands and peoples, though Herzog does often express sensitivity, particularly to the religious ceremonies. That doesn't obviate some fairly cringe-inducing periodisms. At one point, Herzog seems a bit too taken by an adolescent mountain girl, hanging around to comb her hair and remark on her beauty. Hey, they call him Maurice, the Pompatus of love...
Still, in all, I can't discount the courage of these guys. Herzog, a French partisan in World War II, was working with men hardy from the war, and their use of terms like "assault" and "attack" in surmounting their obstacles seems understandable and appropriate. This insane pursuit is a kind of warfare, not far from a suicide mission. After surviving Nazi occupation, there's a certain poignancy to stalwart men wanting to live life this large.
The most interesting takeaway from this account, perhaps, is the working out of the logistics of a large-party climb up a world-class Himalayan peak. There were no good maps, no established trails, no pitons left in the rocks and ice by any previous parties. These guys were working completely from scratch. No Euros had attempted this before, and there was no blueprint, no known dos and don'ts established for such missions: how to divvy up the loads, what was actually essential to take in the heavy packs, how to utilize the Sherpas, where and how often to set up intermediate camps, how long to acclimatize at these heights, whether to risk climbing under severe time constraints or sit it out, etc. Everything, including the gear, was untested in this scenario. The waxing and waning of each man's endurance demonstrates the difficulty in getting all hands in sync at any given time.
Oddly enough some of the best writing in this has nothing to do with mountaineering, as toward the end of the book when the sickly Herzog refuses to take nourishment and his companions chide him into eating protein-rich kidneys to get his strength up. These little moments really add flavor to the account; no pun intended. Herzog even injects a bit of gallows humor as his fingers are being hacked off, which takes the French attitude of c'est la vie to a whole new level.
A question is, does this mountaineering book hold up, now that great writers like Jon Krakauer and Robert Macfarlane have written on the subject in their inimitable ways? Perhaps not, and I'd even hesitate to call it essential at this point, but it's worth the doing if you have an abiding interest in the history of mountaineering.
EG-KR@KY 2021