Krakauer Revealed

As we were discussing Krakauer's possible lies during his writing process, especially with "Into Thin Air," I decided to take on the book as a side reading project since I somewhat enjoyed "Into The Wild." I noticed several things that this reviewer noticed, however. Although I cannot criticize Krakauer for leaving out information, such as the fact that some fellow climbers were left behind to die, I did find it odd that he didn't seem to try to redeem or explain his actions to the reader. Being left unjustified, I am not sure of his intentions. First I believed that he thought his readers would believe his journey to be so rough that there was no other option, but then I realized that Krakauer's own moral compass may have been deserted for "survival of the fittest" while on this journey.

Through the lack of explanations, even upon re-thinking actions later in life, it seems as though Krakauer is not remorseful about his or the group's actions with saving themselves. The real debate now, at least for me, is whether or not situations such as these are a good enough reason to forfeit all of what we have been known and taught about right and wrong. Given the circumstances of these traumatic events, was there really more to lose than gain by aiding these people? Can struggle and the will to live temporarily turn you into something that you're not?

We all cannot say indefinitely that we know what we would do in this type of situation. Perhaps we would surprise ourselves with our desire to protect ourself, especially if we had no previous encounters with the individuals with us. Do feelings need to be involved to care about another human being, or is there a deeper connection that we can rely on to draw us together? Either way, it is clear that Krakauer did not feel responsibility for these individuals, and does not feel as though it is necessary to base his reputation on the fact. Any thoughts?

http://www.spectacle.org/1098/krak.html.