The Adventurist Sparks a Nerve….Twice…And You Speak Out!

May 30, 2007

This past week has seen two pretty controversial pieces here at The Adventurist take center stage. The first one titled “David Sharp HAD to Die” was recently mentioned on ExplorersWeb and has seen well over 2,000 people stopping by to check it out in the past few days alone.

The David Sharp issue continues to be a very hot topic, even a year after this incident took place. The media and the Climbing Community have been very vocal on their thoughts and concerns over this incident and it seems like everyone has their own opinions. I figured I would highlight a couple of these opinions that have been shared here on The Adventurist, just to show you a bit of the differing viewpoints taking place:

First, From reader Yolan:

I am still amazed that people have a problem with climbers dying on Everest…..if you plan to take a risk like that, it is a known factor in the whole “picture”. Expecting a Sherpa (or anyone else for that matter) to risk his/her life to save yours, is way out of line….. ethics be damned…cerebral edema may not be a complication that a climber can prepare for, but as a climber, you have to know it is a potential hazzard in the “death zone” (called that for a reason!!) in a situation like and Everest summit attempt, it should be made very clear…. every person for himself!!!

From reader Leon:

It is unfair for members of the public to have such a negative opinion about how climbers are left in the death zone to die because they have never experienced being at that altitude and in such extreme conditions.

When a climber sets foot on a mountain, he or she SHOULD be awear of the dangers and be prepared for the unexpected.

And Lastly, from reader Helen:

Yolan and Leon have missed the central point here - from all reports 40 climbers passed David Sharp on the way UP. 40 still relatively fresh climbers with Os and Dex, 40 climbers with thoughts ONLY of the summit. You’re damn right the “public” have a negative opinion. Most people I talked to at the time (public all) could not imagine why anyone would think being the 431st or so person on top could possibly outweigh saving another “climber”. What story would YOU rather tell back home ? I made it to a summit thats been climbed a thousand times ? Or I saved a life ?

These comments just tip the surface of this great debate, but none the less, it is very interesting to see the different views expressed.

The second piece that seems to be drawing alot of attention is a piece I wrote just a couple of days ago titled “Dave Hahn, Usha Bista, and How The Mainstream Media Bites a Big One“.

I wrote this piece in reference to how the Mainstream Media seemingly took a great story of Heroism and rescue at the top of Everest and once again turned it into the David Sharp incident.

Your comments into this issue have been interesting as well.

From reader Shaka:

Yes. But the lazy mainstream media get most of their “facts” from the littlestream media: sites that at times post early, loose bits of information and speculation as fact and exploit someone’s tragic death in doing so. Before you know it, these stories make their way into world headlines (not too difficult these days) - whether verified for truth or not. The David Sharp story is just such an example.

And From TorstenW:

One of the problems is that sensationalism gains readership. Not many people would like to see anyone perish high on a mountain under dire circumstances, yet mountaineers seem to inexplicably want to put themselves in just such inherently risky and deadly situations, even if decidedly calculated. I guess it’s just human nature. I am no stranger to the risk-taking contingent, loving dangerous hobbies, and will most likely persue high altitude climbing myself.

This issue even sparked a response from Kraig over at The Adventure Blog :

I predicted this would happen on my blog several days back when the story was just breaking. I had a bad feeling about how this would play in the mainstream press. At the time I said that I hoped they would focus on the rescue and the good things that happened, but they would most likely instead go the route of the climbers being “abandoned”.The mainstream media is so predictable.

And Lastly, from Shaka Once Again:

Because of the very nature of what goes on during a climb of the world’s highest mountain, where climbers race against the clock with their lives through the death zone, it’s natural that full details of stories often do not unfold until everyone on the scene has had the chance to tell their story.

Though it probably doesn’t feel like it for most climbers, Everest season comes and goes in very fast. The media’s attention soon turns elsewhere and sometimes the full truth of a story seems to be left behind on the mountain. The sensationalized version, whether verified or not, often stands.

Sadly, all of these points are well taken.

David Sharp will probably continue to be quite a hot topic in climbing circles for years to come.

This season has seen quite a few Expeditions make courageous rescues and later on, mention the media and how the David Sharp incident played out. Most people are in agreement that this was wrong, yet still quite a few say that that is just the way it is and should be expected…

Both of these topics are still up for debate. There are so many different sides to the story–and all making very good points. My readers continue to amaze me with their knowledge and intellect concerning issues such as these discussed. If you would like to take part in either of these discussions, just click the following links and post your own comments and thoughts. We always love to hear from all of you, and I will continue to try to update you on these issues, as well as others, that seem to be sparking an interest around the world. Now, Click the links and join in..

David Sharp HAD to Die

Dave Hahn, Usha Bista, and How the Mainstream Media Bites A Big One