Forever on the Mountain: The Truth Behind One of Mountaineering's Most Controversial and Mysterious Disasters

This appears to be pretty even-handed about the causes of a major climbing disaster on Denali, a peak fraught with difficulties. The indifference of the US National Park Service is appalling, and the squabbling and backbiting between various prima donnas is discouraging.

My criticism of this book revolves entirely around choices made by the Author. It seems like he was trying to write the “Into Thin Air” of the Wilcox expedition disaster while doing MUCH less actual research and by being very biased. Did Wilcox make mistakes? Absolutely and some of those mistakes may have contributed to the disaster. Tabor does not mention things like abandoning shovel handles and other digging implements that features prominently in other writing on the tragedy. This is an important detail and clearly describes a “Tactical Error” that eventually led higher camps to remain exposed without igloos or protective barriers for the tents. Making a “Run” at the summit was a rash decision, one made seemingly based on impatience, and it led to the logistical issues of stocking high camps. Finally, so much is made of rescue operations that are held up but anyone who pushes themselves into the mountains MUST understand that they can’t rely on anyone else to help them. Climbing is an expression of the supreme self and one of the biggest modern controversies is people who knowingly push past their limits in dangerous terrain expecting other climbers and rescue operations to save them. Blaming a fire fighter that a building burned is short sighted and it feels like grasping at straws. “Blame NPS, blame Brad Washburn, blame ARG, but don’t blame Wilcox.” It was probably wrong of ANAM and the Anchorage conference to place blame wholly on Wilcox shoulders but this book, seeking to absolve Wilcox at the expense of NPS officials, ARG, and all others disparaged is equally wrong. Brad Washburn probably overreacted to Wilcox initial letter smearing the name of a 20-something nobody but Wilcox was definitely wrong to continue to pick the fight with the preeminent expert on the Alaska range. Wrong answer. It would have been far smarter to instead apologize for the misunderstanding, explaining publicity as a means to an end, and asking for the old timer’s advice. Getting into a well-documented and publicized pissing match with Brad Washburn are the actions of a teenager not a leader. Wilcox, in fact, tries to manage the “Team” up the mountain rather than leading it. 1960’s expeditions required strong leadership like Norman Dyhrenfurth in the 1963 Everest expedition and Wilcox’s crew lacked that. It’s amazing that the author documents the many “meetings” called to solve problems that required a steady, considered, yet firm hand to resolve. A real leader would have kept John Russell’s detrimental attitude in check and could have identified load carrying issues early. Lack of leadership IS a problem and the main blame rests with Wilcox but Snyder and Clark are ALSO to blame for not stepping into the leadership role. The expedition lacked a leader and thusly lacked direction. What was Wilcox plan for a rescue if anyone got into trouble? Call a meeting and discuss in a committee? All these are contributing factors with the storm being the activating event. A stronger, more centralized team with a solid foundation in logistical planning with an actual plan, MIGHT have been able to withstand the storm. Probably not but it can’t be over stated just how the real villain of the tragedy is the storm. The storm killed those men, a common occurrence in the days before accurate weather reporting though it still happens today. More people in the mountains means more and larger disasters will occur and the author shows that Bradford Washburn makes this point. The Author is (like this review) scattered and inconsistent. Grandiose language can’t create drama where none exists and genuinely difficult and drama-producing moments are often over looked. Tabor sets himself up as something of a subject matter expert (or at least someone who is competent in climbing and climbing history) yet he links Hermann Buhl to K2 instead of Nanga Parbat or Broad Peak. He claims to be telling the truth yet in reality he’s seeking to smear the NPS Officials and Brad Washburn who is polite enough to provide him an audience. Frankly, I think if you read this book you should also read “Denali’s Howl” which is essentially a counter argument written by George Hall’s son. Lastly, this book is not as good as or remotely like “Young Men and Fire” and I’m amazed at how often that book and the Mann Gulch fire are referenced to explain a mountaineering tragedy. It makes literally no sense. You don’t see Norman Maclean referencing the Wilcox tragedy because the two have no link except that both were fatal. Worth reading for the sake of subject matter but it should be taken as part fiction, part over-reaching commentary, and part insult.

Dear Jim,I did go back for a second read through after all these years. Of course, my book SHOULD I NOT RETURN was next in line after your exhaustive expose. Below is my review, which I wrote over nine years ago.Back in 2007, Bill and I surprsingly finished reading your book at about the same time. He received his copy a few weeks before I got mine, while it took longer for mine to arrive--up here in Alaska. Yet, since Bill is up here visiting, we got together for breakfast, and...lo and behold... we discovered we have neared to end of your opus together... a fitting end... for each of us.We chatted together for close to an hour, in praise of your efforts. Let me say first, what a wonderful writer you are. Your dedication to detail, mastery of descriptive imagery, and unbelievable investigative technique is beyond comprehension. Your creative `exploration' describes very closely, and perhaps, in the vain of `nothing less' than what we climbers endured on the slopes of Denali in `67. If I didn't know better, it would almost seem as though you were there with each of us during the nightmare of our lives.Daring to delve into material that others so easily chose to ignore--or perhaps not even question--I was quite moved by your ability to first encourage participants to share, then with candor and clarity, piece together the puzzle pieces that were lost somewhere in the maze of burearcratic pedagogy, inflated egos, and blurred memory.Your book tells it like it was with no excuses, no attempts to cover-up confusion, nor expediancy to tie up the loose ends with a blame strategy that simply defies explanation. You clearly defined the human fraility and individuality of each of your story's participants, an--along with the good, the bad, and the ugly--you helped clarify those moments of true courage which most everyone displayed in times of turmoil. What you have written is an objective, honest, and no holes barred attempt to get at the truth. And lastly, you describe the sheer terror of coming face to face with death--an event that continues to challenge men from all over the world, and continues to do so, on the icy slopes of Denali--North America's crown jewel that still kills with each passing year. Well done, Jim.Jeff and Bill Babcock

A very good read well rehearsed by the author I would reccommend this book to anyone interested in mountaineering and human endurance.

Tabor's book deals with the 1967 disaster on MC Kinley/Denali mountain, where seven moutaineers died, while five survived. Not only does it narrate the possible story of the tragedy with all an all-encompassing view, but it conducts some sort of a "forensic", psychological and even organisational investigation on the accident. The slightest issue he does not leave aside, and gathers a tremendous number of documents and interviews in his attempt to discover the whole true story. Being himself a climber and a reporter, Tabor has wrote something comparable to Krakauer's into thin air, but for one essential difference: he was not part in the mortal journey. Far from being a weakening factor that circumstance reveals itself, on the contrary, an improving one. Tabor may indeed be more neutral to the protagonists and has nothing to prove about his own behaviour. This is an important point, since like in the Everest 1996 case, the Denali tragedy inescapably raised the question who is to blame. The two main characters of the story wrote books to explain their judgment about it. Pointless to say that they do not agree. Tabor's book is sound, balanced and convincing. Moreover the writing is as sensitive as it is sensible and might even bring peace among the survivors. Last but not least, to me the book's writing seemed more than pleasant. Altogether, a kind and solid book.

I was going to save this book for holiday reading,no way. II did find it rather disturbing,in all probability the truth will never be known,a good read

Interesting.

Very compelling, well written and thoroughly researched.