I assume they're doing it to publicise their company name to people whose only contact with mountaineering is what they read in the Sunday papers. Because anyone who followed the goings-on of the Mallory expedition and the ensuing debate will be viewing this new project with a fair amount of scepticism. Anything that can awaken that slumbering beast the Alpine Club from years of dormancy and force it to publically issue specific ethical guidelines for an individual expedition is obviously lacking in credibility amoungst the mountaineering community.
I suspect that if you were to poll active mountaineers on whether this project should go ahead, you would get a decisive 'no' vote. Craghoppers, along with every other expedition sponsor, must surely be aware of this. I don't think Craghoppers has a great deal of credibility with mountaineers anyway, and this move certainly isn't going to enhance what they have got. May sell a few more dog-walking jackets, though.
Considering how many more dog walkers than mountaineers there are, that may be a wise move.
It was interesting to see how they were talking about it being an archeological project. If it is, how is it being documented? What credentials do the archeologists on the project have? Surely it would be very interesting to read articles about these early mountaineers and to find out what really happened. But it's got to be done properly. --Mjausson
Joan Collins - you think if you put a poll to most active mountaineers they would say 'no' to this project going ahead. Why you you think that? Just curious.
So, there is some British Involvement in this expedition - I thing that's great, and hats of to Craghoppers for taking no notice of the stuffed shirts at the AC.
The greatest story in British mountaineering history - and it seems the climbing establishment wants to wash it's hands of the whole affair.
I've followed this story for over 30 years. I want to know what really happened. Thank God for the Americans - and the German!
Some people would argue that the expedition's pretty close to grave robbing and shows a lack of respect for the dead - that's not necessarily my personal opinion, but it's a valid point of view. I guess it's a question of whether you think the end, which is possibly - though probably not - knowing who got to the top first, justifies the means. You also have to take into account the feelings of Irvine's family who really don't want the body interfered with. Would you be hapy if someone decided to exhume your grandfather for reasons of historical curiosity? It might be significant in mountaineering history, but in the bigger picture, it hardly matters, does it?
As you say any investigation probably won't prove one way or the other if they got to the top or not. Even if a camera was found any pictures supposedly taken on the summit would I guess have been taken very quickly and would be dismissed by sceptics as 'a patch of snow'. Likewise, they would be hailed by believers as 'on the summit'. I can't imagine either of them taking a stop to write anything in their diary immediately after reaching the summit, they would have tried to get off the top quickly. Anything other than a search for a camera ( which I think is iffy anyway) is macabre grave robbing given the short time span since the event. and shouldn't take place. Let the families keep their memories and let the people believe or not whether they succeeded. Personaly I'm a believerando there's not much that could come from the expedition to make me change my mind.
shivaun - I can't recall seeing or hearing one shred of support from active mountaineers before, during or after the earlier Mallory-finding expedition. There was a particularly negative reaction to the cash-in book. And there was a degree of surprise that a second expedition was even going ahead given the controversy caused by the earlier one.
This is just what I gather from personal conversations and opinions expressed in specialist magazines and websites/forums. But I believe they are probably representative of the larger whole.
Bear in mind that many mountaineers are opposed to anything that could be seen as commercial exploitation of wild mountain areas (especially Everest), combine this with the somewhat macabre aspect of this project and it's easy to guess at the reason for the opposition.
Before I read about the discovery of Mallory I was a real sloth. I had never heard of Mallory and Irvine, let alone Hillary and Tenzing. This has opened up a new world for me and I devour books written by Doug Scott, Stephen Venables, Wilfred Noyce, Audrey Salkeld, and other mountaineering literature. After being allergic to walking, I have visited Cedar Idris, Plas n Brenin in Wales and the Lake District. I am thinking of joining a walking/outdoor club. That can't be bad? To me it's been a very positive experience. All because of the discovery of Mallory.
Grave Robbing: if found, Irvine's body will be where he fell, and has lain unburied ever since. The team will treat him with great reverence, and will then bury him under stones - so really it's the exact opposite of grave robbing.
It the bodies were found at sea level, there would be a forensic investigation and an autopsy. Nothing so drastic will happen here - what difference does it make that a body is found at 27,000ft.
I don't understand the attitude of the Irvines - none of whom ever knew Sandy or are descended from him. If there was the slightest possibility that a relative of mine had been first up Everest - and it is a very slight possibility - I would want it investigated as fully as possible.
As for the support of 'active mountaineers' - it seems to me that they are indifferent. After all, modern cricketers as a rule are not interested in Bradman and Hutton! But anyway, the Mallory and Irvine story does not belong to 'active mountaineers', it belongs to everyone. Their opinion is irrelevant.
Archaeology wise - well, it's not the 'Time Team' going up there, but I'm sure they will be as thorough as possible in the circumstances. Simo, Hahn, Norton, Richards and the others are risking their necks to find out what so many of us want to know - personally I can't be too grateful to them.
Eric Simonson announced in Kathmandu in 1999 that they planned to return so the Alpine Club/Irvines seem to have had a two-year long think before issuing their document of demands, concerns, whatever it was. The timing of the document is a little unfortunate, because the whole world knew that at the time the expedition were fully committed (and it's an enormous undertaking planning these trips) - so they could not but go. The timing is unfortunate as it could almost look as if the Alpine Club/Irvine's were well aware that the expedition could not exactly be cancelled - therefore, they are secure in the knowledge that they were in a position to demand everything which this expedition works to find. However, if the motivations of the Alpine Club/Irvines is absolutely morally based - then I'm sure they will not be engaging in using everything gifted to them by the expedition - ie they surely wouldn't want to be seen financially or otherwise benefiting from copyright of photographs taken by the expedition, exhibiting artefacts found - which the expedition went out there and will have worked to find at risk to themselves. Because if they do - they're going to look a little bit greedy themselves. However, I'm sure they won't do any of this - because nobody in their right minds would go out of their way to ridicule an expedition taking risks like these guys are - and then confidently take everything worked for by others and use it to their benefit. Surely not! Surely it couldn't happen in Britain. There is a very discerning world-wide audience out there made up of individuals from all walks of life who have spent years studying the pre-war British Expeditions. At the end of the day - the 1924 expedition was an episode of history which was unique and historically significant. It cannot be possessed by the Irvine family or the Alpine Club, or the British mountaineering community - a community which appears to display a staggering ignorance of their own climbing history and most only came crawling out of the woodwork when it seemed that there was a good argument being publicised. Graham Hoyland said his motivation was to celebrate the achievements of the early pioneers - and they were achievements alright. The Americans view them as great historic achievements, the rest of the world does and celebrates it - but the majority of the British climbing community seem to know zilch about it's significance and spend all their time spouting or plagiarising the same old moans and groans mumbled by a few doyens of the esoteric community who seem to look down their noses at just about anybody they don't personally know. Craghoppers also sponsor the Southern Challenge - check with the Alpine Club if you don't know who these people are undertaking this expedition - they'd be liable to deck you one if you called any of them dog-walkers or suggest that the nearest they ever got to mountaineering was from reading the press. From some of the comments on UK climbing forums, it very much looks as if every bit of knowledge they have comes from press hype from the last two years by the usual biased suspects. It's a shame - because more than any other group, the UK mountaineering community are on the one hand bemoaning the motives of this expedition (it's not money - but you won't listen to them or see what they say because you'd prefer just to whinge) - and at the same time here's Jon summing up Sandy Irvine's life story as 'Top Everest Climber in Sex Scandal' or you view the first out there British mountaineers as "..we're a little bemused by the press's obsession with dead, upper class mountaineering toffs who, if they lived today, would be grade B 'Hello' fodder'.
[this message was shortened to fit new size restrictions - contact the poster for full details]
If the Mallory & Research Expedition II , this spring, is able to ascirbe George Leigh Mallory and Andrew Comyn Irvine a successful summit bid of June 8th, l924--- then its legacy will not be that of over commercialization of Everest and disrespect of bodies on high ; rather the honor due Mallory & Irvine and its bequethal to the British nation!
1. The article you refer to was a light-hearted attempt to poke a little fun at the disproportionate veneration of historical figures - think the Royal Family - by Brits, by reminding people that historical figures were real people with faults and foibles just like anyone else. The idea that I'm any sort of spokesperson for the UK climbing community just made me laugh though.
2. 'Dog walkers'? Don't think that's any sort of issue. No-one's questioning the mountaineering credentials of the team. That's all part of a different debate about the commercialisation of Everest.
3. The Alpine Club isn't a commercial organisation, the expedition, as I understand it - though I'm happy to be corrected on the point - is.
4. A lot of UK mountaineers would be appalled at the idea that they're indifferent to the history of UK climbing. British climbing culture is actually steeped in respect for and awareness of the past. Ironically, it's this respect for those who came before that makes a lot of British climbers dubious about the current research expedition.
The fact that some portions of the British climbing establishment are dubious about the expedition and its methodology, doesn't indicate a lack of interest in its history, more a respect which you would presumably see as exagerated or outmoded.
I guess Sandra, that you're a climber yourself - you are, aren't you? - and so understand that climbers are real people with their own opinions and a lot of them genuinely believe that the Mallory - Irvine research expedition is wrong. They're entitled to hold those opinions, just as you're entitled to yours.
I don't think that sweeping condemnations of the UK climbing community does anyone or your arguments any favours.
These aren't necessarily my personal opinions - I tend to think that once you're dead, you're dead and what happens to your body is pretty immaterial - but this isn't black and white, or right and wrong. There are shades of grey here and people are entitled to believe one or another side of the argument to be right without being slated for it.
I'm in a rush this afternoon but I'm very supportive of this year's Mallory& Irvine Research Expedition II. If they can prove Mallory & Irvine summitted on June 8,l924. it will be noble. What better way to honor them , than to prove that deed. I hope this controversy and It's all right for people to publically voice their disagreement, shouldn't turn into something of a largely led American expedition versus many members of the British mountaineering establishment. In fact, Geroge Mallory toured the United States in February of l923 to raise money for the expedition the next year. He spoke in New York City, Chicago ,Cedar Rapids Iowa, and several other cities. When he spoke to the Harvard students, in Cambridge , Massachusetts they were thrilled by his talk on Everest as recorded by the Harvard Crimson. JOAN COLLINS: Yes, you are correct in that many British climbers have been critical of these two search expeditons. But you must surely know if you read Ghosts Of Everests that George Mallory's daughter, who sadly died recently, Clare Milikan , wrote a letter stating that Everest '99 had acted respectively toward her father. Lastly, Joan, you must surely now that BLAKE CARRINGTON would have approved of this year's search expediton. best regards, Paul
Good evening everybody. I'd like to beg your indulgence and post a couple of paragraphs from the book The Fight For Everest l924. These paragraphs were written by Sir Francis Younghusbad and I think they go to the heart of why some of us in succeeding generations are coninuously inspired by Mallory & Irivne's feat on June 8,l924.
" Mallory's spirit did indeed force his body to his death. But the manner of his and Irvine's death was such as to kindle the spirit iin thousands of others. Their lives were not thrown uselessly away, for it is a fact, just as seal as any "scientific" fact, tha tthe story of their death has roused the spirit of men and women in every country. Few can be Everest climbers, but all can be inspirited by a deed like Mallory's and Irvine's last climb. And many there are who, on hearin of it, have felt themselves helped in battling with their own stern difficulties. And Mallory and Irvine will for ever live among the great who have helped to raise this spirit of man. Another fact which must albe be put to the credit of these Everest Expeditions is that the story of their attack on the mountain has aroused interest throughout the world. And the value of this interest can, in this case, be meausred in box-office reciepts; thus giving us tangible evidence. For the telegrams relating that story, newspapers were ready to give substantial sums of money. And to hear the lectures and to see the wonderful cinematogrpahic record which Captain Noel brought back, hundreds of thousands of men and women and children all over the world have been ready to pay. In this practical manner they have shown that they do atach value to what these expeditons have done." Sir Franciscis Younghusband ca. 1925
