Talk:Jon Krakauer

Edit session

User:Gareth Owen is right to criticize an edit session; what wacko did this?

I can't find our copy of the book, but i'll try some research twd fixing it. --Jerzy(t) 23:27, 2004 Jul 6 (UTC)

I left the wording vague about the number of deaths, since i found articles on Web giving 5, 8, 9, 10, and 12; i assume they mostly have different criteria for who to count. (E.g., the 3-person Indian-party seems to be counted sometimes, even tho, i think, that was the next day. But not stupid to include in the same account.) IMO, this should be worked out in detail in a Mt. Everest May 1996 storm or Mt. Everest May 1996 deaths article. It should reference the multiple accounts and books, some of which deserve their own articles, and account for the different numbers. --Jerzy(t) 19:36, 2004 Jul 9 (UTC)

Okay...five comes from Fischer from the other group and four from Krakauer's group - Namba, Hansen, Hall, and Harris. All five, however, died on May 11 or later - merely stranded and unable to be helped on May 10. The eight count comes from the three Ladhakis dying. Nine sounds random, but I guess you could count Chen from the Taiwanesee group dying, but that was on May 9. Bruce Herrod died, which Krakauer counted as the 12th casuality of the season - I don't who the 10th and 11th are. The 10th could be counted as Ngwang, the Sherpa from Fischer's camp who died of HACE later in June or so, in a hosptial. The Mount Everset article says that there were fifteen deaths, which still leaves four more unaccounted for...
I personally believe that such a title should be 1996 Mount Everest Disaster -- Hbdragon88 07:25, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Boulder

Does he live in Boulder now? --Keflavich 06:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

His Response

Well, I don't know about the book itself, but Krakauer's rebuttal on the Random House site was reasonable and even-tempered. He stated his case well and I don't think he's a biased man.

The Church's argument is also reasonable - people will make unfortunate connections to the "main" branch of the LDS church based on insinuation from fundamentalist behavior.

I think church members and Krakauer can definitely open a dialogue while amicably agreeing to agree to disagree on certain things. I'll keep this article on my watch list to keep it fair.203.131.167.26 12:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Krakauer has been considered biased and unfair in his other books too. Further, he has admitted he had an axe to grind with the LDS Church and religion in general. If that is so, how can you say he is "fair"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blue Tie (talk • contribs) 21:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

Does anyone else find the last few sentences of "Criticism of Krakauer" to be a little strange? Specifically, "Quinn would not say how or where he got this information and many believe that he said these things because he was angry at the church because of his shortcomings instead of himself." <-- this seems to be written by someone with a bone to pick against some guy named Quinn and is not only opinion, but doesn't really make sense.

Improvements to Krakauer's Biography

This page is very light on content. The 'mountaineering' section provides a very brief overview of his accomplishments, I have added to the list (I feel that it gives the reader a better understanding of Krakauer's novels - such as Into the Wild and Into Thin Air). The magazines and books sections were too mixed (ie. the book section talked about his magazines). I've made some changes to separate them more. I also added more details about Into Thin Air and included other awards and recognitions, including a quote from the American Academy of Arts and Letters, which gives an excellent summary of Krakauer's journalistic style. I propose getting rid of the 'Criticisms' section, because everyone has their critics - must we list them all? I also propose that we add a picture, although I personally don't have one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.237.242.34 (talk) 15:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)