Jon Krakauer: A Compare And Contrast Essay

As we read about what unfolded at Everest on May 9 and 10, 1996, there was a tragic disaster that struck every mountaineer on the Earth, a storm that killed 12 climbers and left many more wounded. Today readers seeaw the argument between Jon Krakauer, the author of Into Thin Air, and Anatoli Boukreev, a Russian climber who co-wrote The Climb where they disagreed on events that occured during the disaster. These two books by two survivors of Everest saw and experienced different viewpoints of what transpired in the storm above Camp Four. When we look at who is more persuasive in their books and we tend to observe three key points: their knowledge and expertise in climbing, their character, and their goodwill. But the most credibility of what actually happened on Everest goes to Jon Krakauer who was more convincing in his arguments over Anatoli Boukreev.
On the mountain, there is no moral or value at that high of altitude but there is a skill that has

As Krakauer was writing many people who were pro-Boukreev believed that Jon only wrote this book for the money and fame. Krakauer wrote this book because he “wanted [his] account to have a raw, ruthless sort of honesty” (Into Thin Air introduction). His book was to show what materialized on top of Everest and to help the reader visualize what occurred in his perspective. After Into Thin Air was published Boukreev was outraged that he was the villain in the story. Anatoli was “puzzled... by his [Boukreev] depiction in Krakauer's book and wanted to get his version on the record”. He wrote The Climb with co-author DeWalt and in the book that had “a number of responses to Krakauer's book”. The co-author, DeWalt, had no climbing experience and has never been faced with writing a book at this length. Jon Krakauer’s goodwill for writing this heartbreaking story is preferable to Boukreev’s book base on he wanted the information to become