The Strange “Case” of Vanessa O’Brien

Tony Danzawrote:

You just described surfing, skiing, and snowboarding to mention a few. Really any of the outdoor based “sports” could qualify.

Correct. Except I'm not talking about the elements of every sport. I'm talking about how those elements have contributed to climbing's uniquely rich literary history. Skiing and surfing both have good books. But no one could say with a straight face that they have a literary pedigree on par with climbing, which goes back to the 19th century.

I know this is something most MPers don't care about. I'm reminded every day how few people read books anymore. O'Brien is simply one manifestation among many of how climbing literature and media is changing, not for better. So purists like myself and Andy will keep fighting a losing battle. But if I'm going to die on a hill, proverbial or otherwise, I don't mind it being this one.

Maybe it’s more about appealing to a specific audience and how climbing has changed over the years. When the vast majority of modern climbers demand safety and convenience and beta intensive instruction manuals (modern guidebooks), tales of hard people, facing dangerous objectives,  in austere settings , ring hollow. Consequently, modern  climbing media is produced to target the current audience.  Additionally, legacy climbing literature was possibly more authentic storytelling and less commercial in nature. 

You mean like Free Solo?

J W wrote:

The difference is time.

Any activity where people spend months engaged in a single task has a rich literary history because robust literature accompanies life’s long-form pursuits. Read the library’s collection on gardening.

Mountaineering is better thought of as exploration as opposed to sport; as such, it’s essentially no different than journeying down an unknown river, sailing uncharted waters, or walking overland to distant terrain.

You all should take up caving. The ultimate expression of, "I wonder where this goes..."  ;)

That said, there have been some pretty good books written on caving. Yes, there's the sense of true discovery, but (I'm going to get in trouble for this next part, I just know it...)  unlike rock climbing or mountaineering, there's really no "performing" for celebrity or style points, in an effort to impress others. Nobody can see you. It's purely for the individual experience, and that of your very close teammates. And while caving certainly attracts all manner of eccentric personalities, there's often not too much drama or controversy around people. That much is pretty nice, really.

Here's Pete in some deep hole cave bounce

Here's Pete on El Cap

Guess which Pete gets the most attention? 

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

As to the super-competitive 7-summiters? Most long term climbers I know don't give a fuck about any Firsts claimed on a guided ascent, of anything. Period. I couldn't care less what that author has to say in her book, I ain't reading it. Come back when she can actually climbing something on the lead, organizing her own climb, on some gnarl, then I'll pay attention. Until then she's just paying to run in a fancy race track, nothing more.

Though "over-curated reality" is a huge disease in all facade of current society because of how much media is around, claiming too much credit in front of an uneducated crowd is nothing new. I don't think climbing is in any unique position to fight these general phenomena. If anything, we cure ourselves by climbing, develop our own tastes of what's truly inspiring so that we can choose  what do we follow/give credit to instead of just being fed whatever crap the media feed us.

That's why as far as I know, even gym climbers are educated enough to not care about those cheesy guided mountaineering stories. Don't worry we are not "that" dumb.

Bb Cc wrote:

Except Thailand. 

What about Thailand? None of the cavers on the rescue went looking for the fame. And despite the obligatory interviews since then, those guys have been exceptionally quiet about the incident.

I own and have read Rick Stanton & John Volanthen's books. (And other's too actually.) Very well written, especially Rick's. Rick's book, you could erase the Thai-rescue from the book, and it would still be a great read. Without drama or theater - which seems to match his personality from every other glimpse you get of him.

Those guys were exceptional cavers & divers before the incident, and have kept their pursuits after too, without fanfare. Richard Harris (the anesthesiologist) has continued to push very deep cave diving, including some pioneering work on mixed-gas diving.

If anything, we cure ourselves by climbing, develop our own tastes of what's truly inspiring so that we can choose  what do we follow/give credit to instead of just being fed whatever crap the media feed us.

I like your thinking.  Where and when I started climbing (cretaceous period   ) there was no choice but to develop our own tastes, there were no role models, no media, no climbers around the fire. 

But we had these magnificent books! Bonatti, Roberts, Rowell, the list goes on and on. They were the books a kid climber read and reread, and kept on his book shelf to his old age. They helped educate, inspire and terrify, all at once.

Just a side note: you wanna know the greatest advancement in mountaineering and alpinism in the last 75 years?

The real-time weather report. 

Mike Larsonwrote:

Maybe (probably) it's because I make my living through the written word, but you're dead wrong about other sports having as rich a literary history. Climbing is unique in that it combines exploration with extreme athletic endeavor with life-and-death stakes in the grandest landscapes the earth has to offer. Are there tons about books about racing and golf and baseball and weightlifting and surfing? Of course. A few can be quite good. But the whole point is they rarely interest anyone outside of the sport's followers. Climbing books have been different for generations. They had a lay audience long before Into Thin Air. Because the best of them are at heart adventure tales, and adventure appeals to all. 

You're on a climbing forum read almost exclusively by climbers. You're saying that climbing is special and unique and that climbing stories are more interesting than other sports.

I agree climbing is special, to me and to everyone else here, because we are climbers.

We're in an echo chamber. And that's ok because we're just talking about our hobby.

Btw, I saw Ford v Ferrari a while back. It was a great movie even though I have never raced a car, or watched racing on TV, and I drive a Prius. It was was also a huge success at the box office. According to my quick research that's 10x more than the most successful movie about climbing.

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

DK, my whole point is not that other sports don't have good books or good movies (though my point is directed solely at the literature). It's that climbing's literary heritage is uniquely long and rich, and that since its first days has attracted a large audience **among non-climbers.** Maybe 5%, at most, of the readers of Into Thin Air were climbers. The same goes for Touching the Void, The White Spider, and many, many others. William Finnegan's Barbarian Days is one of the best books ever written about surfing, but the publisher marketed it as a memoir, because they knew that to market it as a surfing book would limit the audience.

Publishers view climbing books as adventure books, in a way they don't about skiing or surfing or [pick your sport], because the audience for adventure books is usually far larger than sport-specific books. It's why O'Brien's book found a publisher. Within the climbing community, her exploits aren't noteworthy in the least. But the general audience it's geared toward doesn't know that. 

As Cherokee rightly put it above, it's those magnificent books that set us apart. And for those of us who value them, the self-publicizing efforts of O'Brien and others detract from that heritage.  

I read an Outdoor Magazine article/pabulum about "anti-influencers" but my takeaway was that they are influencers. This person sounds like an anti-influencer influencer. (AII)

Andy Kirkpatrickwrote:
Back then I thought that kind of confessional style was honest, but really it was lazy, limiting, and clichéd. Dishonest, even. 

Howdy Andy!

First, yeah sure, could be an interesting, nuanced, essay.

My 2 cents further?

I don't think all climbing literature needs to be Lit Ur A Ture.....with the nose in the air. Further, I'd say most of those casual.readers aren't reading a grand tradition of climbing lit, just a good read, in the armchair adventuring category. I think the book in question might be viewed not as "climbing", but as personal travelogue sort of thing. As to the "accomplishment", naw, it matters not one whit in the history of climbing.....but....the armchair readers can vicariously say "oh, I could never do anything like that". Which is how ALL of us get viewed, lol! But then?

Sometimes that little light goes off (I've seen it, you have too, I'll bet), and you can see that tiny pause, and, "maybe?????'. 

However tiny our own maybes are, they are still more than nothing at all. :-)

Secondly?

Yes, this is (very broadly) climbing, but, myself, I think there's a huge difference between mountaineering and pikers like me. I'm a climber. Conrad Anker is, well, Conrad Anker. 

Lastly?

My admiration and enjoyment for who ever wrote and storyboarded and drew Bugs Bunny cartoons back in my back in the day, takes nothing away from my same admiration and enjoyment of who ever tf wrote Shakespeare way back.....and all the enormous riffs on BOTH those classic canons of work! 

YMMV

H.

Old lady Hwrote:

Howdy Andy!

First, yeah sure, could be an interesting, nuanced, essay.

My 2 cents further?

I don't think all climbing literature needs to be Lit Ur A Ture.....with the nose in the air. Further, I'd say most of those casual.readers aren't reading a grand tradition of climbing lit, just a good read, in the armchair adventuring category. I think the book in question might be viewed not as "climbing", but as personal travelogue sort of thing. As to the "accomplishment", naw, it matters not one whit in the history of climbing.....but....the armchair readers can vicariously say "oh, I could never do anything like that". Which is how ALL of us get viewed, lol! But then?

Sometimes that little light goes off (I've seen it, you have too, I'll bet), and you can see that tiny pause, and, "maybe?????'. 

However tiny our own maybes are, they are still more than nothing at all. :-)

Secondly?

Yes, this is (very broadly) climbing, but, myself, I think there's a huge difference between mountaineering and pikers like me. I'm a climber. Conrad Anker is, well, Conrad Anker. 

Lastly?

My admiration and enjoyment for who ever wrote and storyboarded and drew Bugs Bunny cartoons back in my back in the day, takes nothing away from my same admiration and enjoyment of who ever tf wrote Shakespeare way back.....and all the enormous riffs on BOTH those classic canons of work! 

YMMV

H.

Hi, it's not my review, it's a review by someone I respect very much, but who was afraid to publish it, probably as it was a negative review of a book written by a (very wealthy) female climber, meaning he could either say nothing, or pretend it was good (of course it's good, it was written by a ghost writer). I think if some wealthy Wall Street stock trader wrote the book, about being guided around the world, people would not be so defensive on the author's behalf?

I don't know many outdoor writers who make a living just from that (most have a second income, or partner with a real job), but I'm one (even though I can't spell, or know anything about writing). Yes, I'm "thin-skinned" and defensive, but I write to please my critics, my one star reviews on Amazon, the 1% who hate what I do, no matter how hard I try to please. If I was the author of the above book, I kick myself, as I think a better book could have been written, both for myself, and to serve climbing. That book would have been about the reality of being the sort of person who would burn through hundreds of thousands of dollars to be the first to do something so pointless. What makes someone do such as thing? What made them that way? How does it end? What does it tell us about ourselves?

I think people need to get over his anti-elitist attitude, as that's just an excuse for half-assed medals for everyone mediocrity. 

Andy Kirkpatrickwrote:

That book would have been about the reality of being the sort of person who would burn through hundreds of thousands of dollars to be the first to do something so pointless. What makes someone do such as thing?

Sorry, I tuned out for a hot minute. Could you remind me  what the point of the multiple expeditions to be the first to stand on Mt. Everest was? 

Everybody has an ego and it demands attention, nourishment, and justification.  You do you, and we all hope if its trash or literal surface-shitting, it wont succeed. Much of the time the world rewards that, tho.  

Rock on with gusto, Mr. Kirkpatrick! If you do something right well enough, maybe it will shine bright, and teach, and improve things for a few. 

 Candy brings in more money than vegetables and always will.  

Very hard to get by selling self without self promotion.  What money did Leclerc make for his absolutely incredible acheivements?

Guys, I have a confession. I never made my own ice tools. I have no idea how to make my own rope or cams. Hell, I’ve never even forged a piton. And most everything I’ve done has been fueled by food I didn’t grow.

We’re all inauthentic rich bitches. I agree that following a guide up a mountain FEELS like a step to far. But that’s just a tradition.

To my mind, the rule is still “don’t lie about what you did.” That’s surprisingly fraught already; I don’t see the value or validity of insisting on other qualifications for writing something down.

Why waste 100s of thousands of dollars on, well, anything at all?

Because you can. 

And that, I think, is pretty often the "point" of the pointless.

I can do this.

You can't.

..........

Sir, I do understand, in making a living at it, the need to pay attention to the 1 star asshats (who are often mean, uh gee, because they are anonymous and can be mean).

But I do hope that you plow on anyway, with the writing that you choose to write ...at least when you can. And keep the editors happy, or whoever signs your paychecks.

Being a writer, or anyone doing anything remotely creative for a living, is tough! Lots of hard work and long hours/years put in. So give yourself full credit, just for putting your pants on and showing up to ply your craft. You're already doing way more than those who are merely wistful wannabes.....who never grow the balls to give it a shot, even just for fun. Whatever the particular shot might be. 

Best wishes! Helen

PS

I've personally blown 100s of thousands of dollars recently. But I have a very nifty little house to live in, employed a bunch of very small business trades people, and will have a tiny "legacy" to leave behind for people in the future who might live in this collaborative creation. 

Is it the scale that's bothersome? 

Or impinging into your chosen field? (Be that writing, or climbing). 

Except for those who have no resources at all, all of us make choices every day, how to use the resources we have. I'll freely admit that most of my life has probably been entirely useless, in the grand scheme of things! So perhaps you caring about climbing, and writing, might help balance out my uselessness in those categories??  

Edit to add, ordered a book of yours. You sound more interesting than the book this thread refers to. :-)

grug gwrote:

I thought this was interesting. If you don't care then don't comment.

Please remove your meme - its cluttering the thread. 

Please remove your quoted meme, it is cluttering the thread lol

Andy Kirkpatrickwrote:

I’ve been working on an essay about the false beliefs and delusions that exist in modern outdoor media—how high-profile climbers and outdoor types often construct a story about themselves to appeal to sponsors (or themselves), gain followers, or excuse weaknesses, but are ultimately fake or limiting. One example: a woman in a high-end, high-stress corporate job saying she won’t write about her adventures because she “lacks confidence”, something she believes all women suffer from (they don’t; many are simply burdened by the idea that they do). Then there’s the dirtbag or underdog who claims to be held back, yet in reality enjoys immense privilege or social clout—their apparent poverty a choice, their victimhood a superhero costume. Maybe personal narrative in adventure sports has become TEDified: everything distilled and packaged to fit a neat and tidy into the current form of hero's journey, e.g, no hero is complete without some claim of mental health issues. If you go watch the Johnny Dawes doc, What Climbing Has Taught Me, you'll find the antithesis of what I'm talking about. 

Anyway, someone sent me this book review of Vanessa O’Brien’s book The Greatest Heights: Facing Danger, Finding Humility, and Climbing a Mountain of Truth (2021) and I thought it inculcated what I'm grasping at, and thought I share, to see what others thought. 

One of the internet literary sites I follow recommended I listen to a podcast about “the greatest mountaineer of her generation” and also “the most adventurous woman of her generation.” So, I listened. She was indeed described in these terms, and she accepted the praise without qualifications. She was, of course, promoting her book, The Greatest Heights: Facing Danger, Finding Humility, and Climbing a Mountain of Truth. The author’s name, the purported author’s name, is Vanessa O’Brien.

Her main claims to fame, and claiming fame is very much central here, are “fastest woman to complete the Seven Summits,” and the “first American and British woman to successfully climb K2.” Of course, Brits Alison Hargreaves and Julie Tullis (actual climbers) successfully climbed K2, but perished on the descent. I think she has been “corrected” enough times on this point that she sometimes amends the “successfully climbed” with “and safely descended” to the K2 climb. I do wonder what actual British folks think of this though. O’Brien was raised in Grosse Pointe, Michigan and acquired her “dual citizenship” through marriage. According to reports, she continues to live part-time in London.

She hiked up Kilimanjaro first. Then, after doing the next six of the seven summits, she realized if she did Kilimanjaro again, she could claim to have done the seven in “record time.” So she did. This desperation for records, particularly public records/world records/Guinness records just feels kind of . . . sad. Go get some actual alpine skills and earn a Piolet d’or if awards matter so much to you. P.S. It’s not something you can buy.

O’Brien is clearly a highly-motivated, driven human. In addition to the seven summits, she also climbed Cho Oyo, Shishapangmga and one other 8000 meter peak, I forget which. In addition, she made two attempts on K2 before succeeding. Unquestionably, only an extraordinary person could have succeeded on these.

But why does “say what you did and how you did it” become so . . . complicated? In this case, it’s by seemingly not understanding that a client can’t be the greatest mountaineer of her generation, much less the greatest explorer.

The tally looks like about seven attempts of 8,000 meter peaks in a very short period of time. You can do the math as well as I can. If the average cost of these climbs is $65 K per climb . . . . Well, that’s a lot of discretionary income.

The book is compulsively readable. Moreso, I would guess, if you are able to take it at face value. In her acknowledgments she thanks a fellow writer for all her help. But one wonders how much help? A little research reveals that person is a professional ghostwriter. Ghostwriters, like mountain guides, know which side of their bread is buttered. They operate, by necessity, by the Fight Club Dictum, the first rule of which is “Do not talk about Fight Club.”

I could probably live with the whole thing a lot easier if she amended the subtitle, to “How the World’s Wealthiest Client Searched for Humility but Never Found it, and Got Lost on the Mountain of Truth.”

Roccia Innerkofler

Pam R. Sailors in Chapter 6, More Than Meets The "I", Values of Dangerous Sports, p. 85, in Climbing Philosophy for Everyone, Editor Stephen E. Schmid, 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, makes the distinction between 'summiteers' and 'mountaineers'. Firstly, "Summiteers have three characteristics. The first is that they are goal oriented. Never mind the journey, it's the outcome that drives summiteers, some of whom will pay almost anything and do almost anything to get to the top",p.85. Mountaineers on the other hand, are best described by (1) "process oriented", in terms of a "relationship with the mountain rather than a race to the top", p.87. (2) A summiteer is "engrossed in an examination of self or an affirmation of self, the mountaineer seems to escape the self altogether", p.88. (3) "The third characteristic of mountaineers is that they exhibit a sense of moral responsibility for their comrades on the mountain", p. 89.