serene’s posterous

I listened to this book on-off for the past few weeks, most of it on the flight to and from Turkey.  The book is by Philip Delves Broughton, about his experiences in Harvard Business School.  He brings an interesting perspective as an outsider because he was a journalist prior to attending business school and had very little experience with business or finance.  I don't think the book was as hard hitting as it could be, but it does give an insight to how doing an MBA at a top business school would be like.

I found this book engaging and fascinating, and quite difficult to put down.  The author, Sudhir Venkatesh, describes his experiences when researching gang and tenant life in Chicago.  He was probably most famous for writing about the underground economy of the housing projects ("Why Do Drug Dealers Still Live With Their Moms?") in Freakonomics with Steven Levitt.  This book essentially describes how he managed to obtain the data in his research, and at the same time shows how the people (the gang members, the prostitutes, and the leaders etc.) lived in the projects.

I had wanted to read this book by Elizabeth Royte after reading the NYtimes review.  Unfortunately, it sounded a lot more fascinating in the review, and it took me a while to get through the slow bits in the middle.  There were several interesting chapters about the quality of tap water versus bottled water and the backlash against bottled water. 

The world has to decide whether it is a basic human right to have access to clean, fresh water, or if it costs too much to provide it for everyone.  In third world countries that we have visited, tap water is frequently not potable and we have to resort to drinking bottled water and avoiding all raw food and ice.  But what about those people who can't afford bottled water?  Do they just have to run the risk of water-borne diseases?

We borrowed this as an audio book from the local library and listened to most of it on our road trip.  It seems a little weird listening to a book rather than reading it, but it did help pass the time on the long drive.

This is another one of those books detailing the greed and the criminal acts on Mount Everest. This time it is written by Michael Kodas, a journalist for the Hartford Courant.  This book focuses more on the criminal underbelly of mountaineering and therefore seems significantly more sensationalistic than the previous book I read about Mount Everest.  

There were two main threads running through the book.  One was about the author's experience on the mountain on a team seemingly wrecked by internal dissension and poor leadership.  The other was about Dr Nils Antazana's ill-fated climb to the summit with a guide who appeared to have serious psychological issues.  I did not like how the book was organized, with the chapter by chapter switching between the two stories.  The story of Dr Antazana was definitely the more compelling of the two.  I am not sure that the description of Koda's own experiences can ever be entirely impartial under those circumstances, so those parts of the book were simply bogged down by all those little details defending his views and position.

This is a book detailing events of the 2006 season on the North side of
Mount Everest written by Nick Heil. I picked this one off the books
Eu-Jin checked out from the local library. The 2006 season was marked
by many deaths from several expeditions that were not directly related
to the weather (unlike the events of the 1996 season detailed in Into
Thin Air, The Climb etc.). In particular, the death of David Sharp,
who was climbing solo with no frills, appeared controversial, because
he was still alive when climbers passed him on the way to the summit
the next day. In contrast, Lincoln Hall, who was struck down higher
in the mountain by cerebral edema on his way down from the summit, was
eventually rescued.
 
Heil's account is balanced, and not sensationalistic. I thought he
was fair to Russell Brice, the commercial operator of Himex, whom some
thought was somewhat accountable for the death of David Sharp. It
seems that Russell Brice, more than most people, was responsible for
making the north side of Mount Everest accessible to climbers. And
while he isn't the most well liked person on the mountain, he
certainly makes sure that his climbers (and quite lot of moochers) get
down safely.

This was a memoir of sorts by travel writer, Thomas Kohnstamm, about
his experiences as a Lonely Planet guidebook writer. It dragged at
bits, especially the first few chapters before he actually gets to
Brazil. But his description about the difficulties of travel
guidebook writing was interesting. Too little time and money, and too
much area to cover with too little resources. I am not surprised that
corners are cut, and freebies taken. Although one hopes that most of
the guidebook writers don't spend their days drunk and making up
information in the guidebooks.

The key take home point is that guidebooks are arbitrary - the writers
may not necessarily know more than you - and don't slavishly follow
every recommendation. Places that are not in all those guidebooks may
actually be a better experience overall.

Eu-Jin and I were frequently surprised how out-of-date some of the
"recommendations" and information were in some of these guidebooks,
especially when traveling in Central and South America. Restaurants
don't exist anymore, hostels significantly more decrepit than
described, and just plain wrong information.

After reading The Climb, I wanted to read Above the Clouds by Anatoli
Boukreev. It was a fascinating book about the thoughts of Boukreev
from a translation of the diaries of his various climbs. He was
extremely strong, making many speed ascents that I doubt more than a
handful of people throughout history would be able match. Other than
that, there was a strong sense that he felt a spiritual connection
with the mountains. Maybe mountains make men philosophical?

I recently finished reading The China Study by T. Colin Campbell and
Thomas M. Campbell II. The book essentially presents an argument for
a vegan diet and against all animal protein. I am not sure I believe
everything that is written because it really seems that Dr Campbell
has a strong bias against animal foods. While Dr Campbell does
present a broad range of research including experimental work, I am
rather skeptical of any research that relies on correlations or
observational studies. I also wonder if he was somewhat selective in
presenting his research to make his point that we should all be
vegans.

I do have to admit that the work on milk protein (casein) is quite
compelling, especially considering that East Asians only started
drinking cow's milk quite recently. I think that it is more important
to make sure that your diet consists of mostly whole foods, fruits and
vegetables than trying to make sure that you eat 0 mg of cholesterol
and avoiding all animal proteins. It would be too depressing to give
up ice-cream...

I recently finished reading both Into Thin Air by Jon Krakauer, and
The Climb by Anatoli Boukreev and G. Weston DeWalt. Both books are
accounts of the disastrous May 10, 1996 summit attempt on Mount
Everest. A combination of a rogue storm and poor judgment by several
parties resulted in the deaths of several climbers.

Of the two books, Into Thin Air was definitely a more compelling read.
Jon Krakauer is a better writer, and it seems he did try to interview
most of the parties involved to get a better picture of what happened.
Perhaps, it is unfortunate that the Russian guide, Anatoli Boukreev,
was painted as the villian of the piece. While Krakauer acknowledges
Broukreev's heroism in his successful solo efforts to rescue three of
the climbers in the raging storm, he points fingers at Boukreev's
decision to climb without oxygen and descent quickly to the camp
before the guided clients.

The Climb is essentially Boukreev's response to Krakauer's book. It
almost seems that this book was written and published in a rush, and
does not seem as solidly researched as Into Thin Air. And it perhaps
suffers from taking only Boukreev's point of view. Nevertheless, this
book shows Boukreev's motivations and thoughts, and his general
philosophy with regards to high altitude climbing. I can also see why
that he can be misunderstood because his English is not perfect, and
his attitude and personality is probably not what guided clients, who
paid $65,000 to make it up the summit of Mount Everest, expect.

It seems like in these kinds of tragedies/ accidents, there is a
strong desire to assign blame or speculate the what ifs. Yes, maybe
if Boukreev had waited for the clients higher up in the mountain the
situation may not have deteriorated. But perhaps he would then not
have been rested enough to save the stranded climbers. The tragedy
happened because a series of bad decisions, judgments, and events,
including the bad storm, lined up in a row. It was like watching a
train wreck taking place in slow motion as each poor decision was
made.

It is undeniable, however, that Boukreev was an extremely strong high
altitude climber. And a less talented and strong climber or less
heroic person wouldn't have rescued those three client climbers.
Sadly, Boukreev was killed in an avalanche while climbing the
extremely dangerous and difficult Annapurna in the winter of 1997.