Hints to Lady Travellers
has a cold and so her travels over the past few days have mostly been of the
armchair variety. On Sunday I
watched the 1953 documentary “The Conquest of Everest” which is pretty
spectacular, all things considered.
It tells the story of the 1953 expedition which resulted in Edmund
Hillary and Tenzing Norgay being – well, if not the first to reach the top of
Everest, certainly the first to reach the top and live to tell the story.
The photography was done
by members of the expedition, directed by George Lowe, a climber and teacher
from New Zealand. The footage is
extraordinary, the colours intense and the script is poetic – not surprising
given that it was written by a poet: Louis MacNeice.
The story starts and ends
with the words George Mallory (who may or may not have reached the summit in
1924 before dying on the mountain) is supposed to have said when asked, ‘Why do
you want to climb Mount Everest?’
‘Because it is there,’ he replied.
‘Because it is there,’
strikes me as an odd sentiment, but perhaps it’s just because I’m of a
generation that flinches a bit from the Imperial (and sexist) language of
conquest and colonisation. This
movie, let me prepare you now, is full of such choice phrases as: ‘the goddess,
mother of the world – as the Tibetans call her – can only be conquered by men.’
I assume what Mallory was
getting at was the idea that when reaching somewhere first (or conquering, if
that’s your thing) the where (Everest, the Moon, the South Pole) doesn’t matter
so much as the challenge – the who and the how and the when. (This is echoed in Hillary’s comment to
Lowe on returning from the summit: ‘Well George, we knocked the bastard
off.’ Sadly, this was not caught
on film.)
The men filmed on the 1953
expedition visibly suffer, physically and emotionally. There is talk of desolation, of the
place having ‘the smell of death’ – and given the footage shown, it doesn’t strike
the viewer as poetic licence.
Then, at the end, when Hillary and Norgay make it down to camp, their
teammates bound to greet them, hug them (hugging! 1950s British men hugging!), slap their backs, pump their
hands. Though the
overarching narrative – and the motivation sustaining the climbers - may have
been about conquest, about being first and thereby proving Britain’s might, the
underlying message seems to be about establishing a relationship (if you can
call it that) with a particular place – not so much conquest as wary
truce.
But then, ‘The Wary Truce
of Everest’ as a title doesn’t have quite the same dramatic potential, does
it? And let’s not forget (and the
film doesn’t let us) that the ascent of Everest took place on the eve of Queen
Elizabeth’s coronation – with many headlines tying the crowning and the
conquering together.
Whatever your own opinions
on the significance of climbing Everest, or on ‘because it is there’ as a
reason to go anywhere – there is no doubt that “The Conquest of Everest’ is an
amazing record of a particular event and the time in which it took place.
I was the 2.........n to climb Hutu Peak, also in the Himalayas. And at breakfast on the terrace of Wildflower Hall, the handman told us that we could see Everest if the air had been clearer. Doubting Anthony thought the curvature of the earth might have got in the way but what are a few curves in India?
ReplyDeleteI'm hoping for a guest post about your Himalayan adventures, hopefully less torturous than Hillary's.
ReplyDeletex