I may be going off on a slight tangent in this response, but I think Stephen Slemon makes a lot of interesting observations that can be driven a little deeper especially relating to colonialism. I think Slemon also comes very close to answer the question of why people choose to climb the tallest peaks and maybe why most people do not have an answer for it. Our long history of colonization and control is something that is engrained into us, especially in western culture. I think the attraction towards mountains in the 20th century are very similar to how land was seen in the 17th and 18th Century. A good example of this is when the British assumed that Mount Everest did not have a local name when they “discovered” it and how its name became universally know. And also how the British referred to Mount Everest as “the British mountain.”

As much as Said said about Orientalism, I think it would be interesting to explore the ideology behind western colonization specifically towards mountains and how the history of conquering tall peaks seems to repeat itself in western culture. The approach Slemons would take on this is making the argument that mountaineering literature is the driving force behind this ideology because mountaineering literature has always been internal opposed to travel literature being external. Again the selfishness usually referred to mountaineers makes sense thinking along the lines of colonialism and power. Mountaineering literature is most often non-cultural too another observation Slemon mentioned. Seen in a lot of books we have read, the author portrays local people as the Other (unless your Heinrich Harrer).

Thinking about some of Slemon’s other points I do not think climbing Mount Everest will ever be exhausted because the climb is driven by the books not the actual climb itself. I got the sense Slemon was saying climbing Mount Everest today is almost entirely socially driven and mountaineering literature along with other social media are really the catalyst behind the act of climbing. I can definitely see this to some degree because Mount Everest seems unattractive to most die hard mountaineers and attractive for a person sitting on $70,000 who wants that one time experience. On the other hand to climb Mount Everest the climber is stepping into a long history of characters and stories, which I guess if you are really into the history of mountaineering literature this may be what is drawing you into mountaineering. If the climber is following those narratives it would make sense why the ideology of colonizing a mountain still remains in western culture today even though all of them have seen a history of ascents.

“What does it mean to write about Mount Everest?” is another question Slemon asks which really shows how climbing Mount Everest and writing about Mount Everest is a two way street. You can’t really have one without the other. Making that relationship, Slemon did a great job of really reshaping a lot of my thoughts about Mount Everest and not towards any particular side either.