The White Spider: The Classic Account of the Ascent of the Eiger Book

I really did want to enjoy this, I gave this a go after reading Joe Simpson's "Beckoning Silence" since he had been so inspired by this book in his childhood. But I came away from it with far less appreciation that I had anticipated; the first few chapters are undeniably very compelling as Harrer outlines the early history of the Eiger attempts, the tragedies of climbers like Toni Kurz for example, and not to mention his own successful ascent which was the first ever.

But much of the rest of the book, and much of the expansions which were added on in the following years, leave a great deal to be desired as Harrer's tone shifts more towards the critical and vindictive, scorning unsuccessful climbers in some instances, and descending into almost pure tirade when he turns his attention to Corti and the rescue attempt. Frequently Harrer repeats and insists that he is merely providing an objective eye and is leaving personal feelings aside, reviewing only the facts, but I fail to see how this is the case in his hypocritical and paradoxical praising of certain ascents and condemnation of others. Some people made successful attempts with poor equipment and were ill-equipped and are met with praise and admiration for their nerve and skill; others who had to retreat or were lost on the face in the same circumstances are held up as examples of failure, as lacking in forethought or too inexperienced.

I understand where he is coming from in some sense, that the ascent should not be taken lightly and those who approach it ill-prepared are courting with danger, something to be discourage, but it's also done in such a tasteless way. Some parties who join together after meeting on the mountain he refers to as not being able to communicate linguistically at all: those that succeed in summiting subsequently are praised as being able to "talk the language of the mountain" and that was all that was needed, yet those that fail did so because they worked disharmoniously, struggled with the language barrier and should never have partnered in the first place.

These hypocrisies make this a rather frustrating and confusing read as a result, Harrer clearly attempting to put some salient points across regarding aptitude and ability and mental strength but only coming across as paradoxical.

Similarly disappointingly, in the chapter of his own ascent he refers enormously to his climbing companions and their feats, especially Kasparek and Heckmair, but almost nothing of his own accomplishments. Some sequences outline in magnificent detail the trials his partners overcame to pave their journey and he frequently concludes the passage with something like "and I quickly followed". I really hoped he would have provided some first hand accounts of the event, describing his own encounters with the most difficult moments, but not so. Maybe this is just modesty, to me it almost felt like he was omitting it deliberately. Perhaps he felt like his contribution was not that significant? This is just personal speculation.

That being said it's still rather compelling reading, especially the early chapters pre-success, and the history of the face is outlined in good detail across its span. I just wish Harrer had written a little more tactfully and consistently, especially in regard to the performance of other climbers. His treatment of Corti is distasteful at best, and it's shameful that his poor treatment of the man wasn't retracted in later publications after vindicating evidence came to light in the years to follow.