Krakauer's recounting of certain aspects of the climb generated criticism, both from some of the climb's participants and from fellow mountaineers such as Galen Rowell. Much of the criticism centers on Krakauer's account of how Anatoli Boukreev, an experienced Russian high-altitude climber and guide for Scott Fischer, had handled the climb. Boukreev had descended the summit before his clients did, ostensibly out of concern for their safety, in order to prepare for potential rescue efforts. Although Krakauer acknowledged that Boukreev's efforts after descending the mountain were heroic (he engaged in repeated solo rescue efforts, saving at least two climbers' lives), he questioned Boukreev's judgment during the climb, in particular his decision to descend from the summit ahead of his clients, his decision to not use supplementary oxygen, his choices of gear on the mountain, and his interactions with clients. Boukreev provided a rebuttal to these claims in his 1997 book, The Climb.
Mountaineer Galen Rowell criticized Krakauer's account, citing numerous inconsistencies in his narrative, and observed that Krakauer had been sleeping in his tent while Boukreev was rescuing other climbers. Rowell argued that not only were Boukreev's actions heroic, but his judgment was also prescient: “[Boukreev] foresaw problems with clients nearing camp, noted five other guides on the peak [Everest], and positioned himself to be rested and hydrated enough to respond to an emergency. His heroism was not a fluke."[4]
Krakauer's account has also been criticized for omitting to mention that the team members were receiving accurate daily weather forecasts and knew about the impending storm in advance.[5]
In Krakauer's 1999 paperback edition of Into Thin Air, he addresses some of the criticisms in a detailed postscript.[6]
