So I have finished reading "The Climb" after having read "Into thin air" last fall. The two accounts (or rather the account in "Into thin air") of the same tragedy of 1996 on Everest has been the source of great controversy of the years, especially shortly afterwards. For those of us who where not on the mountain those days in May 1996, what really happened will never be clear. From the accounts it's also obvious that altitude and fatigue made even some of the people that where the unsure of what was happening.
It's always bordering to silliness to have someone who wasn't involved try and analyze events and motives, but after reading the two books I am left somewhat puzzled on the more general issues around the controversy. Jon Krakauer, in "Into thin air" and in other fora, seems to have been accusing Anatoli Boukreev of neglect as he descended ahed of his clients - a fact that Krakauer attributes to the fact that Boukarev would have been poorly dressed and climbing without oxygen. The first assumption is in "The climb" refuted with proof of the photos from the summit. That Krakauer to my knowledge never explained to admitted the error seems dubious to start with. But let's ignore that and concentrate on the main point of Krakauers criticism. That Boukreev descended early, and did not wait for his clients. Boukreev says in the taped hearings directly after the tragedy that while on the summit he felt the wind start to pick up and became worried about the weather. So did others.
One must assume that Krakauer views that a better action would have been for Boukreev to stay on the mountain, with the very spread-out group and assist them. We are now heading for speculation but one must assume that Boukreev would then have used the extra oxygen that Scott Fisher had organized as backup for Boukreev. O2 that was now used by the clients instead, that needed it as the slow ascent had lead to them using a lot more of their own O2 than what had been planned for. Instead, with Boukreev descending he got to lower altitude, got rest. All of which I assume would help him to get the strength later on to go out in the storm and find, and bring back the others. So in that regard, as just the reader of the books, I have to assume that less clients would have made it safely down had not Boukreev descended.
However, there is of course the argument that had Boukreev stayed on the mountain, he could have helped them find camp faster. I however doubt that. The party was very spread out, at extremely high altitude. It would have meant that he would have had more strength and some over natural ability to navigate in the whiteout - that non of the other guides had.
However, again - it's hard to speculate. Both books are well written, and give their accounts of what happened on the mountain.