Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
As a goodwill gesture, Guérin and Lachenal
fils
invited Herzog to write a preface.
Herzog responded with his characteristic courtesy, agreeing to the task. In his letter,
he betrayed little of the anxiety he must have felt on learning of Guérin's publishing
plans, though he added a few words to remind Guérin of Lachenal's excessive nature,
which no doubt spoke in certain ill-considered judgments in the diary. It would be dis-
appointing, Herzog allowed, if the publication backfired, making Lachenal look mean-
spirited or jealous of his Annapurna teammates.
In the end, Jean-Claude changed his mind about the preface, realizing that his fath-
er's long-dormant witness might only be compromised by one last effort on Herzog's
part to put his own spin on the Annapurna story. Herzog was tactfully disinvited.
With the publication of Guérin's new
Carnets,
which coincided nearly to the month
with Ballu's biography of Rébuffat, a storm of controversy seized France. Rébuffat's
profound disillusionment, as revealed in his letters to Françoise, and his acidic and epi-
grammatic latter-day
pensées
on Annapurna intersected with the unmistakable evid-
ence of heavy censorship of Lachenal's diary. Journalists cried foul and demanded an
accounting. Only a handful came to Herzog's defense.
Some of the new revelations were devastating. According to Claude Francillon,
writing in
Le Monde,
in Kathmandu Rébuffat had been bodily searched by Ichac, to
make sure the guide wasn't smuggling home any canisters of exposed film he had shot
up high on Annapurna. As official photographer, Ichac would control all the images
to emerge from the expedition. (In
Annapurna,
the title page indicates “Cartographic
and Photographic Documentation by Marcel Ichac,” even though all the climbing pic-
tures above Camp II—the highest point Ichac reached—were shot by Rébuffat, while
the summit photo was taken by Lachenal.)
Quoting Rébuffat, Yves Ballu told a story about an early attempt by Lachenal to
defy his oath-ordained silence. In 1951, he had apparently prepared his own account of
Annapurna; knowing Rébuffat had connections at
Le Monde,
he asked his fellow guide
for help placing the piece in that prestigious newspaper. Rébuffat asked the editor-in-
chief, who said he would welcome it.
Lachenal had made the mistake of talking too freely about his account, and the
Himalayan Committee got wind of it. “One of its members,” Lachenal told Rébuffat,
“came from Paris to see me and say to me, 'Lachenal, do you like your job at the Ecole
Nationale de Ski et d'Alpinisme?'
“Of course, what else could I do with my amputated feet?”
“If you want to stay there, it would be preferable if you gave up this intention of
publishing your account of Annapurna in
Le Monde.
” Lachenal had no choice but to
acquiesce.
