With the world's current population and technologies, pretty much every Earthly adventure has been done, and done again, and done to death. Getting to the top of Mt. Everest isn't even remarkable. Crossing Antarctica is a walk in the park.

It seems the only way to make these soAlign Leftrts of feats worthy of, say, publication, is to be part of some identity group (ranging from nationalities to disabilities) which hasn't yet had a member make the feat. For example, if I were a one-legged, blind, pregnant Japanese woman, climbing Everest would still be worth a newspaper article.
The other way, if I'm just a plain old physically able white guy, is to impose upon myself some kind of arbitrary limitation to make the feat a lot harder than it needs to be. Like, if I try to cross the Atlantic on a row boat, or climb K2 in my underpants, or run with the bulls in Pamplona on a pogo stick. You read ridiculous stories like that a lot these days.
I suppose the third way to make one's adventure worthy of publication is to make it political. Like, if I go to some jungle to promote the environment, or promote the plight of whoever to get whatever it is they need to get.

Comments

Jes said…
Or you could just do it for your own personal sense of satisfaction, instead of for the media attention. They have this same argument about marathons, like, "Who hasn't run a marathon these days?" But, the truth is that the only people who think it isn't an amazing feat are those who have never run so much as 1 mile. Same is true in mountaineering. Climbers give Everest all the respect she deserves - even the Nepalese and Tibetans who have been up and down her a thousand times continue to hold her sacred.

I hardly think summitting Everest is no big deal. Those who really care about such feats understand the difference between a safe, real summit experience and just paying a sherpa to haul your ass up there. It remains a highly respected achievement.