¿ESTAS DISPUESTO A SUBIR A LA CUMBRE DEL EVEREST QUE SE PRESENTA EN TU VIDA?

NO HAY ÉXITO SIN FRACASOS
POR: FRANCISCO DE LA PEZA BERRÍOS.

No podemos hablar del éxito sin tener en cuenta los fracasos a los que tendremos que enfrentarnos. Son muy escasas las personas que logran el éxito en el primer intento por realizar lo que se proponen. Y de quienes lo logran,  la mayoría no puede mantenerse en él por muchos tiempo, ya que al lograrlo con la facilidad con la que lo hicieron, no aprenden a valorarlo.
El verdadero éxito se escribe con toda una historia. Son muy escasas aquellas historias de éxito que no se han escrito con grandes esfuerzos y quienes lo logran, muchas veces han tenido que probar la amargura de algunos fracasos.
La gran mayoría de las personas de éxito, sin duda alguna traen cargando a cuestas una larga historia de momentos amargos, dolorosos, y de muchos sufrimientos, de gran esfuerzo y sobre todo de una gran perseverancia.
Sir Edmund Hillary fue el primer hombre que logró conquistar la cumbre del Everest, el 29 de mayo de 1953, logrando escalar los casi 9000 metros de la montaña más alta del mundo.
Pero aquel no fue su primer intento, ya en 1952 había tratado de lograrlo, sin embargo había fracasado aquella primera vez, pero de ninguna manera se dio la vuelta y volvió a casa y se sentó a llorar las penas de su fracaso, al contrario, se empeñó en lograrlo.
De hecho, tras su primera expedición fue invitado a una conferencia en Inglaterra, cuando llegó al estrado, se desató una fuerte y larga ovación, Sir Edmund se alejó del micrófono, se puso al pie del escenario, volvió la mirada hacia la fotografía de la imponente montaña, levantó la mano y señalándola le gritó. – ¡Everest! ¡Me venciste la primera ocasión, pero yo ganaré la próxima vez, porque tú ya creciste todo lo que podías… pero yo sigo creciendo!
La pregunta que quiero hacerle es ¿Usted sigue creciendo frente a los retos o ya se dio por vencido?
El éxito requiere de un proceso de desarrollo con perseverancia y dedicación. Nada se logra sólo con extender la mano, todo requiere de un esfuerzo.
Las personas de éxito denominan lecciones y enseñanzas a lo que todas las personas califican como “fracasos”.
Si usted quiere alcanzar el éxito, debe pensar que a cada paso que dé se encontrará con un Everest, y que tal vez, cada una de esas gigantescas montañas lo vencerán una, dos, tres o mil veces, sin embargo, usted tendrá la oportunidad de decirle: “¡Everest en esta ocasión tu venciste, pero la siguiente yo te voy a vencer!”. Pero para eso debe estar convencido que es más grande que los retos que se le presentan.
El éxito es la mezcla adecuada de una pasión incomparable por lo que quiere lograr, una seria determinación por alcanzar el objetivo deseado, un profundo convencimiento de que puede lograrlo, aunque para ello tenga que hacer el intento un millón de veces.

‘It’s not the mountain we conquerbut ourselves’ – Sir Edmund Hillary

Mt Everest and its facts:

Mt. Everest is the highest peak of the world. It is located in the margin of Nepal and Tibet. The height of Mt Everest is 8,848 meters (29,029 ft) from the sea level. The other names of Mt Everest are chomolungma (Tibetan), sagarmatha (Nepali). The name Mt Everest is named after a British surveyor of India, George Everest.
www.nepalnews.com
In 1953, sir Edmund Hillary from Netherlands and Tensing Sherpa from Nepal first climbed Mt Everest and mark a history. Soon after that many people started climbing Mt Everest and set a world record like fastest climber, climber without oxygen, helicopter landing on the top etc.
People living around Mt Everest are known as Sherpa. Sherpa is an ethnic group in Nepal who resides mainly in the Himalayas. They help visitors to climb and set up a base camp. Namche Bazar is a famous village right below the Mt Everest. Visitors first come to Namche Bazar and then go for expedition.

www.treknepal.com

10. Faroe Islands (Kronurs)

“A true beauty, this bill is from the Republic of Maldives in the Indian Ocean, a chain of about 1,300 islands and cays scattered for 500 miles southwest of India. Beyond fishing and collecting coconuts—the centerpiece on this bill—there’s little livelihood, and Maldives is one of the poorest countries in the world. This is doubly ironic, since cowrie shells (shown as part of the decorative border along the bottom) were the world’s first international commodity-currency, and the Maldive Islands were their primary source.”

“Hard to get much lovelier than the one-two of the face and back of this note from French Polynesia. But then the islands encompassed by the territory pretty much define paradise: Tahiti, Moorea, Bora Bora, Hiva Oa, Nuku Hiva, made part of our imaginative landscape by artists and writers such as Paul Gauguin, Robert Lewis Stevenson, Somerset Maugham, Herman Melville, and even Jimmy Buffett.”

Via : CNBC

One time I went to a water park with my godson and his family. He asked me to go on a water ride that appeared quite intimidating. As I looked up at the summit in fear, I knew I didn’t want to disappoint my dear boy. So, I said, “Sure, let’s do it.”

We got on the line (and I hoped it would move very slowly, but it didn’t). It went fast and before we knew it, we were at the moment of truth. I couldn’t back out now and remain his idol, so I jumped on my board and started screaming as the water carried us away.

[Note: I'm not sure if I excreted urine, but I made it to the bottom knowing how Sir Edmund Hillary felt after descending Everest.]

© Sheri Jordan and Aunt Sheri Says, 2009-2010.

Robert F. Scott. Tradotti i taccuini del marinaio inglese, figlio ambizioso dell’Impero. Un esploratore impreparato che fu beffato da Amudsen.

«Caro Capitano Scott, poichè probabilmente sarete voi il primo a raggiungere questo luogo, dopo di noi, vi chiedo il favore di consegnare questa lettera a re Haakon VII. Se vi può essere utile qualunque oggetto lasciato dentro la tenda, vi prego di non esitare ad approfittarne. Con i migliori saluti, vi auguro un ritorno sicuro. Sinceramente vostro Roald Amudsen». Quando il capitano di vascello della marina militare britannica Robert Falcon Scott si ritrova tra le mani la lettera dell’esploratore norvegese, è il 18 gennaio del 1912. Scott è arrivato in prossimità del Polo Sud, i suoi calcoli sbagliano di un chilometro, errore che fa anche Amudsen. Ma non importa. La lettera è la prova che la spedizione norvegese l’ha preceduto di cinque settimane. Dal 14 dicembre del 1911, sul Polo Sud, situato su un altopiano piatto, ghiacciato e ventoso a 2.835 metri d’altitudine sul livello del mare, sventola la bandiera norvegese. Svanito il primato, Scott, già in condizioni critiche come tutta la sua compagnia, perderà anche la vita sulla strada del ritorno, dopo 129 duri giorni passati sulla neve, tra vento incessante e temperature proibitive.

Polar party si chiama la spedizione di Scott, e Polar è un termine che richiama il noir francese, quello più violento, quello della crisi del genere. Ma nella storia sfortunata di Scott non c’è nessun giallo, come spesso accade per le tragedie avvenute in luoghi estremi. Il destino di Scott ha avuto il loro resoconto scritto. Vengono infatti oggi ritradotti da Davide Sapienza e curati da Filippo Tuena, i tre taccuini che compongono il diario di marcia di Scott verso il Polo Sud. Una scrittura asciutta, ovviamente piena di annotazioni ripetitive ma che garantiscono una tenuta di tensione al diario, perchè ogni pagina è una conquista della civiltà, redatta al termine di ogni giornata, sottraendo energie preziose, mentre fuori la natura si è trasformata in un incubo. Scott fece in tempo anche a vergare delle lettere accurate di scuse e di addio, alla moglie, a un amico, alle moglie degli altri componenti del gruppo, ai suoi finanziatori, ai suoi superiori, anche esse trovate nella tenda un anno dopo insieme al suo cadavere. Una precisione nei dettagli a cui fece però difetto l’organizzazione della spedizione. Ma oltre i taccuini, le lettere e le foto del Polar party, Scott ha lasciato ai posteri anche una memoria pubblica dove smentisce le future accuse.

Sono due le forze motrici della marcia di Scott: una è l’impotenza dell’uomo di fronte alla natura che preme sulle notti e i giorni passati a marciare sugli altipiani dell’Antartide, e sulle pagine dei taccuini che fin da subito diventano un conto alla rovescia della catastrofe. L’altra è la sottile arroganza del figlio dell’Impero che pensava di cavarsela con «un atteggiamento da amateur anche nei luoghi estremi del pianeti». Per molti come il capitano di vascello della Marina militare britannica, l’incontro con la Storia – il sogno di gloria di tanti esseri umani – è avvenuto in luoghi che con la stessa umanità non hanno nulla a che fare. Dove la maestosità della natura, interlocutore dell’iniziale stupore umano, si è rovesciata ben presto in uno spietato e indifferente avversario. Ma con la scrittura meticolosa fino alle lettere di addio, la tragica impresa di Scott, reale, documentata, concreta, si salva dal destino di allucinazione scaturita dal tentativo di comporre una Storia tutta personale nel cuore sconosciuto del mondo come in L’uomo che volle farsi di Kipling o in Aguirre, furore di Dio di Herzog.

Si salva Scott ma non dalle sue colpe. Nei taccuini lo sconforto viene rapidamente superato dalla disperazione: la beffa di Amudsen non è nulla, agli occhi di Scott, rispetto alle sole 11 miglia che separarono i resti moribondi del Polar party dal campo base della salvezza. Ci vollero quarantasei anni prima che Sir Edmund Hillary sbarcasse di nuovo in Antartide per raggiungere il Polo Sud. E non a caso il neozelandese era un alpinista, un know how che il marinaio militare Scott non possedeva.

Sherpa Tenzing Norgay and Sir Edmund Hillary on the way to the top of Everest, 1953.

In 1902, a geologist named Benjamin Willis set off to the subartic in search of a mineral cache. When he couldn’t find clothing acceptable to withstand the journey, Willis decided to design and manufacture his own.

Using materials such as leather, shearling and alpaca, Willis created a line of foul weather clothing that performed splendidly through the harshest of conditions. (He also found the minerals.)

Through the early 1900s, Willis sold the items he designed and manufactured through venerable outdoor retailer Abercrombie & Fitch. Word of Willis’ designs spread quickly through the exploration community and in 1906, Teddy Roosevelt wore Willis’ wares (that he had purchased from Abercrombie & Fitch in NYC) on his trip across Alaska.  Roosevelt was pleased enough with their performance that he again wore Willis’ clothing in 1908 when he journeyed to Africa.

Charles Lindbergh wore Ben Willis-designed clothing on his epic flight across the Atlantic. (1927)

In 1928, Willis took on a business partner named Howard W. Geiger, and the company was re-christened Willis & Geiger Outfitters. Willis handled the technical and design aspects while Geiger focused on marketing.

Willis & Geiger operated under a simple dictum:

“Don’t tell us how to make it cheaper, tell us how to make it better.”

In 1931, the U.S. Government approached Willis & Geiger in need of a new jacket for its pilots; the result was the now famous A-2 Intermediate Flight Jacket. From there, the list of adventurers who wore Willis & Geiger reads like a veritable Who’s Who of exploration marvels: Lindbergh. Amundson. Earhart. Hillary. And the list went on.

Willis & Geiger supplied Hillary and Norgay's clothing on their Everest ascent.

For more than 50 years, the “Make It Better” philosophy served the company well. However, in 1977, Abercrombie & Fitch went bankrupt with its single largest debt owed to Willis & Geiger. W&G didn’t survive.

In 1936, W&G created a bush jacket for Ernest Hemingway of the author's own design.

In 1979, a former Abercrombie & Fitch employee named Burt Avedon led a group of investors that revived the Willis & Geiger brand. Avedon, who played football and baseball at UCLA in the 1940s, was a former Naval fighter pilot in World War II and later an African bush pilot and professional hunter. Naturally, Avedon had a deep appreciation of the company’s outfitter heritage. He did a masterful job resurrecting the brand, creating the company’s first mail order catalog and developing it into a strong multi-channel specialty retailer.

Avedon led the sale Willis & Geiger to VF Corp. in the early 90s, and VF later sold it to Laura Ashley. In 1995, W&G was purchased by Lands’ End. Though Lands’ End no longer actively markets the brand, LE/Sears still controls it and occasionally attaches its name to new product offerings. Each of these much larger parent-company-owners never seemed to understand why the Willis & Geiger concept couldn’t successfully be taken mainstream. They didn’t comprehend the notion that bigger isn’t always necessarily better, and for a niche purveyor like Willis & Geiger, that was certainly the case.

More than 100 years after it began, the most lasting testament to Willis & Geiger’s “Make it Better” formula can be seen on eBay. Though its been nearly 20 years since the company last made products independently, it’s well-worn clothing and accessories frequently change hands on the auction website for several times their original retail price.

Don’t make it cheaper; make it better. We can’t think of better words for a retailer to live by.

2 Peter 1:16-19, Ps 97, Mark 9:2-10

Those who are interested in such things as climbing mountains may find themselves motivated to do so by various reasons. Some might go for the view, some might go for the sense of accomplishment in attaining the summit at great personal risk. When Sir Edmund Hillary, the first to ascend Mt. Everest,  when asked why he chose to climb such a dangerous mountain responded simply, “because its there”.

Today’s feast revolves around what took place amoung the clouds of a mountaintop. The climbers were brought together not by natural beauty or personal accomplishment but by the invitation of Jesus who saw the setting as a fitting place to reveal something especially important about Himself to a few close friends.

The description of the event tells us nothing of the climb or of the scenery but focuses solely on the person of Jesus and what takes place before the eyes of the witnnesses. Transfigured before them Jesus the man is revealed as Jesus the divine Son of God. This signature “coming out” changed the lives of those disciples radically and would become a touchstone for how they would go on to preach the Good News of Jesus Christ.

Peter writes in his letter from the first reading today that his preaching is not fabricated from stories or well worn myths but, rather, from first hand, eyewitnees experience. Peter was one of those chosen to be a part of the mountaintop revelation. Hearing with his own ears, seeing with his own eyes Peter was a witness to the transfiguration of Jesus and as such takes it upon himself to share that with whoever will listen.

We are two thousand years removed from that experience but Peter’s words continue to resound for us as we read the Gospel on our own or listen to it in the midst of a faith community, “We oursleves heard this voice come from heaven, while we were with him.

In our faith journey we may be privleged from time to time to have our own moments of mountaintop manifestation as we see or experience Jesus in new ways which transforms our lives. Such moments are amazing and we might be tempted, like Peter was in the Gospel, to build a tent and stay in that moment and savor the spritual high. However such moments are not meant for ourselves alone. Those who receive the gift of the invitation are called to share it with the world, not as story or myth, but as truth as only an eyewitness can share.

Reflect for a moment on a mountain top experience that you  have had?

How did it change your image of God?

How have you been able to share that revelation with others?

The Herald has an article on the resolution of the ‘dispute’ between the Auckland War Memorial Museum and Peter & Sarah Hillary. The settlement agreement is here.

The Herald summarises the outcome:-

Peter and Sarah Hillary get:

To sort through the archive to have anything considered private returned to them.

Unlimited access to the archive.

Exclusive publishing rights on anything in the archive until the 20-year anniversary of Sir Ed’s death.

The museum gets:

Ownership of the archive (documents including diaries, letters and pictures of expeditions and family holidays recorded throughout Sir Ed’s life).

Publication rights after the 20th anniversary of Sir Ed’s death.

Now back when this first arose Adam made a number of posts on this issue titled Auckland Museum and the Hillary bequest, Auckland Museum and the Hillary bequest #2, Auckland Museum and the Hillary Bequest #3 and finally Auckland Museum and the Hillary Bequest #4

Adam was of the view then that many who had commented on the issue had allowed sentiment and regard for the Hillary name to replace respect for facts and the law.

In his first post on this matter, Adam wrote:-

Adam is no lawyer, but the interpretation seems to be relatively straight forward. The children have access and the right to control publication for 20 years. That would seem to suggest that the intellectual property rights are with the museum, but for 20 years they have to consult with and gain the agreement of Hillary’s children. The children have the right to access the material, but it is not theirs.

Having read the agreement Adam would venture to suggest that this is what seems to have resulted in essence.

Yet at the time some seemed to suggest that the family were looking for ownership, though that may have been an erroneous impression engendered by the media.

One important aspect that seems to have been clarified is that the Museum is able to digitize the collection and place it online.

There is agreement that certain documents if agreed not to form part of the bequest, but included in the current Museum holdings shall be returned to the Hillarys. Further there is agreement that certain material shall remain Restricted for 20 years.

These conditions do not seem unduly onerous unless dispute arises over what is deemed not to be within the bequest.

Looking at the Agreement Adam still finds it very hard to see what the HIllarys were in essence griping about. It would seem to Adam that to a large degree the position of the Museum has been vindicated.

Fortunately the mob has not been allowed to prevail despite the desire of many to see the law over turned.

Perhaps we have the officials in the Department of the Prime minister to thank for rational thought prevailing.

Consequently, we might begin to see some sense prevailing amongst the general citizenry and an end to the xenophobic campaign against Museum Director Vanda Vitali.

Names weren’t needed. Alf knew immediately which one was involved when he spotted the headline: Deputy quits after clash at museum.

He was right. It was the Auckland Museum. And yep – the story revealed yet another contretemps involving its director, Vanda Vitali. The woman has a remarkable flair for whipping up trouble.

This time –

The deputy director of Auckland Museum resigned six months into the job because of a falling-out with his boss, Vanda Vitali.

Tim Walker was the director of the Dowse Art Museum in Lower Hutt for 10 years, before joining Auckland Museum in August last year.

He left in January.

The experienced curator is now working as an arts consultant and was a speaker at a Creative New Zealand conference this week.

Mr Walker, who has also held senior roles at the National Art Gallery and Te Papa national museum, declined to comment about the reasons he left the Auckland Museum so quickly.

But the Weekend Herald has learned he resigned after disagreements with Dr Vitali over the future direction of the museum.

Dr Vitali is on annual leave and could not be reached for comment.

The Herald points out that the swift “disappearance” of Walker is the latest in a string of controversies involving Dr Vitali, who was appointed museum director in September 2007.

The article proceeds to list incidents such as –

* The restructuring that left 46 personnel, many of them long-serving and senior staff, without jobs;

* The run-in with disgruntled Bomber Command veterans from World War II, who were refused space for a memorial inside the museum; and

* The dispute with Sir Edmund Hillary’s offspring over the control of his writings, old diaries and thousands of family photographs bequeathed to the museum in his will.

Curiously, despite this dubious track record, Vitali has strong backing from the Auckland Museum Trust Board.

Perhaps they appreciate the publicity she has attracted for their institution.

One Boy’s Passion for Wilderness Survival Skills

Marco & Jelena Wells

One never knows when an inspirational person will cross one’s path. Today, for me,  it came in the form of Marco Wells, all of 12 years, who visited us in Piha, with his sister Jelena, mother and father Tina and Steve and grandmother Helen from the former republic of Yugoslavia, (who recently attended our wedding a few weeks ago.) From the start, it’s a bit hard to determine who’s the biggest inspiration in this family, whether it’s Helen for starting her journey to New Zealand from eastern Europe years ago, or Marco’s dad who fosters his son’s love of the outdoors and wilderness survival. Then there’s his mother, who gets just as excited as her son, when we got the compass out and starting shooting bearings off the nearby peaks. It could also be his wonderful sister who’s eyes lit up during our day hike, when she looked over the edge of the windy cliff, which dropped a few hundred metres down to the Tasman sea. But this story leads me back to Marco.

A few weeks ago at our wedding, “Grandmother Helen” (we’ve also adopted her as our own), told us about her grandson who “is interested in the out-of-doors”.  Well, when I started talking to Marco today at our home, “interested” was an understatement. Marco is passionate about wilderness skills, wild edibles, feeling the wind, and even a bit of climbing and just being out there. He’s got it in his blood.

Today's Hiking Buddies

My wife and I later wondered aloud, after they had left back for the  Auckland area, what makes one boy passionate about the outdoors and the next, not. I was that boy which started with my romping and winter camping trips around the John F Gile Memorial Forest and Morgan Pond in New Hamsphire. Marco, his dad and I talked about “nature deficit disorder” and, stating the obvious, I mentioned the threat of video games, technology and kid’s lack of nature time.
(Image: L-R:Randy & Amanda Richards, Grandmother Helen, Marco, Yelena, Tina and Steven Wells)

Kare Kare Beach from our Hike Today

Not Marco! He’s out back building different types of fires, constructing snares and assembling survival kits in a can. OK, I’m sure he puts his own time on the computer too, but he sure knows quite a few native plants and is working on lots of survival skills. On our walk today he was naming a number of plants and their their uses. He taught me a number of things today, but one stuck in my mind. When collecting and using silver ferns for a emergency shelter, be sure to turn the ferns belly up, otherwise, the tiny seeds, adhered to the bottom sides of the fern, will drop off on you during the night causing irritation and itching. He showed me the tiny seeds. Marco, just so you know, I’ll not forget that.

He brought his backpack to lunch, and before we headed out with the family for our walk around a loop near Kare Kare Beachheads, he pulled out various contents to show me what he’d been assembling for a good survival pack. Just as I was wondering if he’d heard of the SAS survival manual, he pulled a copy out of the top pocket. Hmmm, He’s plugged in.

We talked about his passion and, after my telling a few bear stories, mentioning what I liked and disliked about being a mountain guide and how Outward Bound rubbed off on me.  I also told him how he could start prepping to be in the outdoors a lot, by taking some classes, volunteering to be an assistant in a few years in logistics or even as an assistant instructor when he’s older. I mentioned the importance of first aid training too.

The takeaway for me today? Being reminded of my own passion for being outside. Sometimes writing these blogs, and running MSI from this computer, I don’t get out as much as I’d like to. But, all it takes is an afternoon walk on a bluff above the Tasman Sea with a passionate boy named Marco, to remind me why I do this.

Marco, keep it up, don’t get distracted by the bobbles of society and technology, and don’t forget to read that book I mentioned, “Scrambles Amongst the Alps” by Edward Whymper, and while your at it, check out “The Wilderness World of John Muir“, “My Side of the Mountain“,  maybe even Journal of a Trapper, by Osborne Russell, Desert Solitare by Edward Abby, and in a year or two even Ralph Waldo Emerson and Kurt Hahn. They’ll be touchstones for you during your life in the mountains and wilderness.  To Parents all over, again I recommend Richard Louv’s “Last Child in the Woods” . Marco, no need to read that one. You are in the woods!

As a side note: It turns out, according to another hiker we met on the trail today, This was Sir Edmund Hillary’s old stomping ground in his later years. What’s more, there are some dramatic vertical femeroles and caves that he rapped into and explored. As we walked around this place today, I couldn’t help but be inspired by this place and knowing he had played around these cliffs.

Unswerving determination is one of the most important factors in reaching your goal!

This quote is from “The Seven Steps to Inner Power”

by Dr. Tae Yun Kim, of NorthStar, and Jung SuWon

Uncover your potential – to achieve your goals!

An example of using unswerving determination….

On May 29, 1953, Mount Everest (worlds highest peak)

was conquered as Edmund Hillary of New Zealand, and Tensing Norgay of Nepal, became the first climbers to reach the summit!

They knocked the bastard off

Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay

The conquerors of Everest

Bill Ralston in his Media Scrum blog looks at the Auckland Museum/Hillary children spat in a much more considered way than either the Herald, or indeed the Fairfax stable so far.

Ralston surveys the issue and writes, amongst other things the following:-

We have the children of New Zealand’s greatest hero threatening legal action against the Auckland Museum, which itself is a frequent target of criticism in the media. Also, although it is not entirely clear in the original story, it seems it is only Peter and Sarah Hillary who are arguing for control of their dead father’s memorabilia. There is no mention of the position on the will taken by their stepmother, Sir Edmund’s widow, June. This raises the question of whether there is a rift in the family over this particular issue.

The museum is likely to get a thrashing in the media because it has more than its fair share of cultural critics who intensely dislike the new more user friendly direction it has taken. There is nothing nastier than a feud in the arts world and I would expect the critics to leap at the opportunity to attack the museum’s director, Vanda Vitali, who has aroused their ire.

I suspect the museum is caught in a nasty bind. It has the prospect of a looming court case and will have to watch what it says. It also cannot be seen to be attacking Sir Ed’s kids or getting caught up in Hillary family issues. It also has to be seen to respect Sir Ed’s wishes for his papers and gear.

At the same time it has an Elgin Marbles type of problem. Yes, Peter and Sarah are right, some of the stuff held by the museum is their shared family heritage which they “own”, as all families “own” their photo albums and memorabilia. The problem here is if the museum hands over formal control of the bequest to the children, what other treasures that it holds may then become subject to ownership issues from descendants of the original owners?

Ralston raises some good points. He notes how nasty cultural arguments can be and suggests that given the power of the Hillary name, the museum is on a hiding to nothing.

This ties in with Adam’s view as expressed in his several posts from post#1,through post #2 and post #3 on this topic.

As Ralston concludes:-

I have long been a great supporter of the museum and I fear it is about to become media carrion, again.

Therein lies the problem. People in the main side with the Hillary children and attack the museum. No regard is given to the fact that the museum has rights and obligations, nor to the fact that Sir Ed did bequeath these things to the museum. Indeed, it might be asked why did he choose to leave them to the museum rather than his children. If he had intended for his children to have ownership and the intellectual property rights why did he not do so in his will?

Interestingly enough on looking at the Your Views thread at the NZ Herald a number of the more recent comments seem to be more measured and less favourable towards the Hillary children. Though there is still a heavy preponderance of those who would ignore any rights the Museum might have, as St Edmund must have meant what the children say.

This is one recent sample:-

The behaviour of Sir Ed’s children is appalling! Sir Ed bequesthed his papers etc to the museum – the museum therefore has ownership pure and simple. A stipulation attached to the bequest is that the museum allow his children access to these items and the right to publish excerpts if they wish.

This stipulation would hardly be necessary, or even logical, if it was not intended that these items be the property of the museum. If Sir Ed had wanted his children to have ownership of these papers he would have bequested them to his children and left it to them to contribute to the museum as they saw fit. He didn’t. Get over it!

A number of comments have moved on from attacking Dr Vitali to attacking the Communications Adviser.

However there are still plenty who take the view that legal rights and process do not matter, viz this example:-

The museum has the right tools to keep the items ‘crisp’ that’s why, probably, Sir Ed entrusted them these things. What is in the will are just legal technicalities which can be circumvented with moral understanding and common sense.

So the museum should conserve the items, house and pay for their upkeep and the Hillary family should get any money. Oh and never mind the law just circumvent it. Adam was especially taken by the use of the words ‘moral understanding’ in this code for ignore the fact these items were bequeathed to the musuem. In addition we can see the impact of Annette King here, as the writer invokes the ‘common sense’ argument.

The NZ Herald continues it’s populist campaign on behalf of the Hillary children and their ‘rights’ and against Vanda Vitali and The Auckland War Memorial Museum. This has been supported by the emotional and often irrational comments on the Herald’s Your Views section of the Herald website, where the Museum and Vitali are vilified and the Hillary family are automatically afforded the status of saints. As is usual in NZ legality and rationality are not respected. Metaphorically, much of the public is pushing the tumbril to the guillotine with the Museum Director as the lead ‘aristo’.

Given, based on the information in the Herald, that this dispute appears to be about intellectual property rights then it occurs to Adam that this dispute may be about who is to benefit financially from the bequest. However, that is only supposition.

It is time that people started looking at the facts rather than re-acting with emotion.

It seems that there is a bit of a pattern emerging in the disagreement over ‘ownership rights’ of Sir Edmund Hillary’s papers between his children and the Auckland Museum.

The Auckland Museum is now saying that they have;

“complex and nuanced points – when it appears we can get them across without being screamed at by the public for being disrespectful, we will reengage“

Does anyone see what’s wrong here?

This is a public organisation, but it clearly is not used to having it’s agenda challenged, especially publicly. Vanda Vitalli hasn’t given any interviews, won’t discuss it expect through finely crafted press releases, won’t speak to the Hillary family (but claims they can ring her any time), and now they feel that we’re all a bit hysterical for questioning their motives over ownership. They’re lack of communication skills is clearly annoying the Herald otherwise they wouldn’t have published that letter (what on earth were they thinking???)

How about you put out a press release with your “complex and nuanced points” so we can all make our own decisions?

Or do you think we’re all a bit thick to understand them Vanda?

Top claim that they will reengage on their terms, when they feel ready, smacks of arrogance. They could have put out a press release with their points right when this all was made public. Like I said, this didn’;t happen overnight and they surely must have seen where events were headed – into the public arena. 

Vanda and her PR team are making a really bad call here, the longer they leave explaining what they were doing the worse things will get, and currently they have handed the stage, and the mor5al high ground, to the Hillary family.

Vanda and Co and being “disrespectful”, to the public. Clearly they think the issues are too complex for the great unwashed, and I suppose a bunch of academics stuck in a stone mausoleum overlooking Auckland might be forgiven for thinking they were a bit too special  to have to justify their actions to the public who provide the money for their operations.

Bad mistake. 

As a story for the MSM to pick up and run with, this is great, it has a feud over property rights, a famous deceased NZder, a public institution, and an American. 

A suggestion to the museum would be to get a new PR team, do a press conference and explain yourselves. This won’t go away and you’re inability to state what you are trying to achieve leads everone to suspect the worst. If this isn’t the case it shouldn’t be too difficult to explain that, should it?

If your’e planning to dig your way out of this hole, you’re going to need some pretty heavy equipment. I’m not sure people thought you were being disrespectful, just a bit money grubbing and sneaky, now we can add arrogant to the list – disrespectful is about to be added.

The NZ Herald with it’s populist Kiwi battler hat on is running one of it’s online readers views concerning the dispute between Sir Edmund Hillary’s children and the executors of their fathers estate, as proxy for the Auckland War Memorial Museum.

The original story is here. John Key has offered to mediate.

It appears that key facts are as follows:-

He bequeathed his personal papers with the proviso that his children would have access to the material as they saw fit.

A clause in his will stated further “that no other person, or corporate body may publish any of the material” without the consent of the Hillary children for 20 years after his death.

It is this clause and the museum’s apparent claim to intellectual property rights that is due for scrutiny in court. Sarah and Peter Hillary are bringing an action against the executors of their father’s estate in the High Court at Auckland next month.

Adam is no lawyer, but the interpretation seems to be relatively straight forward. The children have access and the right to control publication for 20 years. That would seem to suggest that the intellectual property rights are with the museum, but for 20 years they have to consult with and gain the agreement of Hillary’s children. The children have the right to access the material, but it is not theirs.

The Your Views comments thread is essentially full of comments saying the museum should let the children do whatever they want. Yet it would seem from the Herald article though subject to the legal consideration of the full facts which are not known, that Sir Ed quite clearly bequeathed the material to the museum with some limitations on what they could do for the first 20 years.

It was not clear from the article or a major TVNZ News item as to precisely what has caused the dispute. Though there was a brief reference to digitisation of certain material so that access could be obtained on-line. That would appear to be covered by the publication consent limitation. Is it the case that the children want no public access to the papers? Do they regard display of papers as publication? Have they and the musuem not been able to reach agreement on digitisation?

A former museum director, not interviewed on air,was quoted by TVNZ as saying perhaps not everything had been properly clarified to the family prior to Sir Ed’s death.

The matter now depends on the legal process. Though as so often in NZ the populist view is damm the museum who appear to have rights and let the children have the material. Adam would be intrigued to know why the children are so concerned about the intellectual property rights. As always in these instances the facts may not be what they seem to be at first.

The comments thread seems as well to contain a lot of dislike of the current director Vanda Vitali. Yet she and the trustees have a legal duty to ensure bequests are properly dealt with. They cannot alter willy nilly the terms of gifts just because family members want them to.

It is concerning that so few people commenting at the Herald had any regard as to the rights of the museum, and all presumed that Sir Ed would have wanted what his children claim. Then why leave the material to the museum? Why expect the museum to house and conserve the material at their expense without them having any ownership rights/

Adam is of the view that this story is only just beginning.