How are Maurice Wilson and Earl Denman different according to the account?

How are Maurice Wilson and Earl Denman different according to the account?

• A. Wilson didn't know when to turn back, but Denman knew when to turn back and when it wasn't safe.
• B. Wilson and Denman both turned back early.
• C. Wilson was from Nepal, Denman from Britain.
• D. Wilson was more cautious than Denman.

Answer: (A)

The key idea is how each climber judged risk and decided whether to go on or retreat. In the account, Maurice Wilson pushes onward despite dangerous conditions and limited support, showing a tendency to press the ascent even when retreat would be wiser. Earl Denman, by contrast, demonstrates careful risk assessment, recognizing when it isn’t safe and choosing to turn back at the right times. So the difference is about who knew when to retreat and who didn’t—Denman made safer, timely decisions about safety, while Wilson did not.

The key idea is how each climber judged risk and decided whether to go on or retreat. In the account, Maurice Wilson pushes onward despite dangerous conditions and limited support, showing a tendency to press the ascent even when retreat would be wiser. Earl Denman, by contrast, demonstrates careful risk assessment, recognizing when it isn’t safe and choosing to turn back at the right times. So the difference is about who knew when to retreat and who didn’t—Denman made safer, timely decisions about safety, while Wilson did not.