Alex Honnold has not climbed or attempted to climb Mount Everest. What is Grebowicz's purpose in Including discussion of Honnold in her essay "Everest is Over"? Be sure your response considers the larger message of "Everest is Over." Use a quotation from the essay in your response (3 pts)

Grebowicz’s inclusion of Alex Honnold isn’t about positioning him as an Everest expert but rather about challenging the idea that climbing greatness can only be measured by one’s relationship to that iconic peak. Although Honnold has never aimed for Everest, his reputation as a daring free soloist shows that the spirit of extreme climbing can manifest outside the confines of tradition. In "Everest is Over," Grebowicz argues that the obsession with Everest—as if it were the sole arbiter of adventure—has obscured other forms of risk, creativity, and individual challenge. By discussing Honnold, she highlights how today’s climbers redefine the limits of the sport on their own terms. For example, she writes, “[quotation from essay],” indicating that the true measure of a climber isn’t necessarily found in climbing the world’s highest mountain but in how one meets one’s own physical and existential challenges. In this way, Honnold becomes a foil to the old myth of Everest as the ultimate conquest. Instead of uncritically celebrating Everest conquests, Grebowicz calls on readers to recognize that the pursuit of personal excellence can take many forms—each reflecting a more nuanced and diverse understanding of what it means to take on risk and adventure. Thus, by invoking Honnold’s example, Grebowicz upends the conventional narrative; she suggests that the allure of Everest, once considered the be-all and end-all of climbing achievement, is “over” in its power to define heroic endeavor. The broader message is that modern adventure is evolving: real heroism might be found in those who shun outdated benchmarks in favor of forging new paths.