1
Two words or phrases that describe Jason Laing are “cool under
pressure” and “highly skilled.” These descriptions show that he is calm
in dangerous situations and has strong abilities, which are essential
qualities for someone involved in life-saving helicopter rescues.
2
Jason Laing recalls the earthquake in Nepal as a time of complete
devastation. He remembers how entire villages vanished, and how he
helped rescue more than 140 people from high in the mountains.
Later, he stayed in the area of Lukla to assist the local people he knew,
showing his strong connection to the community and his determination
to help beyond the basic call of duty.
3
Rescue pilots deal with extreme conditions while flying, especially at
high altitudes. Thin air makes it difficult for helicopters to maintain
flight, especially over 23,000 feet, where “the chopper can’t sustain
flight.” Weather conditions, such as “cloud, fog, weight, wind,” add
even more danger. In addition, pilots often struggle with poor
communication and locating disoriented climbers. These factors can
lead to life-or-death decisions, where pilots have to say “no” to prevent
risking more lives. All of this shows that rescue work is far from simple
— it is dangerous, unpredictable, and requires immense skill and
judgement.
4
Steven Morris uses language and structure to portray the men’s
adventure as irresponsible and immature. From the title itself,
“Explorers or boys messing about?” the tone is mocking and skeptical.
The word “boys” immediately undermines their credibility, implying
childish behaviour rather than professional adventure.
The article includes expert criticism to make the men seem foolish. For
example, a rescuer says he “wouldn’t use a helicopter like that,”
showing their poor judgement. Morris carefully selects these voices to
make it clear that professionals do not take the men seriously.
Structurally, Morris uses short, sharp statements of fact — like the cost
of the rescue — to contrast the men’s grand adventure with its
consequences. He adds a sense of irony by describing their high-tech
gear, such as a “Breitling emergency watch,” which sounds impressive
but seems useless in context.
Lastly, Morris repeats phrases like “boys messing about,” reinforcing
the view that the men are reckless and wasteful. The tone throughout
the article stays critical, making the reader question whether these
men deserve admiration at all.
5
In Text One, the writer presents risk and danger as something serious,
but worth facing when it comes to saving lives. Jason Laing is shown as
brave and professional — someone who is “cool under pressure” and
experienced in high-risk situations. The tone is respectful and
admiring, showing danger as a challenge overcome through skill.
In contrast, Text Two takes a much more critical view. The writer
portrays risk as something the two men foolishly invite upon
themselves. The phrase “boys messing about” is repeated to mock
their lack of preparation and judgement. Danger, in this case, is
presented as avoidable and caused by arrogance or recklessness.
While Text One highlights real emergencies and heroic responses, Text
Two focuses on unnecessary risk-taking. The helicopter pilot in Text
One rescues others, while the men in Text Two need rescuing
themselves. This difference shapes how each text treats the idea of
danger — one with honour, the other with sarcasm.
Overall, both writers explore risk, but in very different ways. Text One
respects those who face danger for a good cause, while Text Two
criticises those who chase danger for their own entertainment or ego.
6
All three texts explore people facing dangerous situations, but the
writers present them with different tones, purposes, and perspectives.
In Text One, the pilot Jason Laing is shown as heroic, selfless, and
composed. His bravery in high-risk rescue missions is portrayed with
admiration and respect, highlighting his skills and willingness to help
others.
Text Two takes a very different view. The two adventurers are
presented not as heroes, but as reckless and immature. Steven Morris
uses language like “boys messing about” and quotes experts to
criticise their poor planning. The focus is on how their choices led to
danger that could have been avoided, with taxpayers paying the price.
Text Three (usually a personal account or memoir-style piece) often
provides an emotional and reflective perspective on danger. The writer
may describe feelings of fear, shock, or determination, giving the
reader a deeper understanding of what it’s like to live through such
experiences. In contrast to Text Two’s mocking tone, Text Three is
often more personal and sympathetic.
The biggest contrast is between admiration and criticism. Text One
presents bravery as honourable, Text Two questions whether the
danger was justified at all, and Text Three often explores the human
emotional response to fear or survival. Together, the texts show how
people react to risk — either through professionalism, recklessness, or
deep personal reflection.
