The article states, "remoteness of the image". Hardly. It's an extremely popular dayhike in and back from Tuolumne Meadows, a spot seeing a couple hundred people a day in summer, which is exactly why I don't go there. Even back in Adam's time, when going in with horses and mules was more routine for sake of all the camping amenities, it would have been an easy destination. But historically and artistically, it's certainly an interesting photo. He took numerous images of that particular peak over the years.
Concerning the historical aspect, with the accompanying photo on that link, AA was frequently criticized for hobnobbing with the rich and famous, especially when the Great Depression was afflicting most Americans like it was at that date. He commented on it himself numerous times. But courting philanthropists and movers n' shakers was an important aspect of the growing National Parks movement. It didn't happen by itself, and we all benefit from the outcome. The conservation movement also provided a lot of young men needed work during the Depression era, building trails and so forth. So I think it's nice that the only peak per se in the entire range named for Adams really is way back in, above a stunning pristine high valley which experiences very little visitation per year.