I like these shots too, and I'm almost reluctant to write any of this, as I don't want to seem like I'm piling on.
First off, it's a gorgeous location. There's an awfully lot to work with in that scene. Good sky, nice clouds, water, beautiful geology, and the list goes on.
To me, looking at the limited slice of what you've shown us, the least attractive part of the scene, are the rough and jagged rocks that you chose as the foreground. To compound this, the scene was imaged towards the middle of the day, and overall the light is rather harsh in the image. I will say this, the high clouds are working for you on the mountains, given you some nice broken light, and providing a very nice sense of depth on that part of the image. If I were PP-ing this, I'd likely accentuate this by utilizing very localized luminance (both positive and negative) and contrast adjustments on the mountainous areas of the image.
Now I think totally understand the choice to include the rocks and stream in the image. My guess is you were looking for movement in the scene, but given everything else around I'm not 100% sure they would have been my main focal point. I might (I'm sure I would) have included them, but maybe not given them the weight that they have in this image. Guessing here, but I might have tried to move closer to the lake, gotten low and close and gone for more of a reflection off the surface of the lake. To me, the most interesting thing in the scene are the craggy peaks in the background. Going for the reflection essentially doubles their presence in the scene. And FWIW, I hate giving critique like this, as I'm sure you don't have the opportunity to eaisly return to this site and do it over.
So we've got what we've got and there's a lot of harsh "midday" light on those rocks. You were on a backpacking trek, not a photo expedition, so I get it. I'm a proponent that not every landscape shot HAS TO be shot during the golden hours to be good. The light here might be a little harsh but it's even throughout the frame. On the plus side, this is how many people would see the scene if they were to visit this spot, so often times I think that resonates with people as well ("this is how I remember it). IMHO, I think that it can be compensated for by simply decreasing the brightness in that part of the frame (the foreground). This will serve to decrease the overall impact of this area in of image. The particular offender is the large prominent rock in the lower right center of the frame. It just about right (brightness-wise) in the first image, but too hot in the second. I'd pull it down even more. Instead of pushing the highlights on the snow to get it to "pure white", try brushing over it with an adjustment brush that desaturates it. As the old saying goes, there's more than one way to skin a cat....
Overall these are two nice images. Personally, I like the 2nd comp a little bit better than the first (with that being said, there's a very small rock protruding into the snow field on the right side of the frame, about 1/2 way up. Hit that with the clone tool). I think that they are totally workable into something really good. I think that folks taking the time to comment on them, shows they have potential. Keep working on them.
And on a side note, looking at your flickr stream, your Matterhorn shots are outstanding and the Torcal de Antequera is on my "hit list" as well.
Cheers,
L