Rating: 
Summary: A great read despite the anti-Scott bias
Review: After reading books on Shackleton and the Endurance expedition, I read this book as it was supposed to be the definitive work on the race to the South Pole. I was not disappointed. It is an impressively researched book that educates and entertains simultaneously; a truly fascinating story. Huntford's treatment of Scott is, however, overtly biased. Chapter after chapter, the author juxtaposes the methods, preparation, and planning of the two explorers; Amundsen and Scott. This alone is enough to compel the conclusion that Amundsen deserved his victory, and that Scott was a bumbling leader, not suited for such a monumental undertaking. As such, Huntford need not constantly remind the reader that Scott was incompetent. It was evident enough. Even though Scott's ignorance caused the death of his entire polar party, it is difficult not to be moved by the effort they made, and the manner by which they faced death. Yet Huntford, attempting to remove Scott from the realm of martyrdom, remains entirely unsympathetic. It is but one criticism in what is otherwise a fantastic book.
Rating:
Summary: History meets Adventure
Review: This is an amazing book. It is thrilling and at the same time very interesting from the historical point of view. The only thing that may be considered a weakness is the bias that the book carries so strongly. Scott is depicted as such a feeble character in so many words that it is sometimes hard to imagine that so many people believed in his competence for so long. But it is a good, interesting and entertaining book, very well writen and highly recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: Couldn't put it down
Review: Although Huntford may create the impression of having an anti-Scott, pro-Amundsen bias, he is nevertheless justified in his harsh treatment of Scott due to the extensive primary source documentation he relies upon. He quotes extensively from the diaries of just about everybody from both expeditions, for example. He's doing nothing more than revealing the facts which, in light of Scott's subsequent martyrdom, are a bit unsettling. We learn for the first time that a great national hero (to the English) was nothing more than a bumbling incompetent, although mightily determined. Anyway, the book is a real page turner. Next on my reading list are "Nansen" and "Shackleton", both by Huntford. I also have the "Last Place on Earth" videos which track the book very closely. Some of the tapes are slow at times, but overall a lot of fun to watch--especially the middle tapes where the parties are in the Antarctic. My wife really thinks the Norwegian actors are cute, too. ;)
Rating:
Summary: What you learned in school isn't always what really happened
Review: We all know about the race to the South Pole. We learned it in 6th grade. Some of us kept thinking about it past 6th grade. This book is for you. While the author *is* biased against Scott, he inadvertantly paints a picture of Victorian Heroism and makes our view of both Scott and Amundsen come into fuller focus. I heard recently that 2 women have completed a journey of walking 700 miles to the South Pole. They most certainly used "modern" techniques to get there. Amundsen used techniques he learned from Innuit (sp?) navigators and hunters and he not only survived his race to the Pole, he made it look easy. This book will make you mad at Scott for not availing himself of these "tools" and "skills" but you will also marvel at what he *did* with what he had! A great read.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderfully written, fascinating tale
Review: This is an all points beautiful book, well written, well researched, a distinct pleasure to read for its prose style and its information alike. While Huntford has been criticized for partizanism -- as if it were possible to be passionately interested in anything, and not develop some degree of bias -- his fair and reasoned description of events presents all the information any reasonable reader might need to identify for themselves instances in which a point of interpretation might be contested. But it would be a sorry mistake to dismiss this book as a polemic. There is no better source for information on Scott's career, Amundsen's life and exploration, or the polar bids of either man available in English today. Mr. Huntford's research and presentation are remarkable. This is a wonderful book and great fun to read, and you will be the richer for the time you spend with the people who populate its pages. My greatest regret on completing the book was that there were not another five chapters for me to read yet (and fortunately for me there are the author's biographies of Shackleton and Nansen to be had). Truly one of the cornerstones of the modern literature of Antarctic exploration!
Rating:
Summary: An Excellent comprehensive read
Review: Huntsford in this book begins to demythologize the chararcter of Robert Falcon Scott and in turn the entire Bristish polar exploration attempts of the early 20th century. He points outs the inherent flaws in Scott's expeditions. In turn, he gives Amundsen the credit to which he is due. Amundsen was one of the greatest Arctic explorers ever. This book is highly readable and at times hard to put down. It follows the dual expeditions closely showing that the conditions which each faced were not that different but the approaches the expedions took were opposite each other. In the end one proved to be superior to the other. If you are interested in the history of polar exploration this is a must read.
Rating:
Summary: THE "must read" of the history of polar exploration!
Review: That Robert Falcon Scott was a bumbling fool can not be denied; the facts speak for themselves. But is Huntford also guilty of holding a bias against Scott? Of course he is, but this is excusable, given the magnitude of Scott's ineptitude. In fact, it is Huntford's willingness to take sides that makes "The Last Place on Earth" such a good read! A dry review of the facts without any editorial comment would not have done this compelling story justice. Huntford's way of telling the story draws the reader into the author's world, where Amundsen represents most of what is good in Man, and Scott represents the slimy underside of Man. The amazing thing about this history (and I think this is why Huntford's book has elicited so much opposition), is that Huntford pretty much got it right.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't Blindly Trust Authors with Axes to Grind
Review: This book, while full of interesting comparisons between Scott and Amundsen, is written from such a one-sided perspective that anyone unwilling wholly to accept Huntford's basic thesis--that Scott (and, by extension, Britain) had no redeeming graces, whereas Amundsen (and, by extension, all of Scandinavia) had no flaws worth noting--will find it maddening to read. There are plenty of legitimate grounds on which to criticize Scott and praise Amundsen; however, Huntford inexplicably is constrained to rip into Scott every time he mentions the man. (He even strongly implies that Scott couldn't have been much of a man, alleging both that Scott's benefactor Clements Markham was homosexual and that Scott's wife had an extramarital affair with Amundsen's mentor Nansen.) All of this smells of some agenda besides merely correcting common wisdom about Scott's purported heroism. In short, Huntford is like a literary Oliver Stone, inasmuch as he interprets the historical record entirely in light of his predetermined conclusions. One thing is highly instructive with regard to Huntford's intentions: his treatment of Frederick Cook, Amundsen's good friend. Huntford implies that Cook, a noted charlatan and abject liar, actually did reach the North Pole in 1908 ahead of Peary. In doing so, he not only ignores Cook's demonstrably false claim of a 1906 first ascent of Denali--which, any thinking person would conclude, makes his north-pole claims that much more implausible--he also violates his own "principle" of not accepting romantic notions as fact. Finally, Huntford fails to note that time has vindicated at least some of Scott's methods (e.g., man-hauling). Amundsen may have taken the most prudent path in capturing the prize at that time, but there's a lot to be said for the fact that Scott did it the hard way--and came very close to succeeding.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Comparison of the South Pole Explorers
Review: I found "The Last Place on Earth" a compelling comparison of the two different techniques of Amundsen (Norwegian) v. Scott (British). Although the book has a decidedly pro-Norwegian slant, it is extremely well researched. Much of the history of the Scott expedition has tried to show how Scott and his expedition were the unfortunate victims of bad luck and bad weather. Huntford is able to present data and quotes directly from the Scott party's journals to illustrate why the failure of the team rests almost exclusively on Scott's lack of planning and experience. The contrast with Amundsen's years of training and planning makes for an interesting look at leadership in general and specifically under such extreme environments as an Antarctic expedition.
Rating:
Summary: A complete story of both men
Review: As a avid polar reader this is a must. Huntford does a great job explaining the faces behind the men and why one made it and the other didn't.
| 
