Rating: Summary: Philosophy in Action Review: This book shows what ideas mean when applied to living. Most people today can muddle along with contradictions in their thinking, surviving on the brains of their betters. However, when living on the edge of survival, true ideas are life-giving- Irrational ideas mean death. My copy of this book is literally falling apart from re-reading.
Rating: Summary: Amazing. Will give you frost-bite in the middle of July. Review: This is one of the most moving and powerful books I have ever read. It captures your imagination and never lets go. If you liked ïnto Thin Air", that was a cake-walk compared to the Scott expidition. This book is a must if you have any interest in exploration, drive, history or biography. A real triumph!
Rating: Summary: one of the finest books i have ever read on any subject Review: huntford holds no punches as he describes the backrounds of both scott and amundsen. leading up to their actual treks to the south pole is both gripping and agonizing, as the outcome becomes all too apparent. these men are polar opposites. amundsen is a man of education, able to find learning in every situation be it a success or failure. scott was a man of appearances, all surface. never was a man so poorly placed as he, a bungler led up through the ranks for everything but his competance. the story is written so well, with a perfect balance between their history and the actual trek to the poles. it is an exciting read.
Rating: Summary: one of the best books I"ve ever read Review: The chronicle of the last truly great adventure, to the most inhospitable climate on the planet. The destiny of two groups of men held in the hands of their respective leaders.
Rating: Summary: What really happened Review: I recently read "Scott's Last Expedition", the edited version of his diaries from his South Pole expedition. This left me interested but unfulfilled: I wanted to learn more about Amundsen and the context for both expeditions, and to get more analysis of the bald facts as related in Scott's diaries. So I turned to Huntford's "The Last Place on Earth". I was not disappointed. Huntford narrates the entire lives of both Amundsen and Scott, with edifying discursions on Nansen, Shackleton, and other Polar explorers. Huntford knows Norwegian and thus was able to consult primary sources for Amundsen's expedition directly; he provides many excerpts from the letters and diaries of both British and Norwegian expedition members. He also reveals some of the omissions in the edited version of Scott's diaries. As a minor quibble, Huntford only rarely gives full dates, so that I found myself frequently having to page back a considerable way to remind myself which year or even which month it was. An appendixed chronology would have been immeasurably helpful. As other reviewers have noted, the author is highly critical of Scott -- occasionally unfairly so, as when he notes that Scott's first depot journey brought "a ton of supplies not quite to 80 degrees South" where Amundsen's party had "moved three tons another two degrees of latitude closer to the Pole", omitting to mention that Amundsen started about a degree farther south than Scott. But from the evidence Huntford adduces, even without his interpretations, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Scott was criminally unprepared, negligent, and generally incompetent. It is not as though he had no information about what he would be facing -- his previous expedition encountered nearly all the same problems, but he seems not to have learned anything from it. Huntford shows how Scott's diaries and their careful editing combine to portray Scott in a much more favorable light than he deserves -- a case of the loser writing the history books. Huntford also reveals what might charitably be called "traditional" attitudes toward women. For example, speaking of Kathleen Bruce, Scott's future wife, Huntford says, "She was a predatory female; more predatory than usual, that is." Fortunately, since nearly all the principal figures in the book are male, this only surfaces occasionally, as when Huntford describes Amundsen as having "an almost feminine sensitivity for the undertones and cross-currents on which a leader has to play". Despite its flaws, "The Last Place on Earth" should be among the first books you read on Polar exploration, or true-life adventure in general. Once the race for the Pole was on, I found it as hard to put down as any fictional thriller.
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: Appalling revelations of incompetence Review: I have read many books on polar exploration, and this is undoubtedly one of the best. Scott has gone down in history as a great British hero, but the sad truth as presented here is that he was an incompetent bungler who had no business leading an expedition. Scott refused to learn from experience and modeled his plan after Shackleton's "Nimrod" expedition, which in hindsight was nearly a disaster salvaged mostly by Shackleton's uncommon gift for leadership. Scott, however, was a poor leader, and the majority of his men did not realize this (or chose to ignore it) until it was far too late. The members of his polar party endured almost unimaginable hardships before dying, which Scott in his journal noted with a perverse pride. The fate of "Titus" Oates is particularly harrowing. Perhaps alone among his comrades, he had realized early in the expedition Scott's glaring flaws as a leader. His attempts to warn Scott about the possible danger fell on deaf ears. Despite this, out of a sense of duty he struggled on until he quite simply could take no more suffering and chose to end his life. Scott, thinking of the public to the last,predictably invented the heroic myth that Oates had sacrificed himself to save the others, but the truth as revealed by Huntsford is that he was simply a brave man who had reached the end of his endurance. Poor "Titus" Oates deserved a better end.
Amundsen, by contrast, is depicted as a consummate professional who gleaned every possible bit of information about polar travel before his expedition. Taking absolutely no chances, he planned literally everything out to the minutest detail, even to when he would slaughter his dogs for food (a necessity Scott would never have been able to abide by) The irony is that Scott's death robbed Amundsen of his well-earned moment of triumph. Had Scott lived, in all likelihood his legacy would be far, far different.
Rating: Summary: Adventures are a sign of incompetence Review: The author is miffed that Norwegian Roald Amundson, leader of the first expedition to reach the South Pole, has been overshadowed by Robert Falcon Scott, British leader of the second expedition to the Pole. Scott became virtually a cult figure in England as an exemplar of glorious failure and enlightened amateurism. By contrast, Amundson was considered an opportunist and (gasp!) a professional who stole England's divine right to be first to the Pole.
The author doesn't waste sentiments on Scott who was "weak, incompetent, and stupid" -- nor on England: "an empire in decline." He makes his case well. Amundson was clearly the superior polar explorer of the two. In alternating chapters "Last Place on Earth" tells the life stories of Amundson and Scott. The highlights of the book are the tales of Amundson's organized and competent race to the South Pole contrasted with Scott's tragic end while making his way back to his base camp after reaching the Pole one month after Amundson.
The most damning of the author's allegations is that Scott discounted any lessons from the experts of polar living: the Innuit (Eskimos). Amundson learned the use of sled dogs from the Innuit and he and his team wore Innuit clothing and snow goggles. Scott also resisted the use of skis and only one of the members of his large team was an expert skier. Dogs, skis, and good leadership made the difference. Amundson's journey to the South Pole was relatively easy; Scott's a man-killing misery. In his diaries Scott blamed bad weather for his troubles; the author demonstrates that the weather Scott experienced was no worse than that faced by other explorers.
This is truly a fine and exciting book that will make you hunger to read more about Polar exploration.
Smallchief
Rating: Summary: Character assassination................. Review: I do not like the spirit in which this book is written. I enjoy reading the historical record of events, but I like to be able to formulate my own conclusions from that information. This book apparently is written by an author with an axe to grind against one of the major players, namely Robert Falcon Scott. There are so many negative digs against him all through the book that it began to lose the feel of history to me and suggestive of editorial comment with an agenda of character assassination. I just got to the point that I didn't enjoy the book because of the overwhelming negative treatment of Scott. He is made out to be such a totally flawed human being, incompetent, negative in just about every way possible. Scott may have been the bungler that the author describes that he was, but I seriously doubt every point that he made in that regard. With the historical facts presented accurately, the reader may draw those same conclusions on his own if given the opportunity, but there is little chance of that in this publication. Anyway, this could have been a very interesting and informative adventure story if it had been presented simply as a race to the South Pole by two highly competitive individuals, the historical narrative without the constant and caustic editorial comments. Those comments completely destroyed my interest along the way, as by about chapter three I realized that the character assassination would be the constant theme and little else. I sensed some jealousy of Scott on the author's part. No wonder this book caused such a negative uproar in Great Britain upon it's release. The book feels, and I believe is, more editorial than historical. I don't think it was a fair treatment. Give me a break! I'd suggest other more objective accounts of the race to the South Pole. 'The Coldest March' by Susan Solomon is much more fair toward the Scott Expedition and I am sure there are others that will be more even-handed in their assessments of the efforts made my the Scott party.
Rating: Summary: The Race for the South Pole Review: This book works at several levels. First, it is a thrilling adventure story. Second, it is a wonderful management study in planning, goal setting and organization. Third, it is a classic debunker, undermining the aura (at least in the English speaking world) surrounding Robert Scott and his tragic assault on the South Pole.
Scott and Roald Amundsen engaged in a great struggle to reach "The last place on earth," the South Pole. Each had been to polar regions before, each had become national and even international celebrities due to their trekking. Each was aware of the other party's presence on the Antarctic Continent during the same months of 1911-1912 as they raced to be the first men to stand at the bottom of the world.
Scott and Amundsen were two different breeds. Scott was a helpless romantic. Even after bitter experience and near tragedy in previous expeditions, he refused to learn from Eskimos, Norwegians or others who were battling around the turn of the century to achieve various cold weather firsts (first to the north pole, first to traverse the Northwest Passage -- which went to Amundsen -- first to cross Greenland, etc.) Thus, Scott relied on British pluck and manliness instead of skis, dogs, deer and seal suits and a properly suited diet.
Amundsen was a consummate student on the other hand. He possessed not only the gift of great vision and the ego necessary to pursue it, but also the humility to know that his trip did not have to feature every facet made anew, but should be the culmination of what others had learned when surviving and moving over the planet's most forbidding environment. Thus, Amundsen took dogs to Antarctica, wore clothing he observed the Eskimos using during his journey through the Northwest Passage, relied on skis for human transportation and dieted in a way observed to prevent scurvy.
Amundsen also worked at his project. Starting years before his trek, he organized the people, finances, equipment (much specialty made and field tested in Norway's northern regions) and talked, talked, talked to those whose experiences had something to teach them. Contrast this disciplined approach to organization and logistics with Scott's haphazard throwing together of men, equipment and élan and the outcome of the race is preordained to the reader before it has begun.
(the contrast between the two approaches is such a stark lesson on planning and organization that I suspect this book will show up in business school reading lists if it has not already).
Amundsen's journey to the South Pole was uneventful compared to Scott. Conditions were harsh, temperatures low, blizzards raged, but the Norwegian's party averaged a workman like 15 or so miles a day with dogs, skis and proper provisions. Scott, on the other hand, was not sure of his starting date, did not map out nor account for food consumed during the trip and relied on man-hauling his sleds the 1400 miles round trip to the Poles and his main camp. With the same weather and conditions, Scott and his polar attack team wound up dead after what their diaries reveal was a miserable existence on the Polar Ice Cap (they did reach the Pole, expiring on the way home).
The only area in which Scott excelled over Amundsen was in romantic writing. Scott's published works on his earlier journey to Antarctica are apparently a moving and heroic read. Amundsen was about as workmanlike a writer as he was a captain. For this and other reasons lain out by the author (in his mind much having to do with a decaying empire's need for heroes performing heroic deeds -- even heroic dying) Scott is remembered much the way Pickett's Charge is -- a glorious and manly statement of such heroics that it has made the underlying (and preventable) disaster a footnote to the story.
This is a riveting book that I found hard to put down. Although the author probably takes a few too many turns at whacking Scott when his shortcomings are evident (we get the point), he has succeeded in writing a first rate thrilling adventure, historic debunking and interesting management study.
|