Norway Wins!

[Guest]

Honourable as both leaders were (although history has not judged Scott kindly, and Amundsen was pretty ruthless), neither come close to Nansen, either as polar explorers or all round polymath cool dudeness...One of my all-time heroes - although he makes me feel totally inadequate.....

[Conor Dary]

Honourable as both leaders were (although history has not judged Scott kindly, and Amundsen was pretty ruthless), neither come close to Nansen, either as polar explorers or all round polymath cool dudeness...One of my all-time heroes - although he makes me feel totally inadequate.....

Comparing oneself to Nansen can be rather humbling. Look what happened to poor Johansen.

[gh]

Nansen is played (in a very minor role) by Max Von Sydow in "Last Place.." and he is predictably perfect in the role.

[EPelle]

Thank you... would not expect less than perfect from von Sydow.

[Per Andersen]

Honourable as both leaders were (although history has not judged Scott kindly, and Amundsen was pretty ruthless), neither come close to Nansen, either as polar explorers or all round polymath cool dudeness...One of my all-time heroes - although he makes me feel totally inadequate.....

Ruthless? More ruthless than the bungling amateur Scott ? Scott who insisted that his dying men had to load up their sleds with useless, heavy rocks so Scott could pretend to be a scientist. It was lucky for Scott that he died the way he did. That was the only way for him to become a hero.
Amundsen was not a renaisance man like Nansen but he was the perfect man for what he accomplished. Unlike Scott he minimized the risks his men took.

Nobody loved amateurs like the English and preferably dead ones.

[Guest]

Honourable as both leaders were (although history has not judged Scott kindly, and Amundsen was pretty ruthless), neither come close to Nansen, either as polar explorers or all round polymath cool dudeness...One of my all-time heroes - although he makes me feel totally inadequate.....

Ruthless? More ruthless than the bungling amateur Scott ? Scott who insisted that his dying men had to load up their sleds with useless, heavy rocks so Scott could pretend to be a scientist. It was lucky for Scott that he died the way he did. That was the only way for him to become a hero.
Amundsen was not a renaisance man like Nansen but he was the perfect man for what he accomplished. Unlike Scott he minimized the risks his men took.

Nobody loved amateurs like the English and preferably dead ones.

Rolig, Per!

Scott was an amateur, and a bungling one at that, and a hopeless romantic, no argument from me there. And your opinion on the English love of dead amateurs is hyperbole, gallant losers are preferable. BUT...

Amundsen got Nansen's permission to borrow "Fram" for an assumed expedition in the Arctic. But when word came out of Peary's and Cook's alleged attainment of the North Pole, Amundsen decided he was going to try for the South Pole.

He informed Nansen by letter AFTER he set sail for the Antarctic, confessing that he hadn't said so before for fear that Nansen would refuse to lend him "Fram". He knew Nansen had his own plans to go to the South Pole.

Scott was well pissed off when he heard, and many of his supporters thought it wasn't fair play. I disagree entirely, but I believe ruthless, determined and ambitious are fair descriptions. And why not?!

If Scott had got their first, there wouldn't have been a word heard against him. Could have happened to - in spite of the difference between the teams, Scott had more than his fair share of bad luck, and Amundsen an equal share of good.

My $0.02.

[Conor Dary]

On my browser this page, and only this page, explodes to twice the width and makes it very hard to read.

Why is this?


By the way, Scott did not have bad luck. He was just a fool. Read Huntford's book and you will see why.

[Guest]

On my browser this page, and only this page, explodes to twice the width and makes it very hard to read.

Why is this?


By the way, Scott did not have bad luck. He was just a fool. Read Huntford's book and you will see why.

Same here, irritating.

By the way, Scott did have bad luck. He was not just a fool. And I've read the book. And other books.

Would he have been a fool if he'd returned? The world's then largest marine power wasn't in the habit of promoting fools to Captain

Scott's 1901 Antarctic trip in the "Discovery" was a tough but successful trip. New "furthest South" record, winter stay went OK. He'd asked Nansen for advice too, wise move.

The weather he encountered in 1911 - 12 was unusually savage.

Scott was a romantic, pessimist, possibly even a manic depressive and made completely wrong choices (ponies etc). But he was brave, loyal and a good leader. No way a fool.

Apsley Cherry - Gerrard, whom it's assumed knew a thing or two, said in his book: "For a combined scientific and geographical expedition, I'd choose Scott; for a winter journey, Wilson; for a quick tour to the Pole and nothing else, Amundsen; and if I was in deep shit (or words to that effect, can't find his book!) which I wanted out of, give me Shackleton every time". Sounds reasonable.

Edit - just reread my own posts, and see I'm contradicting myself hugely - how can I call him a bungling amateur after 1901 went so well, blah blah. Hands up and admit I'm totally undecided, about the only thing I've never heard Scott called was gay. Or was he called it?

It's great it's still being debated 93 years on.

[Daisy]

On my browser this page, and only this page, explodes to twice the width and makes it very hard to read.

Why is this?

Same here, irritating.

Its the link in garrys post. Links only break at question marks and if there are none then they force the thread wide.

[Conor Dary]

Can't GH just delete his link and then we wouldn't have this problem. Instead of the link just type it out. Or better just mention the movie. (Which I just ordered on Amazon. Thanks gh.)

By the way, I still think Scott was an incompetent. And if you read the book you will notice that Huntford makes it clear that Scott was promoted for his Discovery journey. After the disaster with the Albermale, Scott was in deep trouble with the Navy Brass.

As for the Discovery journey being a success, it was hardly that. They only made it to 82 deg and only most froze to death and had scurvy to boot. And finally, the Navy was none too happy with Scott for getting frozen in 2 winters and almost a third.