Scan barcode
ladytiara's review against another edition
3.0
The Last Place on Earth is an exhaustive, well-researched account of Scott and Amundsen's race to the South Pole, but I can't rate it any higher because of the author's huge bias against Scott. I get it--Scott isn't my favorite either, but contempt and loathing ooze off every page, which makes it a little hard to trust the author's conclusions.
superlegitjoy's review against another edition
4.0
Unflinching and thorough, even in its assessment of its hero. This felt like as close to the ‘truth’ as one can get without living through the events.
holly_117's review against another edition
5.0
I didn't really know anything about polar travel or the race to the South Pole until I read this book. The lasting impression that I cam away with is that Scott was a monumental idiot who, had he lived, should have been court-martialed and probably shot for his incompetence.
This book is extremely well written and gives a lot of background on both Amundsen and Scott, which explains a lot of the reasons for the former's success and the latter's death in Antarctica. It's long, but is a fast read. I highly recommend it.
This book is extremely well written and gives a lot of background on both Amundsen and Scott, which explains a lot of the reasons for the former's success and the latter's death in Antarctica. It's long, but is a fast read. I highly recommend it.
horrorwine's review against another edition
2.0
I should have listened to other polar girlies when they said this book was trash. Such an anti-Scott bias it’s embarrassing. I’m an Amundsen fan and I found myself defending Scott internally while reading this book.
andrew_russell's review against another edition
4.0
This book provides a very in depth analysis of the journey to the pole made by both Roald Amundsen and Robert Scott.
The book highlights the errors in judgement and poor leadership displayed by Scott and contrasts this with the excellent standards maintained by Amundsen.
The book could be accused of displaying heavy bias in favour of Amundsen but it is self evident that Scott made little or no effort to thoroughly research what he was going into, ignored advice given by other more experienced polar explorers and showed a strong refusal to support his team adequately and ensure that they were well provided for during the journey. His obstinate stance on not relying sufficiently on dogs for transport was a ridiculous error of judgement as well as a costly one. The foolish and flawed decisions he made are too many to document in a review but in any case readers will need to read the book for that.
I found the story of the aftermath of the polar journey particularly touching.
Overall, this is as good a tale of the race for the South Pole as I think anyone will likely find and I would therefore highly recommend it. It is lengthy but that does not per se make it a bad book - the length is justified by the level of detail the author had to go into to provide a full and well rounded account of the polar journey as well as the events leading to the expeditions themselves.
It was very well written, holding my interest throughout and is definitely recommended, particularly for those who are unfamiliar with the details of what happened and are keen to learn more on this topic.
The book highlights the errors in judgement and poor leadership displayed by Scott and contrasts this with the excellent standards maintained by Amundsen.
The book could be accused of displaying heavy bias in favour of Amundsen but it is self evident that Scott made little or no effort to thoroughly research what he was going into, ignored advice given by other more experienced polar explorers and showed a strong refusal to support his team adequately and ensure that they were well provided for during the journey. His obstinate stance on not relying sufficiently on dogs for transport was a ridiculous error of judgement as well as a costly one. The foolish and flawed decisions he made are too many to document in a review but in any case readers will need to read the book for that.
I found the story of the aftermath of the polar journey particularly touching.
Overall, this is as good a tale of the race for the South Pole as I think anyone will likely find and I would therefore highly recommend it. It is lengthy but that does not per se make it a bad book - the length is justified by the level of detail the author had to go into to provide a full and well rounded account of the polar journey as well as the events leading to the expeditions themselves.
It was very well written, holding my interest throughout and is definitely recommended, particularly for those who are unfamiliar with the details of what happened and are keen to learn more on this topic.
andrewritchie's review against another edition
4.0
4.5/ 5
If you want to read a positive portrayal of Captain Robert Falcon Scott the national hero and heroic but unfortunate explorer then this is not the book for you.
Huntford completely tears apart Scott's character, leadership style and ability leaving no doubt that all the blame for the tragedy that unfolded stood with him. At the same time he can't praise Amundsen's attributes enough.
Is he tough on Scott? Maybe, but the thoroughly researched evidence doesn't go in his favour. Is he overly effusive towards Amundsen? Possibly but again the evidence suggests far superior leadership, planning and implementation that delivered success.
The contrasting experience of similar conditions brought about by choice of people, equipment, mode of transport, animals and diet are all written about in detail and are all fascinating.
If you want to read a positive portrayal of Captain Robert Falcon Scott the national hero and heroic but unfortunate explorer then this is not the book for you.
Huntford completely tears apart Scott's character, leadership style and ability leaving no doubt that all the blame for the tragedy that unfolded stood with him. At the same time he can't praise Amundsen's attributes enough.
Is he tough on Scott? Maybe, but the thoroughly researched evidence doesn't go in his favour. Is he overly effusive towards Amundsen? Possibly but again the evidence suggests far superior leadership, planning and implementation that delivered success.
The contrasting experience of similar conditions brought about by choice of people, equipment, mode of transport, animals and diet are all written about in detail and are all fascinating.
brodeheim's review against another edition
3.0
This book can be a great exercise in critical thinking. Huntford’s bias for Amundsen and disdain against Scott can be very subtle (e.g. “Amundsen seemed to...”) or exaggerated (to the extent of accusing Scott of holding Wilson and Bowers back and dooming them to protect his reputation - with pretty much no evidence). I’m not too thrilled about his notions of femininity either, but it’s written in the 70s so gah, never mind. So just be very aware of his biases as you read, and after you’re done, check out other books on the race to the pole for a more balanced understanding. 3 stars for not keeping to a more objective point of view.
Shortcomings aside, this is really a great textbook on leadership and our perceptions of achievement. To Huntford’s credit, he takes great pains to explain the rationale behind all their expedition preparations, so people like me unacquainted with cold weather and outdoor treks can understand the rationale behind their decisions.
The thing that intrigued me (and riled Huntford) the most was this: Scott bungled (Huntford’s word of choice) the expedition and was doomed by his shoddy preparation and incompetence, yet dying in his self-manufactured struggle made him a hero in public eyes. Amundsen planned meticulously and made great decisions during the expedition, but the lack of near-deaths, starvation and unnecessary struggle doesn’t make for hero worship. Their dual tales are best summed up with what’s become a favourite quote of mine: “Adventure is a sign of incompetence.”
Shortcomings aside, this is really a great textbook on leadership and our perceptions of achievement. To Huntford’s credit, he takes great pains to explain the rationale behind all their expedition preparations, so people like me unacquainted with cold weather and outdoor treks can understand the rationale behind their decisions.
The thing that intrigued me (and riled Huntford) the most was this: Scott bungled (Huntford’s word of choice) the expedition and was doomed by his shoddy preparation and incompetence, yet dying in his self-manufactured struggle made him a hero in public eyes. Amundsen planned meticulously and made great decisions during the expedition, but the lack of near-deaths, starvation and unnecessary struggle doesn’t make for hero worship. Their dual tales are best summed up with what’s become a favourite quote of mine: “Adventure is a sign of incompetence.”
samhyatt2's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
sad
tense
medium-paced
5.0