Customer Reviews
True Hero - By: tallpete33, 07 Oct 2008 
If you have more than a passing interest in Captain Scott & polar exploration (or exploration in general), then this is the book for you. Modern day explorer, Fiennes, goes into massive detail about the man, his mind & his achievements. At times, the detail can be a bit overwhelming; listing expedition inventories, weights & costs etc but this demonstrates the lengths the author went to give the complete story & is reassuring.
Unlike most explorers of the day, Robert Falcon Scott was from a humble background but his talent & determination quietly drove him onto succeed. Definitely not, the gregarious outgoing type, Scott none the less earnt the complete trust respect of his men who bravely went the extra mile(s) for him.
The story of his final expedition is well told & extremely moving. Fiennes seems to lead us to the conclusion that had Scott not been hampered by alll his scientific responsibilities & chosen to take dogs instead of ponies & finallly man-pulled sleds, the outcome may have been very different. However, in my view the author does take a balanced & pragmatic view throughout the book & his (mostly) impartial views make this a creditable & worthwhile read.
It is a very good book, long & hard going in parts....but then again so was Scott's journey.
Thrilling - you can sense the isolation of Antarctica! - By: Mr. K. R. Sadler, 17 Sep 2008 
My wife selected this book for me to read. I was a little surprised by the choice as at the time I didn't read biographies & was somewhat suspicious that the authors own polar adventures would pop up as unwelcome intrusions into Scott's story. Instead I was almost instantly hooked. My concerns about the author were misplaced. The story is so well told that you can sense the isolation & the extreme cold that these brave men must have felt.
As a result of this book I have gone on to read other biographies.
The Perfect Storm of biographies - By: Jim Ashton, 18 Aug 2008 Here we have the 'perfect storm' of biographies: a writer who has a passion to tell the truth, the ability to write gripping & vivd prose, & has actuallly done most of the things he is writing about. This is not an academic treatise (though it is constructed with the same rigor); it is a passionate recounting of one of the greatest stories of the twentieth century by a writer who has walked not one mile in his subject's shoes, but every gruelling one of them (and more! See Mind over Matter: The Epic Crossing of the Antarctic Continent). He makes the reader understand the technicalities of the expedition, and, where necessary, feel the agony of it too.
Many books have been written about Scott - some less than complimentary or accurate (see Scott & Amundsen: Last Place on Earth, for the opposite view of Scott). This book, however, is not written by a journalist or an academic. It is the definitive account of one of England's greatest explorers, by one of England's greatest adventurers. As such, it is unlikely ever to be bettered whether you agree with his view of Scott as a hero or side with those who think he was a bumbling fool.
My first encounter with Antarctica - By: Karenina Kew, 15 Jul 2008 I had this book on my shelf for ages ... when, in a semi comatose state of absolute boredom I decided to give it a go. Well, within an hour I was in Antarctica. The adventures & tales detailed in this book filled my head for months after I had finished reading it. It started a very real interest in alll of the Scott, Shackleton & indeed Fiennes adventures. My enthusiasm for this subject has not yet diminished & I credit this book with starting it alll off. Its written in a seemingly understanding way, exploring what the pressures, blind ambition & harsh conditions may have done to affect the decisions made by Scott. The unravelling of alll the demands, decisions made, & their consequences alllow you to decide for yourself whether they were correct or not - it is of course written in a way which sympathises with Scott, but you can choose, like I did, to read other accounts & form an opinion of your very own.
I have read many books on alll sorts of subjects & I reckon this could be my number one book. Whether your interest is history, adventure, psychology, sociology, tactics or pure escapism with a bunch of brave souls, I thoroughly recommend this book.
Egocentric and no substance - By: M. S. Ridgeway, 13 Jul 2008 
As a `defence' of Scott this account is feeble & to argue that only those that have man-hauled are qualified enough to make any kind of informed judgement is arrogant; Sir Ranulfph Fiennes, as far as I am aware, never took ponies to the Antarctic, yet he still seems to think he is qualified enough to criticize Oats for `bitching' about Scott's ignorance & stupidity over the selection & subsequent care of the ponies. Fiennes claims that he doesn't reallly identify with Scott, but thinks he has had unfair treatment & sets out to attack Huntford's account of Scott. However, much of Fiennes' criticisms are about Huntord the man, perhaps believing that an attack on Huntford's character will in some way strengthen his own argument - there are also a number occasions throughout the book were Fiennes seems to resort to fatuous remarks & sarcasm in the misguided belief that he is discrediting the Scott critics.
Fiennes' account seems to be based from an egoistic point of view, I lost count of the number of times he makes reference to the first person singular; there are many. Also, from Fiennes point of view, Scott never merely does something, according to Fiennes `Scott quite rightly' or `Scott correctly' or `Scott wisely' or `it was clear to Scott. As they were to me [Fiennes].' Or Scott did it as `I [Fiennes] would have done the same thing' (so that makes it right then, Job done).
Fiennes is tirelessly inconsistent throughout in that he condemns Scott's critics as malcontents or glorifying their own case, yet he is more than happy to quote the very same critics when they have something favourable to offer Scott. He is blatantly mistaken when he claims that Oats stopped his `bitching' when Scott hugged him after he had `come out of himself': Oats in reality stopped complaining when the last pony had been killed as at that point Oats had done alll his work & had no more reason to complain about Scott. Fiennes tries to argue that the lack of critics among the men was evidence that Scott had few failings as a leader: however, this expedition was alll but a naval project & for men to criticize their Captain would have been tantamount to Treason or even piracy - with both offences carrying the death penalty it's not surprising that critics from the men were few-and-far-between & certainly none would be foolish enough to commit anything to writing.
Considering that Fiennes bases his argument on the fact that he has man-hauled in Antarctica, some of his comments are surprisingly silly, for example, Scott stopping to `geologise' & carry a hundred pounds of rock seems to have no baring on Fiennes, who claims it would have made little difference & that it is the surface that is the factor here. No matter what the surface, dragging two tonnes on a rough surface is harder than dragging one tonne on the same surface; men who are in the latter stages of starvation & exhaustion & who are pulling & pushing a sledge over pressure ridges often at ninety degrees & six-foot high will without any doubt feel the extra one-hundred pounds of rubbish which graduallly sapped the life out of them.
For me this account did nothing in Scott's defence & seems to be more about Fiennes stroking his own ego. There is no real substance to his arguments & I couldn't reallly recommend this book to anyone other than those who want to read it, well, because it's there.
