Apparently reading middle grade/teen books with weird premises set in Antarctica and then writing reviews that nobody asked for is my new purpose in life. When trying to explain this book to a friend I called it a “Hunger Games AU of The Worst Journey in the World,” and aside from the fact that this was published three years before The Hunger Games, that’s pretty much what it is—a bold concept, but an intriguing one. Unfortunately, it manages to combine mind-breaking insanity with soporific boredom.
I struggled to sympathize with our lovely little team of heroes, partially because the author doesn’t let you get into their heads, partially because they’re all so repugnant you don’t want to get into their heads. Polly was the worst offender. After I had been suffering through her endless quotations and infodumping for about 200 pages, she began musing over whether she would be brave enough to sacrifice herself by walking out into a blizzard to die, which I fervently hoped was foreshadowing. Unfortunately, that was far too long a word and difficult a concept for the author to implement. If you took out the entire paragraphs that were copy-and-pasted from various other books on polar exploration (most of which are within Polly’s dialogue and thoughts), it would probably cut about 25% of the book’s length and you wouldn’t lose a lot. Those quotes were italicized, but the characters’ thoughts weren’t, which was a bit distracting, but it was quickly overshadowed by the characterization, plot, and childish, talking-down tone.
This is petty, but the polar history buff and aspiring author in me insists on pointing out that subtle naming tactics are not the author’s strong suit—anyone with even a surface-level knowledge of Scott’s last expedition can tell that Robert is clearly named after Robert Scott, Billy must be an homage to Edward “Bill” Wilson, and Grace is obviously named after Lawrence Edward Grace Oates. And all that’s not even getting started on the fact that the most sympathetic character (as seen in universe, they’re all dreadful to me) is named Andrew and the author’s first name is Andrea.
I struggled to pin down the target audience for this. The short sentences broken into short paragraphs came across as a middle-grade or younger teen device, but a passing mention of the dystopian government’s brutal execution methods shown on live tv and the scene where a pony is eaten by sharks suggested a more mature audience. The author’s obvious attempts to avoid cursing didn’t help with clearing up the age range.
The worldbuilding felt childish, too (aside from the above executions on live tv). It’s mostly in service of a heavyhanded message of “TV bad,” so it can come across as exaggerated at times. In addition, it’s very much a product of the early 2000s. The “human fax” machine feels very dated, and the fact that people watch television instead of socializing or going to school and have ebooks instead of real books but still use physical notebooks and newspapers all contribute to a very (apparently unintentional) retrofuturistic tone.
There are almost good things about the story—the book eventually tries to bring up the idea that democracy is not a spectator sport, but this is a bit hard to engage with due to how late it’s introduced, how it’s overshadowed by the “TV bad” messaging that’s taken up much of the story up till that point, and how incongruous the heaviness of the theme is with the simplistic worldbuilding. Ultimately, I went in expecting middle grade/early teen madness and came out of it having tentatively declared it badly written YA that talks down to its audience.
I briefly discussed historical errors in my review The White Darkness, so I’ll do the same here with the ones I noticed.
1) Let me preface this by saying that I really, really don’t want to come across as an obnoxiously pedantic history buff, but this quote irked me: “Robert F. Scott and the four men who died with him on the expedition to reach the South Pole in 1912 went on the worst journey in the world.” Calling the polar trek “the worst journey in the world” makes it seem like the author only saw the title and knew the basic facts of the expedition. The actual “worst journey in the world” was the Winter Journey (part of the same expedition but distinct from the polar journey) to retrieve emperor penguin eggs. This could have been a deliberate choice to highlight gaps in the characters’ knowledge, but given that it’s never corrected or commented on, I think it was probably a mistake.
2) This is pretty minor, but at one point, the author states that Edward Wilson’s first name was Robert. She had just been talking about Robert Scott, and one of her characters is named Robert, so she probably got distracted and typed the name again by mistake, but her editors really should have caught that.
“Fun” things that jumped out at me:
1) Only in this book would you find the sentence “Now where would the government have put the dog food?”
2) This comment, that comes right after one of the characters was attacked by a dog: “That dog wasn’t vicious. It was attacking another dog, and Billy got in the way.” I think that one speaks for itself.
3) While this couldn’t have been intentional given the publication date, within the universe of the story, there’s a movie called “Food Fight” that gets mentioned in passing to flavor the text (pun intended). Oh, the flashbacks to the horrible product placement-riddled animated movie.
4) Speaking of product placement, the story’s filled with mentions of retrofuturistic-sounding brands and products, plus one reference to the Gap. The environment, society, and culture as we know them may not survive the apocalypse, but rest assured the Gap will.
If you want adventure in the Antarctic with stakes and emotions running high, just read The Worst Journey in the World. I really can’t recommend it highly enough; it’s a phenomenon you have to experience for yourself. This book drags Worst Journey and its author through the mud by mere association; poor Cherry-Garrard deserved so much better than to have this dreck try to rip off his masterpiece.
Edit: bumped it down from 3 stars to 1 and moved it from BOTBBC to Leitners even though it doesn’t quite inflict the same sort of psychic damage as its shelf mates. I was very clouded by nostalgia in my initial review.