Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “The Last Place on Earth: Scott and Amundsen's Race to the South Pole (Exploration)” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

The Last Place on Earth: Scott and Amundsen's Race to the South Pole (Exploration)

Roland Huntford,

Paul Theroux (Introduction),

Jon Krakauer (Goodreads Author) (Series Editor)

4.32 · Rating details · 2,866 ratings · 207 reviews

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the South Pole was the most coveted prize in the fiercely nationalistic modern age of exploration. In the brilliant dual biography, the award-winning writer Roland Huntford re-examines every detail of the great race to the South Pole between Britain's Robert Scott and Norway's Roald Amundsen. Scott, who dies along with four of his ...more

Get A Copy

Paperback, 588 pages

Published September 7th 1999 by Modern Library (first published 1979)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Last Place on Earth, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about The Last Place on Earth

Lists with This Book

The Worst Journey in the World by Apsley Cherry-Garrard

The Last Place on Earth by Roland Huntford

To the Poles

99 books — 60 voters

Over the Edge of the World by Laurence Bergreen

In the Heart of the Sea by Nathaniel Philbrick

Best Historical Travel Journals

244 books — 288 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 4.32 ·

Rating details

· 2,866 ratings · 207 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of The Last Place on Earth: Scott and Amundsen's Race to the South Pole (Exploration)

Apr 04, 2008 Wayne rated it it was amazing

Shelves: polar

Reading this book ignited my interest in Antarctica and literally changed my life. I took up mountaineering, winter camping, and cross country skiing because of this book.
On Dec. 24, 2004 I stood at the South Pole after a ski journey of 73 miles (a bit more than the Last Degree of latitude).

flag 31 likes · Like · see review

Dec 13, 2016 howl of minerva rated it really liked it

Shelves: bio-diary-letters, history

In the spirit of Manny I think it's important to immediately point out some parallels with Knausgard. Is there anything more heroically pointless and more boring than polar exploration? I don't mean for science but just rushing to the pole to say you've stood there. For Norwegians to get the world's attention, they have to do something huge and monstrous. Something spectacular that others have only dreamed of or dismissed as ludicrous. One can see Knausgard (that face! the intensity! those crags In the spirit of Manny I think it's important to immediately point out some parallels with Knausgard. Is there anything more heroically pointless and more boring than polar exploration? I don't mean for science but just rushing to the pole to say you've stood there. For Norwegians to get the world's attention, they have to do something huge and monstrous. Something spectacular that others have only dreamed of or dismissed as ludicrous. One can see Knausgard (that face! the intensity! those crags and ridges!) as a sort of Nansen of the page, an Amundsen of the pen, fighting his way to his own South Pole (so to speak) with demoniac fervour and holding the results to the world's nose in triumph.

Sharp corrective here to the Scott I remember from many a school assembly. The noble hero of the Antarctic. As depicted here (an utter hatchet job but a well-documented one) Scott led his men to death because he was arrogant, ignorant and wholly unprepared. Thinking British pep and vim and upper lip were all that's needed. Not bothering to learn to use skis or dogs. Insisting on man-hauling (agonising, inefficient) and ponies (utterly useless on snow). Not planning his depots. Not leaving any margin of error. Determined on ludicrous heroism for its own sake. Deciding at the last minute to take 5 men instead of the planned 4 to the pole, inevitably leaving food and fuel short. Amundsen on the other hand having spent decades learning snowcraft and icecraft, having the humility and good sense to learn from the Esquimaux and the Inuit, adopting their diet, their clothing, their techniques and equipment. Planning depots meticulously. Building in a huge margin of safety. His lean and hardened team of experts (including, in Bjaaland a world-champion cross-country skier) a brutal contrast to Scott's glory-seeking misfits, incompetents and tyros. As the Times of London was to sneer, “professionals”. For Scott, the author puts it biblically: TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting. Scott, slogging through the snow while Fridtjof Nansen casually screwed his (Scott's) wife in a Berlin hotel.

As the author brutally has it, Scott was adopted as a hero in failure and death – a hero for a nation of losers, a necessary hero for a dying empire, a shining example of pointless self-sacrifice for the great war to come. A fascinating book. Much here not touched upon. Recommended.
...more

flag 24 likes · Like · see review

Feb 13, 2013 Kevin Hanks rated it it was amazing

What an incredible book. I was blown away with how much I liked it. It was incredibly well-researched and well presented historical drama. The author had very obviously done his homework and knew the topic well. It was a long read for me, and took quite a while to get through. It's not a fast-paced thriller novel, so there were parts when I would sit down to read it and fall asleep after only a few pages (though that may just mean I'm usually a busy and tired guy). The first 3/4 of the book was What an incredible book. I was blown away with how much I liked it. It was incredibly well-researched and well presented historical drama. The author had very obviously done his homework and knew the topic well. It was a long read for me, and took quite a while to get through. It's not a fast-paced thriller novel, so there were parts when I would sit down to read it and fall asleep after only a few pages (though that may just mean I'm usually a busy and tired guy). The first 3/4 of the book was like that for me, but the final 1/4 of the book, the part that dealt with the actual journey of these two men to the south pole, I read in just a few days because I liked it so much. I pulled a couple very late nights towards the end of the book.

The author presented this history not pretending to hide his own biases. He was very obviously impressed with Amundsen's leadership style, his preparation and technical knowledge. He quite obviously loathed Scott's leadership style and his inept ability at polar exploration. To be fair though, he has the data to back up his conclusion, and I found it difficult to not side with the author in admiring Amundsen and his preparation, leadership, and optimism.

I will admit that I found the account of Scott and his 4 companion's deaths one of the more sad deaths I have ever read. Notwithstanding the evidence that Scott's ignorance brought their deaths upon them and that it could have been prevented with a bit of foresight, I felt an amazing sadness for those men. The author describes well, their state of mind as they raced against odds to safety, as they slowly began to realize that they were in a race for their very lives. When they finally realized their own deaths were imminent and that no help was forthcoming, they hunkered down in a tent and for nine days burned through their remaining fuel and food while furiously writing letters and journal entries. I can't even imagine what must have gone through their minds.

It was an amazing book, and I enjoyed it. I'm also glad I'm done, as finishing it was for me a lengthy journey in and of itself! ...more

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Sep 23, 2012 Lisa (Harmonybites) rated it really liked it

Recommends it for: Anyone Interested in Antarctica, Leadership, Exploration

Shelves: history, non-fiction, 2012-around-the-world, biography, travel

This book is many things: the story of the race to the South Pole, a dual biography of the rivals, Englishman Captain Robert F. Scott and Norwegian Roald Amundsen, adventure and exploration of the Antarctic, and above all a tale of leadership--superb and inept.

The book, which the New York Times book review called "one of the great debunking biographies" was greeted with outrage in Britain, where Scott had achieved mythic status. Scott, who Huntford called "muddle-headed" and a "bungler" embodie This book is many things: the story of the race to the South Pole, a dual biography of the rivals, Englishman Captain Robert F. Scott and Norwegian Roald Amundsen, adventure and exploration of the Antarctic, and above all a tale of leadership--superb and inept.

The book, which the New York Times book review called "one of the great debunking biographies" was greeted with outrage in Britain, where Scott had achieved mythic status. Scott, who Huntford called "muddle-headed" and a "bungler" embodied the spirit of "self-sacrifice." A naval officer who was the epitome of "regimented mediocrity" Scott only became a polar explorer to jump start his stalled career. Huntsman couldn't paint a more stark contrast than that between Scott and Amundsen. Amundsen didn't drift into polar exploration, it was his dream since a teen. Where Scott improvised, Amundsen carefully prepared; he sought men who would take initiative, rather than passively receive orders. Rather than embrace self-sacrifice and suffering as an ideal, Amundsen attacked the problem of polar exploration rationally and efficiently. For him, "adventure is just bad planning." He used skis and dogs; Scott used "man-hauling." It was almost comical at times to read of Scott's mistakes and utter incompetence after having read about how Amundsen led his expedition. Or it might have been, if it wasn't so tragic, such a sheer waste in every sense of the word.

Certainly the contrast between the men and their fates made for gripping reading. This is an intimidatingly long book of over 500 pages--but it read quickly. I have little to complain of Huntford. A touch of misogyny perhaps--which he ironically accused Amundsen of--yet it was the author who made disparaging remarks about women in general, including calling them "predatory." (Scott's wife he described as particularly so, both Scott and Amundsen's mother are portrayed in unflattering lights.) The dogs are depicted as much more endearing. There's a generous use of maps and pictures and the prose alone paints a terrific picture of Antarctica, and he puts in context the history of the times and the countries of the expeditions. I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in Antarctica, polar exploration--and especially the qualities needed in able leadership. ...more

flag 11 likes · Like · see review

Mar 31, 2014 Chris rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

When people ask me about my all-time favourite book it takes about a second and a half for me to reply The Last Place on Earth by Roland Huntford. At one time I would then launch with no further prompting and usually to the distress of my listener on a reverent summary of Huntford’s masterful retelling of the classic tale of Scott and Amundsen’s 1911/1912 race to the South Pole. And in the 20 years since discovering this literary gift I still give the book as my all-time favourite but, fortunate When people ask me about my all-time favourite book it takes about a second and a half for me to reply The Last Place on Earth by Roland Huntford. At one time I would then launch with no further prompting and usually to the distress of my listener on a reverent summary of Huntford’s masterful retelling of the classic tale of Scott and Amundsen’s 1911/1912 race to the South Pole. And in the 20 years since discovering this literary gift I still give the book as my all-time favourite but, fortunately for anyone who still asks, I have quit trying to do justice to Huntford’s book by pinning them into a corner and expounding on its merits with my eyes closed. A few weeks ago, however, I made my third vicarious journey with Huntford to Terra Australis Incognita and was moved to purge myself one last time of the sentiment I have for this skillfully crafted biography.

First and foremost, it is a superb story…

A decade into the Twentieth Century the romance of Britain’s Victorian Era was little more than a fond memory and the nation’s self-esteem lay bleeding on the abandoned ground of the once mighty Empire. While the Edwardians were quietly dropping their heads and rising to leave their seats, an Arthurian hero walked into the world theater and a new hope for the revival of England’s national consciousness took the stage. A son of the crumbling Empire Robert Falcon Scott took up the sword for a people starved for a conqueror. Outwardly confident and undeniably brave he was an almost unbreakable fighter but cursed with critical flaws that carried the seeds of his own death. Driven by a fear that his countrymen could not see and could never abide Scott left his home in 1911 in an ill provisioned and leaky boat with the weight of Britannia on his shoulders and the lives of his fellow expeditioners in his hands. His goal - to stand on the last great undiscovered place on Earth and to retrieve there by placing his feet and his country’s flag upon it both his own self-respect and Britain’s national glory.

In the wings behind Scott, however, lurked his nemesis Roald Amundsen. Calculating, confident, efficient, and hardened by experience - like his homeland in the white north Amundsen was cold and brutally intense. The Viking son of a nation struggling for a voice at the world table, and a protégé of its people’s last hero turned reluctant diplomat, Amundsen came forward to take the mantle of Nordic conquest from Nansen’s failing hands with every intention of snatching Scott’s victory from his.

And so the stage is set, and no fiction writer could have crafted the tale that follows any better than the way that these two men and the characters that supported them carved it in reality. It is a classical drama that incorporates all of the best elements of a good story: a moral message, a noble quest, conflict and resolution, tension and release, intrigue, and even some juicy controversy. The characters are complex, palpable, and their individual qualities can be found plotted all over the wide bell curve of the human condition. And as good as the story of Scott and Amundsen’s race to the South Pole is, it is all the more hypnotic and engaging because it is not a work of fiction. It is not a story broadcast on the narrow bandwidth of a single creator’s circumscribed imagination. It is built from the rich fabric of the real world and its infinite stock of characters and possibilities. The story is real and is, because of that, not just stranger than fiction but far more interesting.

Secondly, the story is relevant…

There is a multi-million dollar business in leadership training and you can spend a ton of money on books, seminars, and classroom and placement training if you feel the need. But I maintain that if you want to keep your money in your pocket and still learn the bulk of what is good and bad in leadership styles and method then The Last Place on Earth is practically the only source of information you will ever need. For Huntford’s biography is not just a fantastic story but an analysis of how and why it unfolded the way that it did; and his analysis cuts deeply into the leadership of both of the story’s main characters.

The dissection is thorough and, in Scott’s case, unsparing. In The Last Place on Earth Huntford reveals Scott as a criminally negligent bungler, impaired by prejudice and governed by childish insecurities. With the obvious depth of Huntford’s research and the clarity of his logical argumentation, The Last Place on Earth did much to bring what many view as a more realistic and objective image of R.F. Scott to a public, especially a British one long accustomed to the consumption of distorted and sanitized images that were in no small part the result of Scott’s own account of the expedition. By refuting with undeniable authority the claim that Scott was the victim of circumstance Huntford’s book brought low a national icon and a storm of severe protest down upon himself; and thus the book takes on with its political impact yet another dimension in a way similar to Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses.

On the other side of the story Huntford says little that is not downright flattering about Amundsen whose preparation, methods, and whose personal traits and attitudes are shown to be not only the main factors of his success in being the first person to stand at the South Pole, but also factors that could lead to little other than success in his or any endeavour. Amundsen, Huntford argues, had no less of an arduous task to perform that Scott and had to perform that task in essentially the same environment under the same conditions. Huntford debunks the claim that Amundsen was the beneficiary of more benign weather and easier ground than was Scott. He goes on to clearly delineate how Amundsen’s tactics were not only designed specifically and consciously to minimize risk from difficult weather and terrain but how failure to employ similar tactics made it virtually impossible for Scott to achieve his goals in all but the most benign polar environment. Amundsen built safety margins that would see him through conditions far worse than he actually encountered, Scott built margins that were inadequate for all but the most forgiving of Antarctic conditions.

Most importantly, however, the tale of Amundsen and Scott is a superbly entertaining drama that will stand the test of time. It has roots deep in the soil of the human condition and speaks to us about things that we are not likely to ever lose our taste for – excitement and adventure, exploration and discovery, contest and victory, and even (especially in the case of the Edwardians) struggle and defeat. And Roland Huntford’s The Last Place on Earth is by far the most superbly crafted retelling of this story.
...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Apr 10, 2008 Jesse rated it really liked it

What I learned: Don't attempt to be the first person to reach the South Pole if you don't really know anything about polar exploration. Also, stories about explorers in Antarctica are less depressing than stories of explorers elsewhere, because nobody lives in Antarctica, so there's no colonialism or genocide involved.

Foolery aside, this is a fascinating book. ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Dec 03, 2011 Zach rated it it was amazing

First off - don't read this book if you really, really like Captain Robert Scott. You probably shouldn't even read it if you even have ever had a slight admiration for him.

Huntford, the author, rips Scott a new one approximately 4,000 times throughout the almost 550 page book. I don't think I need spoilers in this review, as everyone already knows that Amundson the Norwegian won and Scott the Brit lost, so I'll just say it here - I was shocked to hear that technically speaking, poor Scott never First off - don't read this book if you really, really like Captain Robert Scott. You probably shouldn't even read it if you even have ever had a slight admiration for him.

Huntford, the author, rips Scott a new one approximately 4,000 times throughout the almost 550 page book. I don't think I need spoilers in this review, as everyone already knows that Amundson the Norwegian won and Scott the Brit lost, so I'll just say it here - I was shocked to hear that technically speaking, poor Scott never even made it to the South Pole - they were still a few miles off when they brushed off their gloves and said, "welp let's head back."

This book is basically an exacting summary of the ineptitude of the entire British expedition, the "good ol' boy" style of the British upper class that allowed Scott to even get the expedition started, and the unbelievable tyranny of the majority - of both the British and Norwegian populace.

On the contrary, Huntford heaps praises constantly on Amundson, who he seems to greatly admire. It's telling that in the opening pages of the book, Huntford says he is "required to print" a statement from Scott's son complettely disavowing any connection with the book or its author. I should have realized right then that this book was going to completely throw paint on the relatively pristine wall of Scott's reputation.

As far as I can tell Huntford did his homework quite thoroughly before beginning this work (and judging from the pages and pages of resources and citations in the back of the book, it appears he did) - using personal testimonies and the diaries/journals/letters that it seems everyone in the early 20th century enjoyed so much to detail just how organized Amundson was, and how Scott was not.

There's only a few times when Huntford directly compliments Scott - to say that he was a brilliant writer able to capture the public's sympathy, and when talking about his vast stocism. Both of those are rather double-edged. The single time I can recall a compliment freely given is when Scott is talking to his men about science before starting out from the pole, where Huntford seems to sadly say that he missed a much safer calling that he really could have shined in.

I almost wanted to give the book 4 stars for two reasons: I felt that many more diagrams, and better made, might make the reader's tracking of the two racing groups easier, and also because it really did start to wear on me with just how merciless Huntford was in biting into almost every aspect of Scott's character. And the part that perhaps Sir Peter Scott, the son, disagreed with the most was the fact that Huntford felt the need to mention that Scott's wife (Peter's mother) briefly had an affair with Amundson's Norwegian mentor while her husband was exploring the pole seemed a bit unnecessary.

However, the book is worth five stars for the sheer detail and exciting way that Huntford writes. There's a lot of setup in the early part of the book (it's even set up into book 1 and 2) that was a little bit slower to read, but when the men are all at the edges of Antarctica and champing at the bit to get going, the story flows along as easily as sledges on hard packed snow.

It was only fitting that I finished the book while my plane was flying over the southern tip of Greenland, where Amundson's mentor became famous. Staring down at the endless icy expanse below my 747, I can only imagine what it was like for them. And thanks to this book, my imagination was able to become a lot more vivid. ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Aug 06, 2015 lavinia rated it it was amazing

Shelves: history, growth

(Short note: Forget about Jules Verne's, Charles Dickens's, Mark Twain's or whatever other adventure stories you might have read growing up. This is the ultimate adventure book and it's stunning because IT ALL HAPPENED!!)

As I was browsing through a random book at Fram Museum in Oslo a few months ago, my eyes rested on a small passage of Amundsen's letter that he left at the South Pole: he was wishing all the best to the British explorer Scott, who was expected to reach the Pole later, and tellin ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Mar 08, 2017 Shreyas Garg rated it it was amazing

Shelves: nonfiction

Not exactly "Scott and Amundsen" as much as "Amundsen, with a dash of Scott". The focus of this book is primarily Roald Amundsen, and with good reason. The story of Amundsen is a fascinating story of human intelligence and learning, more than grit and passion as Scott would make it seem. The book is stunningly researched with a wealth of first accounts put together in a coherent narrative that flows from adventure to adventure. It is hard to grasp the number of sources Huntford has referred to w ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Jun 30, 2020 Kathy Thelen rated it really liked it

Really great as a study in contrasting leadership styles (or, rather, how to and not to lead, since Huntford was pretty obvious that one -- Amundsen -- was good and one --Scott--was disastrously bad). Kind of hard to follow the actual paths of these guys (though admittedly, i was mostly listening to this while running so I had no map handy). But it's just a great story of these two guys, and the stark contrasts between them, esp in how they prepared and organized their respective journeys, how t ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Jun 07, 2008 Myka rated it it was amazing

Recommends it for: everyone!

Huntford wrote the definitive book on the famous Race to the South Pole between Englishman Robert F. Scott and Norwegian Roald Amundsen. Not to give it away, but-- Amundsen won!

Huntford crafted more than an historical account of the two expeditions. The Last Place on Earth intertwines the biographies of two very different men and examines their competing world views using the race as a lens. To research the book, he combed through all manner of records from military reports and bank statements t ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Mar 17, 2012 Tim rated it liked it

Roland Huntford's take on the race to the South Pole is fascinating, often riveting. But his relentless bashing of Robert Falcon Scott gets a bit tiresome. I'm far from an expert; it seems much of the criticism of Scott is deserved if one looks strictly at what was the most efficient and safest way to the pole. Roald Amundsen is so prepared and efficient that it almost takes the fun out of his first-to-the-pole feat. Scott, who of course died on his way back after losing the race to the pole, in ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Feb 05, 2009 Eric_W rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: nautical-non-fiction

I've always been struck by the fact that the British revere Scott, a miserable failure, in my estimation. He was smug, didn't do his homework, and wasted resources on a doomed effort. Amundsen, on the other hand, studied the Eskimos to learn how to survive in harsh arctic conditions, learned how to use dogs, including eating them as they went along, and he breezed to the South Pole and back almost as easily as a walk in the park. Scott insisted on taking mules, which required that he haul hay al ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

May 21, 2018 Nadia rated it liked it

It was obvious from Scott's own diaries that he was a bit petty and overly dramatic, and that his expedition to the South Pole was somewhat poorly organised, but this (very entertaining) book makes it sound even worse, something akin to a Laurel and Hardy movie in terms of incompetence. More than anything though, it's clear that the author really, really hates R.F. Scott. Roland Huntford hates Scott with the fire of a thousand suns. Roland Huntford hates Scott so much, it's as if Scott had taken It was obvious from Scott's own diaries that he was a bit petty and overly dramatic, and that his expedition to the South Pole was somewhat poorly organised, but this (very entertaining) book makes it sound even worse, something akin to a Laurel and Hardy movie in terms of incompetence. More than anything though, it's clear that the author really, really hates R.F. Scott. Roland Huntford hates Scott with the fire of a thousand suns. Roland Huntford hates Scott so much, it's as if Scott had taken Huntford's pet hamster and put him in a microwave and then stomped on whatever was left of it after that. Huntford hates Scott as if Scott had killed Huntford's mother personally and then insulted her a couple times for good measure.

In a way, the book is more revealing of Huntford than Scott or Amundsen. Everything Amundsen does is justified and excused, whereas Huntford doesn't have a single good thing to say about Scott, to an almost comical extent. Even benign aspects of Scott's biography are seen as proof of his flaws: marrying an interesting woman is interpreted as a sign that Scott was a hen-pecked loser, for example, and every time Huntford mentions Scott's wife, his words are dripping with thinly veiled misogyny. Huntford appears to worship a particular narrow view of masculinity and 'proper' male behaviour, and those who fit it are his heroes, no matter what (Amundsen, Scott's Polar companion Oates), whereas those who reveal themselves to be too insecure, melancholic or sentimental are reviled (Scott himself, Wilson, or Amundsen's man Johansen).

Strangely enough, I came out of it with a more forgiving attitude towards Scott than before. It's clear that both explorers were very flawed as human beings (like we all are) and as leaders. Amundsen made mistakes, too (such as initially starting on the Polar journey too early in the season, a decision that almost ended in disaster), and there were plenty of unsavoury aspects about his character, too. Nobody's perfect, and all pedestals are bound to crumble. But it's easier for me to empathise with Scott's indecision, his depression, his worries, his bursts of emotion, his jealousy, because he lays them bare for all to see. I feel that I know him better. Amundsen's distant, determined competence remains inaccessible to me.

In the end, it's undeniable that Amundsen was the better explorer, but Scott had the better story. And even though Huntford may disagree (which would be strange for a writer, though!), the story is actually just as important as the expedition. Going to the Pole is meaningless in and of itself: it's just a spot in a barren place. The whole point of an exploration is to let others know what you've found, and not just as data, but also to give them something to be excited and dream about. Amundsen may have been prepared for all other aspects of his journey, but if he could not tell a good story, then he neglected something very important, while Scott's people ran with it.

It's a good read, though!

...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Nov 16, 2017 Florence rated it really liked it

It was still the age of discovery, the start of the twentieth century. The North Pole had just been conquered. No one had yet been to the South Pole. Norway was still a backward country ruled by Sweden, badly in need of a national hero. Roald Amundsen was born to be an explorer. Once he had decided to conquer the South Pole, he let nothing stand in his way. A natural leader, he painstakingly provided his men with all they needed for survival in a hostile, frozen continent. British Commander Scot ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jan 13, 2019 Kristina rated it it was amazing

Shelves: on-the-shelf

Inspiring and detailed story of how to properly plan, prepare and execute something ambitious that hasn't been done before.
Huntford has two parallel paths going: to success, and to failure. And two characters that could not be more different with more different endings to their lives. One of my favourite paragraphs at the end of the book summarises the fundamentals: 'Scott wanted to be a hero; Amundsen merely wanted to get to the Pole. Scott, with his instinct for self-dramatization, was playin ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

May 19, 2019 Mike Barnett rated it it was amazing

A bit pedantic and repetitive at times as the author never misses even one sentence to remind you how much of a buffoon Scott was and how great Amundsen was. But still an amazing book to read and a really interesting idea about what we take for heroism and what we don't. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Oct 01, 2018 Judith added it

Shelves: 2018-read-harder-challenge

How (not) to win friends and influence people

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Dec 13, 2018 Janola rated it really liked it

I love me a good arctic adventure story and this was certainly that.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jun 13, 2017 Rikke rated it really liked it

Shelves: explorers-and-adventurers

A well-told tale of the two polar explorers, their two different national cultures, their different strengths and weaknesses as men and as leaders and how the complex interplay between it all had a profound influence not only on them in their time, but also on how we remember them.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Mar 14, 2019 Jack Heath marked it as to-read

Shelves: category-a-adventure

Synopsis: in the early twentieth century, getting to the South Pole was the challenge. Britain's Robert Scott and Norway's Roald Amundsen tried. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Feb 13, 2018 Venkiteswaran Ramasamy rated it it was amazing

Not too often does one come across a book that is thrill-a-minute & adrenaline pumping, is a study in planning, leadership styles & crisis management and is non-fictional, fully based on real life events.

As far as personalities go, Amundsen and Scott were the proverbial poles apart. And that’s probably what set them apart in their pursuit for pole position in the race to the South pole. Huntford does a wonderful comparative character study, although his no holds barred all out attack on Scott do ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jul 12, 2009 Herb Hastings rated it it was amazing

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. I love this book. It brings the early 20th century era of polar exploration to life.( My edition was marred by several typos but not enough to damage the pleasure to be found in this book.) It not only covers the period leading up to Amundsen and Scott's race to the pole, but also is a detailed biography of each. The contrast between these two men is epic. Amundsen spent years preparing for travel in the polar regions. He studied those who went before, learned from the native peoples who live in ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jul 08, 2014 Rodrigo rated it really liked it · review of another edition

This is an amazing book. It is thrilling and at the same time very interesting from the historical point of view. The only thing that may be considered a weakness is the bias that the book carries so strongly. Scott is depicted as such a feeble character in so many words that it is sometimes hard to imagine that so many people believed in his competence for so long. But it is a good, interesting and entertaining book, very well writen and highly recommended.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Oct 20, 2016 Kavanand (Reading for Two) rated it liked it

Shelves: antarctica, nonfiction

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. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Mar 30, 2013 Joe rated it really liked it

An amazing leadership case study!

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jun 08, 2020 Neil Kenealy rated it it was amazing

The book starts out as two separate biographies of Roald Amundson from Norway and Robert Falcon Scott from England. the story is told from before both births right up to when they raced to the South Pole in 1911/1912. This book came out first in 1979 when everyone associated with the expedition was long dead. Scott had been elevated to the national hero of the British Empire but this book debunked that myth and caused controversy in Britain. Telford proves that Scott made huge mistakes even all The book starts out as two separate biographies of Roald Amundson from Norway and Robert Falcon Scott from England. the story is told from before both births right up to when they raced to the South Pole in 1911/1912. This book came out first in 1979 when everyone associated with the expedition was long dead. Scott had been elevated to the national hero of the British Empire but this book debunked that myth and caused controversy in Britain. Telford proves that Scott made huge mistakes even allowing for the lack of information and technology available back then. In terms of discovery of new land, he actually only had to go 150 nautical miles further than Shackleton.

This was a time of huge technological advancement. One ship ran on a new diesel engine but another used steam. Scott's motor sledge was hot off the invention and design table from Wolsey. Wireless was almost available then but it was important for the story that they were outside radio contact. Without wireless, they can be away and not have interference from financiers, navy, king, press, or family so they can ask for forgiveness later. It was probably the last expedition to have that thrill and luxury.

There's a huge rivalry between the two men and it's told like an adventure thriller. Amundsen was chomping at the bit to get started and almost screwed up because he left on September 10 which was too early in the Antarctic spring. The temperature went to minus 50 and he nearly lost a few men. That was weird behaviour for Amundson but he was pretty straightforward and practical for the rest of the expedition. You're flipped from one expedition to the other - chapter by chapter. I was exhausted reading this because I'd just gotten up to the 10,000-foot high plateau around the pole with the Norwegians and then I had to do it all over again with the gallant Brits and their man-hauling.

Telford seems to be erudite in his research although Kathleen Scott's affair with Nansen was contested by Scott's son Peter later. Another factoid was how Scott checked with his only Norwegian crew member when he got Amundsen's telegraph saying he was going for the South Pole. There are also interesting snippets of information like Amundsen casually checking the mast of Scott's Terra Nova ship for an aerial for wireless when he was invited in for dinner by Scott's ship when it visited the Bay of Whales. Amundson's team was well hosted by Scott's officer Campbell but he admitted that their dinner when coming south from New Zealand could be tainted by the ponies quartered directly above them. Leaves an image that's hard to erase from the reader's mind.

As they get close to the pole there is a gradual ramping up of the stakes as it becomes a life or death struggle for Scott's polar party. At the same time, Amundsen's main concern was about controlling how to get the message out to the world when they reach a cable connection to home.

A little advice on keeping track of the characters as you read. The indexes on each person on the expedition are very thorough so it's good to flip over to them even though in Scott's expedition it will show you who is going to live or die. Also, the book was written over forty years ago and there have been reactions to the book since so it's no harm to be checking Wikipedia as you go along. It adds to the enjoyment of this book.

Paul Theroux's preview sums it up best. He says: When you finish it, you know more about human nature for it is more than a book about the South Pole. It is about two explorers, two cultures, and about the nature of exploration itself, which is a counterpoint to the creative impulse, requiring mental courage, imagination, and a leap of faith.
...more

flag Like · see review

Mar 16, 2018 Harrison rated it really liked it

Shelves: classics, nonfiction

It's long and slow, like a long hike to the South Pole, but don't let that fool you. This thing is like "Antarctic Citizen Kane."

Huntford takes 100 pages establishing Amundsen's skill and acumen. Then in about 40, he dismantles the myth of Scott. The book that follows from this set-up functions as a revisionist history in which Amundsen's name is elevated at the expense of Scott's mythmaking, and in between are fresh insights on how geopolitical PR campaigns have long had a lasting influence on ...more

flag Like · see review

May 12, 2019 Carl Barlow rated it really liked it

Huntford does not suffer fools gladly, and, by Christ, does he consider Scott a fool.

He has absolutely nothing good to say about an explorer more widely regarded as an ill-fated hero, other than back-handed compliments on his ability as a writer. He blames Scott almost exclusively for the tragedy at the South Pole (though he does also, more generally, lay blame to British Navy methods and, by extension, British attitudes of the the time). He derides Scott's inability to learn from his mistakes, ...more

flag Like · see review

Apr 26, 2020 Jude rated it liked it

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, ...more

flag Like · see review