Comments on: Scott of the Antarctic

By: red shoes for men

red shoes for men — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 02:59:41 +0000

I was reading where someone was recommending straw. The truth is we need to hold big oil accountable for clean up the mess they have created!

By: Marlon Bouley

Marlon Bouley — Thu, 06 May 2010 08:47:20 +0000

Howdy there,I obtain that your website is incredibly instructive and useful and we were curious if there is a possibility of getting More articles like this on your weblog. If you willing to help us out, we will be willing to compensate you… Sincerely, Marlon Bouley

By: xtr

xtr — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:03:43 +0000

The notion that Scott encountered “unseasonably” cold weather has now been put to question by new scientific proof. They claim the blizzard didn’t last for more than the usual two-four days, and not ten as Scott writes. And as every attempt to recereate the race has shown, the Norwegians win every time! In crushing style! And remember, Scott used clothing which had already proved faulty on previous missions. And as you write yourself, Amundsen learned what to wear from the experts, the inuits. Amundsen’s type of clothing is still used as a model in these dire elements today. Now, who are you gonna trust in a blizzard? The amateur or the true explorer? Scott wrote frequently about his team freezing, Amundsen didn’t mention the cold with one word!

The BBC series “The Great Race”, which is one of those later reacreations of the race, follows a Norwegian and British team battling it out on Greenland (as it’s not longer possible to bring dogs to the Antarctic). Now, what is the Norwegians doing the evening before the race starts? They check up on their equipment to make sure everything works and nothing it left to chance. The Brits? They go to the local bar! I almost laughed my ass off, in such a comical way the series managed to tell the simple difference in mentality between two nations, in reality the same as it was one hundred years ago:

The efficient, simple, and ultimately slightly boring Norwegians/Scandinavians, against the arrogant, dreamy Britons with their slightly perverse approach to heroism still intact.

By: shazza

shazza — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 14:06:47 +0000

love the stories, but i thought the horses that Scott took with him were Mancurian, not Mongolian!

Must check it out, maybe they are the same??

By: Akash

Akash — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 06:47:21 +0000

Sorry about the NPR thing. That really sucked.

By: jackr

jackr — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:23:02 +0000

At the risk of dwelling on a secondary point … you’re so right: something’s wrong with how we’re taught writing (how I was, at any rate). Up through high school, I couldn’t write. My head was filled with “paragraph transitions” and structures and rules, but I couldn’t write. Worse, when I slaved to follow the rules I was given, I could never understand what my teachers were saying, as they obliterated my pages with comments.

Then, in college, I desperately took (yet) another writing class, and this time the prof began “first, you need something to say.” I was thunderstruck! It seems incredible now, but no one had ever told me that writing was about conveying meaning, that all these rules and techniques are tools for clarity, that “what you have to say” is the thing you must think of first.

So, thanks for having so many things worth saying!

By: Francis

Francis — Mon, 21 May 2007 11:39:53 +0000

Hi Patrick,

Excellent podcast, I very much enjoyed it.

Also, I love the new (old?) website! The best of luck with the endeavor!

–
Francis

By: Julie D.

Julie D. — Fri, 18 May 2007 15:43:28 +0000

A really fantastic story and your telling of it was wonderful. Thank you.

By: Patrick McLean

Patrick McLean — Thu, 17 May 2007 16:06:30 +0000

Dave,

I really do appreciate the attention to detail. But I did say Amundsen.

Record yourself saying Amundsen. See if you can say it without any hint of the ‘d’ creeping in there. I think it’s an artifact of the way the mouth closes to say the ‘m’

It’s similar to ‘this year’ becoming ‘thishear’. Another example is “Wriggleworth” vs. “Wrigglesworth” The second is easier to say because of the way your mouth moves.

Anyway, I was trying not to say the nonexistent ‘d’ (notice, the name is spelled correctly in the post) but I suspect it’s kind of impossible. Seriously, I’ve been sitting here saying ‘Amundsen’ to myself for 10 minutes now.

By: Patrick McLean

Patrick McLean — Thu, 17 May 2007 15:42:58 +0000

Land of the Bear. That’s awesome, I had no idea.

As for the typos, well, I’m trying to adhere to my rigrous standard of semi-professionalism.

By: Chris from Detroit

Chris from Detroit — Thu, 17 May 2007 15:18:07 +0000

Wow. This one really got me. There’s something about the last words of a dying man who faces the end bravely … the words hang in the air after they’re read. Excellent job with this one, P.

Oh, and it’s “Antarctic,” from “anti” + “arktikos” (land of the bear, i.e. Ursa Major).

Keep up the good work!

By: St. Michael

St. Michael — Thu, 17 May 2007 14:02:56 +0000

Beautiful episode, Patrick. If writing that clear and concise an beautiful can be written while freezing, knowingly, to one’s death, then surely the rest of us cannot complain that writing is hard.

–
M

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 17 May 2007 12:08:27 +0000

Let me be the first to say thanks for the new episode, with one minor quibble: the Norwegian explorer’s name was AMUNDSEN, not ADMUNDSEN. Seems a pretty petty thing for me to pick up on, but hell – I’m a proofreader by trade, and these things just stand out to me like a thumb that’s just been hammered.

Need a proofreader?

(I love the podcasts, and I’m looking forward eagerly to future incarnations of ‘How to Succeed in Evil’)