I have just finished reading “The Worst Journey in the World” by Apsley Cherry-Garrard, and the title of this post is a quote from this book.  I confess that it has brought tears to my eyes. I already have two other half-finished posts, just waiting on some final research and editing, but I can’t wait to share the emotions which this book has inspired in me. This is absolutely due to Cherry-Garrard’s writings, and the insight he has given to us to his personal experiences and his inner thoughts.

By the end of the book, he has laid out the whole tragedy of Scott’s Polar Journey, although this represents only a small part. Cherry-Garrard naturally presents his experiences during the years in Antarctica, leaving the details of the final Polar Journey to be told by those who were actually there (via their journals and their letters). However, in those things left unsaid, coupled with our knowledge of the tragic outcome, what becomes fascinating is the telling of the events which preceded Scott’s death, as well as some of the events which came shortly after.

I will write later on the actual journey which is the subject of the book – the journey which Cherry-Garrard, Wilson and Bowers undertook during the winter of 1911.

For now, I want to share what I have come to realise about the whole business of Antarctic exploration, which has somehow been brought into the sharp light in the reading of this book.

In an earlier blog, at the start of my reading, I marvelled that these men faced such hardship and danger, and sometimes death, in their quest for knowledge. But it has been made clear that the fact that this expedition was committed to (and succeeded in) so much scientific research could almost certainly have contributed to the failure of the Polar Journey.

Cherry-Garrard writes: “Such tragedies inevitably raise the question, ‘Is it worth it?’ What is worth what? Is life worth risking for a feat, or losing for your country? To face a thing because it was a feat, and only a feat, was not very attractive to Scott: it had to contain an additional object – knowledge.”

And it was definitely the single reason why the winter journey took place. So, while it was a blow for the expedition that the conquest of the South Pole was not to be theirs, the value of their research in many areas, should not be undervalued. Just their experiences and their failures have added new knowledge for explorers who came afterwards.

“And I believe that in a vague intangible way there was an ideal in front of and behind this work. It is really not desirable for men who do not believe that knowledge is of value for its own sake to take up this kind of work” A stark reminder to the rest of us, of the risk without glory, of a career in polar exploration!

And Cherry-Garrard goes on with a dig at people who do not believe the value of seeking out knowledge. “The question constantly put to us in civilisation was and still is: ‘What is the use? Is there gold? Or Is there coal?’ The commercial spirit of the present day can see no good in pure science: the English manufacturer is not interested in research which will not give him a financial return within one year: the city man sees in it only so much energy wasted on unproductive work: truly they are bound to the wheel of conventional life.”

But, as Cherry-Garrard lamented, the goal of the Pole was necessary to lure the backing of those who could provide the much-needed financial support.

Nevertheless, even at the time of writing, he looked forward to the day when countries would support the quest for new knowledge for its own sake, and commit resources to it to better ensure its success.

“Cabinet ministers and voters alike must learn to value knowledge that is not baited by suffering and death.”

So, I think that, while we, spectators to this history, universally accept that knowledge is a worthy goal, the fact that this particular expedition was played out in the public arena as a race between Scott and Amundsen, did much to belittle the scientific worth of Scott’s expedition in the eyes of the world at the time. Rather than see the outcome of the race in the context of the wider accomplishments, it seems that there was nevertheless the taint of failure.

This is evidenced by the subsequent investigation into the journeys of the two explorers, the comparisons between them and their approaches, and the disagreements which exist in the public arena as to whether mistakes were made or blame should be cast. Personally, I have no desire to review any of these arguments. Importantly, lessons can be learned. But not at the expense of others, as a ‘post mortem’ (almost literally) after an eminent track record of success, by both explorers.

In his final words of the book, Cherry-Garrard says, “There are many reasons which send men to the Poles, and the Intellectual Force uses them all. But the desire for knowledge for its own sake is the one which really counts and there is no field for the collection of knowledge which at the present time can be compared to the Antarctic.”

The last sentence in Apsley Cherry-Garrard’s book is an amusing metaphorical comment about being clear on your goals (particularly if you are an explorer!). You really need to read the whole book to get the significance, but I will share it with you anyway, not the least because it gives you a glimpse of the humour which he brought to his writing.

 

“If you march your Winter Journeys you will have your reward, so long as all you want is a penguin’s egg.”