Sunday, 29 January 2012

Scott's Last Expedition at the Natural History Museum

An ultimately dishonest exhibition with nothing mentioned about the long catalogue of bungling by Scott as compared to Amundsen's common sense and efficiency.


  1. was sentimental about eating the dogs in his typical English way when it was quite obvious that they were the best way of having self-transporting fresh meat,
  2. allowed the engineer (who was the only one who could have have fixed those fragile-looking polar exploration vehicles) to be prevented from joining that polar expedition by one of his team for reasons of rank, 
  3. set his base camp in just the wrong place to reach the South Pole because that was the best place for the scientific expedition (Mixed objectives meant a loss of focus on the main objective, which was that of getting there first and coming back alive.)
  4. lugged around 30lb of rock specimens etc etc etc

Why are the English celebrating the life of a bungler? Have they run out of heroes to celebrate? 

It would have been a better exhibition if it had compared Amundsen with Scott more and went into more detail about how Scott fucked up, instead of trying to big up the scientific success of it. 

Maybe the English are now so sad and demented they celebrate bunglers, thinking that would make them feel better. 

Why do they celebrate fools and knaves, especially failed fools and knaves?

Whose damn fool idea was this anyway? reveals that the Exhibition Curator, one Elin Simonssen, is female and is more interested in the DOMESTIC ARRANGEMENTS of Scott's Hut, rather than his mistakes, which I would have thought would be the most important lessons to be learnt from this sad story.   

If you like the idea of walking around what is a model of the hut, looking at the dinner table, looking at where they all slept, what they ate, the design of food containers, crockery, cutlery etc, then this exhibition is for you.   If you just want to know EXACTLY WHAT WENT WRONG, you will find this exhibition of Scott's Domestic Arrangements for Girls certainly NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.   

Why the fuck do the feminazis have to girlify EVERYTHING when there are actually profound moral and logistical lessons to be learnt from this doomed expedition?   

Scott is English amateurism at its worst.  If the English had any pride at all they would be ashamed of Scott, and see his style of leadership - a toxic form of incompetence, stupidity, weakness, arrogance and sentimentality - as dangerously still very much alive and well in 21st century Britain.

Why would they choose to celebrate failure?  Because they are degenerate, demented and depraved, probably, or have allowed women to do their thinking for them.  After all, he was a handsome sort of chap, was he not?

Go, but go only if you are a girl or a girly sort of guy.  If you want to know what went wrong then you might just as well read the excellent Wikipedia entry at

No comments: