CompleteMartialArts.com - Cook & Peary: The Polar Controversy, Resolved
|
List Price: $50.00
Our Price: $18.00
Your Save: $ 32.00 ( 64% )
Availability: N/A
Manufacturer: Stackpole Books
|
Average Customer Rating:  
|
|
Binding: Hardcover
Dewey Decimal Number: 910.91632
EAN: 9780811703178
ISBN: 0811703177
Label: Stackpole Books
Manufacturer: Stackpole Books
Number Of Items: 1
Number Of Pages: 1133
Publication Date: 1997-02
Publisher: Stackpole Books
Studio: Stackpole Books
|
|
|
|
|
|
Editorial Reviews:
|
On September 1, 1909, Frederick A. Cook announced that he had reached the North Pole. Five days later Commander Robert E. Peary claimed the honor. Through his completely documented research, author Robert Bryce reconstructs events and presents the explorers, their motivations, and their accomplishments in their own words and in the words of their contemporaries. 125 photos.
|
|
|
Spotlight customer reviews:
|
Customer Rating:
Summary: A Journey to Savor
Comment: One of my favorites among my polar exploration books, this ginormous slab of a tome might chill the reader's initial interest with its iceberg-like heft--were it not so absorbing on every page. The author plumbs deeply into the motivations of these two different, yet equally conflicted and complicated men and sketches in fine detail their cultural milieu.
When reading of Cook's later career, I was fascinated to get a sense of the vaudeville and chautauqua worlds, not to mention the wildcat oil world in Texas. The icy, haughty Peary comes off as a less sympathetic character, but still fascinating, with a nature of such crusty cast iron that he explored Arctic regions while missing seven frozen-off toes.
I like to reread this book every other year or so to reacquaint myself with the frenzied quest for the Pole and the whole bubbling societal swirl accompanying that quest.
Favorite quote: "Cook was a liar and a gentleman, and Peary was neither."
Customer Rating: 
Summary: A picture is worth a thousand words
Comment: Much more than about the race to the pole, but about all those who went on any of the expeditions, financed it, or later tried to prove or disprove Cook or Peary's claims including Congress, the newspapers, the National Geographic Society and others. The National Geogrphic Society was not made up of thousands of members as it is today and its president was apparently very pro Peary, to the point that they were offering him money and speaking engagements before their sub committee confirmed Peary's accomphlishment with little proof presented to them. It also explains how even before Cook returned a plan was set in motion to discredit him by attacking him along six points. They bribed Cook's climbing partner to the top of McKinley to say they did not make it, but had him vanish so not to be cross examianed. They attacked the distances Cook claimed to have travelled, until they realized that Peary claimed to have travelled even further per day on his trip. It also includes a lengthy discussion of Cook business dealing in oil exploration and fraud charges and trail (having enough mysteries to solve I think it could have perhaps just been summarized).
Finally the author gets to the point where he discusses the claims of each explorer. He decides that since Cook's discredited McKinley climb is what turned the public from his polar claim he needed to look at that first. After concluding that he failed to climb McKinley he states inconsistently that it does not mean anything about his pole attempt. He starts off the climbs discussion with Washburn's contention that it was impossible to do in the time Cook said he did it. He counter's that the Sourdough's climb took less so Cook could have done it! But at the end he seems to discredit their climb as well. But first he decides to drag us threw allot of evidence. He concludes that his pictures are faked. Allowing that perhaps they were mislabeled and/or subituted for the real pictures when they did not turn out he argues that if that is the case these photos would not have been taken on the way up (he does not explain how he knows they were taken on the way up or how they turn out to be so similar to actual top. Still he concludes faked pictures do not prove he did not go to the top. So what does? Cook's diary includes many of the features along the route but omits many, including the numerous mountains he would have to climb to get to McKinley along the route he claimed. This is what the Mazamas concluded, when climbing his route to prove Cook's claim was legitimate and is shown on a map much earlier in the book. This is what was so confusing to me was why this was being at least temporarily rejected in this chapter. He now presents Waale's theory of a different route which lines up with Cook's diary. Washburn concedes this but again says it would be too hard. The author examines these claims more closely by refering to the orginal diary and ekplains how these were mis-intrepeted. Somewhere in there another climber shows how one could get to one of the ridges, which Parker and others said was impossible back in about 1910. Here the book would be much better with some diagrams and pictures of the routes being discussed with the difficutlies clearly shown.
The book looks at Peary's claim to have made it to the Pole first. He reason's that if Peary could have made 50 miles in one day than Cook could have made it to the Pole as well. He explains why in rough ice this is impossible. He does not explain why smooth ice could not explain this, perhaps becuase his diary does not claim this. He does not explain what 50 miles he is talking about. He quotes another saying the proof is in the character of the man, his narrative, and least important the nautical observations since these can be faked. Because of all of Peary's prior false claims he has no character (can the same be said of Cook's claim of Mckinley?) and no else has presented a pro-Peary narrative. But the author does not sketch out in the slightest what Peary claims he did or of those who think he did not make it! Again a map of his route and what lattitude others in his party turned back would have been most helpful. Peary's diary with loose and blank pages is very suspect, and the National Geographic article which the book refers describes all of this far better than this book, with maps, pictures of the diary.
The cook journey is much more complex. So I will go into only one point which still confuses me. The author argues that cook said he would expect to make only 10 miles a day, so why should we belive he made 15-17 miles a day. Instead realizing he could not make it he turned back very early. The author does not explain why if Cook thought he would go 10 miles a day, why he was not prepared to do so and had to turn back. Nor why he would not continue on in hopes of finding easier going ahead.
Customer Rating:
Summary: An exhaustive look at the Cook/Peary polar controversy...
Comment: In early 1909, Frederick A. Cook emerged from the arctic wastes to claim primacy in attaining the North Pole. Five days later, Cook's former mentor, Robert E. Peary, emerged to claim the same while systematically attempting to destroy the claim of his newfound rival. What followed was a controversy of bitter and lasting enmity that raged through the press, the public, and the scientific community here and abroad.Robert Bryce has compiled a painstakingly detailed analysis of the Cook/Peary controversy that is awesome in its' depth. Separated into two parts, he first submits a complete biography of the two explorers and then follows with his resolution of fact and fiction regarding their two respective claims. Bryce not only peered closely at these two antagonists, but at the institutions within which the controversy swirled. His commentary on the roles played by the New York Times and the National Geographic Society are highly illuminating as are his depictions of the ardent supporters and detractors of either side. Both Peary and Cook are tragic figures displayed in the throes of their obsessions and, yet, Bryce admirably presents an impartial, objective picture. His final analysis is shrewd, though compassionate. Frederick A. Cook, regardless of final resolution, remains an enigma. The depth of this man's psyche is plumbed so exquisitely by Bryce that Cook's mental machinations ultimately outweigh the question the book attempts to answer. Who truly stepped first upon the North Pole? Surprisingly, by the time Robert M. Bryce completes his fascinating story, this is not the foremost question in the readers' mind. One can rest assured, however, that Bryce's effort is as thoroughly fulfilling a treatment of the subject as one may hope to find.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Another Title to Read.
Comment: I have not yet read this book, however I feel the most definitive book on this subject is "A Noose of Laurels" by Wally Herbert. Mr. Herbert is an accomplished polar explorer, his knowledge of navigation is what makes his analysis of the Peary-Cook controversy so compelling. I feel no study of this subject can be made without starting with this book.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Mystery Solved
Comment: I came to this book after reading an illustrated article in a climbing magazine showing the photographs of Bradford Washburn to disprove Cook's claim to have climbed Mt. McKinley. That issue is thoroughly covered in this book by Robert Bryce but it is very much secondary to the larger issue of the discovery of the North Pole. It is true that the book could have used some editing to lesson the author's habit of mixing unimportant facts with the important. Still, a reading of the book and a review of the bibliography and source notes, along with a recognition of the number of books already written on this topic, made me realize the heroic task the author undertook to bring this book in under 2,000 pages. The fact that there is enough information to publish a 2,000 page books explains why this book is readable, and even compelling, at almost 1,000 pages in the main text. It is not a sterile recitation of a long series of facts. We become acquainted with American society as it existed at the turn of the last century, the habits of the newspaper industry, the lecture circuit and vaudeville as prime entertainment, and there is even a long digression into oil stock fraud. We learn the history, character and motives of numerous minor players in the polar fraud controversy. I even found much of Cook's writings and personal philosophy to be compelling. The long trail to the conclusion that fraud was perpetrated by both men leaves the reader with not only with the facts, but with an explanation. I think that understanding why these men did what they did is as valuable as the feeling that the mystery has been solved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|