LAUSR

importance of the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, Bones (Chapter 10) delves into the complexities of relationships between politics and polar science. Drawing on incidents in Norway’s history, he discusses how factors influencing international development in the Arctic contrast with those in Antarctica. At the time of writing this review, I was following the progress of the Antarctic Circumnavigation Expedition 2016– 2017. Participants aboard the expedition’s ship, like the authors in this book, are men and women from several disciplines, from several nations and with a range of experience. When the ship berthed in Hobart, I met scientists involved in the expedition. Also on-board were journalists, photographers and filmmakers. Despite challenges and disappointments, there was a driving enthusiasm with resultant successes and no noted mention of inequalities. While understandably focused on their own careers, they were enthusiastic about the opportunities for collaborative, yet competitive, projects and optimistic about the potential for us all to gain a better understanding of Antarctic and global systems, through science and art. In contrast to those on-board the ship, a number of contributors to this book, I felt, wrote with limited optimism for future potential and as if, troubled by inequalities of gender, race or funding, they are burdened with an overwhelming sense of academic injustice. Instead of promoting and celebrating the advances made by the humanities in Antarctica, they chose to use the book as a vehicle to convey their grievances to a readership possibly similarly aggrieved. The value of an inflexible polemic stance to the Antarctic discourse and allusions to ‘science envy’ is questionable when there are numerous examples of people overcoming undeniable inequality. The physical Antarctic space has been subjected to territorial claims and changing politics, but there is intellectual space for the pursuit of the sciences and the humanities, and for their fusion in respectful alliances. Adrian Howkins cites historian Ursula Rack (Chapter 11), who collated meteorological information garnered from log books and diaries of early explorers and collaborated in a comparative study of terrestrial magnetism. Expedition diaries can claim an exclusive genre in Antarctic literature and, as noted in Part I (Leane, Chapter 2), many were written by scientists recording their work and describing the living conditions with an awareness of the social impacts that isolation had on all members of the team. Our interpretation of the Antarctic is from a multilayered synthesis of input by all players, and the humanities have much to contribute. This hardcover first edition of Antarctica and the humanities is beautifully presented, with endnotes following each chapter, with maps and illustrations, and an index for the diverse subject matter. It has been deservedly well-received. It is a book which invites further discussion. It is, and will continue to be, a valuable reference (Anna Lucas, Maritime Museum of Tasmania, 16 Argyle St, Hobart TAS 7000, Australia ([email protected])).