Volume 24-25, 1976-7 - The Arctic Circle - Home

VOL. }Cfl/ }IC. ITTIE AROIIC CIRCLIIARthre jaws of a most prestigious victory. " Ttre people who have studiedCook and Pearlr have gone at tlrem from virtually every apprcachr possible--the ouchr sdrool (several writers suggest that Cook may well have becoreaff licted wittr a version of polar madness, and at least tlrp have suggestedthe same of Pearlz) ; that of psychological and tactical motivation; thestudied analysis of climate, environnent, l-andfall, moving ice and techrniquesof travel and, finally, the school that aclcnowledged tLrat this was first ofall not science in the field but a sporting conpetition, and tLrat tlreccnpetitors were essentj-ally ganrblers and hr:nters seeking a prize.Thre capsule disn-issal of Cook in the majority of conterqnrartrz polar literatureand standard reference works usually follovvs tkris form: Cook's claimsof having reached tl:e I'lcrthr Pole in l9O8 are dubious; Cook's earlier claim ofattaining the strnnit of Moi:nt McKinley is doubtful and Cook's trial,conviction and nnj-l fraud sentence in Texas in 1923-30 suggest a characterflaw vtrich malces trnints one and tian but a prelude to a history of fraud anddeception. For those ratro rnight protest that dispassionate historians wouldjudge thre exploration ontroversies of a decade and a half earlier on threircrlvn merits, I can only guot-e one purported "final solution" book publishedscme three years ago which terned Cook , " . a crjminal who tried tosteal thre life' s work of at least two nien. . . " Les1ie Neatby, a resp'ectedCanadian polar historian, has alleged that Cook represented a "Iawl-essintmsion into the affair" and accusecl hrm of "weari-:lg the mask of honesty".Yet after crcnsiderable c.crnm-rnication, Dr. Ibatby acknowledged to ttre writerseveral years ago ttrat he had beccne "a good deal more pro-Cook than whenour @rrespondence opened. " NeatJry has offered what is the central and oftenmissing ingredient in the Cook-Peary controversy, asserting that Cook'scharacter "becores the key to the question. " Orrce we have arrived at th.isplateau, it is easier to evaluate Frederick Cook and to follow his road frqnthre triu'rph vdridr he operienced in Copenhagen a:rd New York in the FalI of1909 to a loneJ-y prj-son cell in Leaverrworth Penitentiarlz L4 yea-rs later.The recitation of the storm of events whicir overtook Cock in the firstyears following his return frcrn the Arctlc have been tc>i..cl vrith detail andslmpathy by nnny writers, dt least one of thrern (Andrel^r F.r:eeynan) having spentoonsiderable tin''e with the oplorer in the last, tragic r;ecade of his life.Witlrout taking up thre banner of the great Anerican u-ndE:rdoq, suf fice -it tosay that Cook was well cast in ttre dubious title ac.:orCerl him by a friendlyauthor as a "Prince of Losers " ard that plots, bribes , r,vell-plalnedcampaigns of harassnent and well-placed msnbers of a very real old boy'scircuit in ttre years l9O9-15 provide ample evidence that our pre-World War I"Icegate" was lirnited only by tlre technology of the surveil-lance industryat thrat tine.Cook's naivete, his gentleness and unfailing courtesy irr the face of bitterattack, his nrodesty and hudlity made hjm an easy candiCate for thre lostcause advocates. Pearlz was type-cast as a heavy from ure day he left