Response to Shipwreck at the Bottom of the World

             As an adolescent myself, nonfiction was always a tough sell for me.  Nonfiction is all about the facts, and in my opinion facts meant science.  And let me tell you, anything with science attached was rated right up there with watching paint dry.  I couldn’t imagine anything more boring than science.  I realized that history was made up of facts but that remained completely separate in my younger mind.  History was made up of factual stories; obviously the presence of stories made those facts less intimidating.  But would I ever, by choice, select a nonfiction book?  Absolutely not.  As an adult, I have ventured in the genre of nonfiction but very hesitantly and only with historical nonfiction (my older self still equates history with stories).  In an effort of full disclosure, my childhood lens of nonfiction is still intact.  As I approached Shipwreck at the Bottom of the World, I knew I was going to read a real story about a famous explorer and his failed expedition to Antarctica.  I was excited to hear a true story of A harrowing, against-all-odds adventure.  If I knew that I was going to learn about climate, zoology, and the science of navigation my younger self would have scoffed.  Admittedly, my older self would’ve scoffed.  However, Jennifer Armstrong tackled my nonfiction prejudice head-on by telling a story that is both historical and scientific while keeping my attention.  Dare I say that I actually learned something?  My younger self looks a little sheepish now.     

            Building background knowledge is a basic key to scaffolding a student’s understanding.  As a teacher, you constantly have to build students’ background knowledge or play into what they already know.  Either way, the inherent value of prior knowledge lies in the fact that students will understand better when they have the necessary background.  I realized early on that my basic knowledge of Sir Ernest Henry Shackelton was going to be an asset.  My 8^th graders study his expedition in Geography and complete a project in which they are all very engaged.  I have helped many of them with their project and, so therefore, have heard many 8^th graders’ versions of Shackelton’s adventure.  Knowing that I probably had only some of the facts, my background knowledge helped me to understand what I was reading.  Reading Shipwreck, I had a vague picture of this real-life adventure with large gaping holes where the actual facts should’ve been.  I was able to fill in those holes to complete my understanding as I went.  I know the value of prior knowledge in the classroom, but I always value the chance to experience it first-hand as a learner myself. 

  

          Any author, of fiction or nonfiction, wants to write something that holds readers’ attention from the first word to the last.  In Shipwreck, Armstrong grabs our attention with her first line and holds it by using pictures and maps that are both interesting and informational.  “Just imagine yourself in the most hostile place on earth.”  From the first sentence, readers are given a sense of great foreboding; I wouldn’t want to visit a place that was hostile, much less the most hostile place on the planet.  We are instantly flooded with questions about what we want to know.  Where is this place?  How do you get there?  What does this place look like?  What are the conditions in such a hostile place?  How long can one really survive in the most hostile of places?  The maps are a useful tool in answering many of these questions.  The maps include Antarctica, previous paths traveled, and paths that the explorers took throughout their adventure.  I found myself marking these pages and referring back to them as I read.  The map showing Shackelton’s path upon returning to South Georgia Island was especially helpful.   I found that each time the explorers had to change their path I would stop reading to check the map.  In the case of retelling the facts of an expedition, maps are especially helpful so that readers can track their progress on the actual land that they covered.  It creates the factual framework in which the story is told.  Equally helpful were the actual archival photographs taken by Frank Hurley.  These pictures helped to answer readers’ questions in images rather than words.  We were able to see exactly what the men saw, experience the harshness of their environment, and put the faces of the explorers with their names.  My favorite pictures were the ones that showed the human aspect of the expedition: Frank Wild with two of his dogs (pg 29), Greenstreet’s “breath icicles” (pg 68), and Saved! (pg 122).  The pictures served the purpose of putting pictures in our heads and we were then able to visually put these pictures and places on a map.  This combination supported the facts presented in the text and kept readers’ attention throughout the book.

            Most stories make more sense when they are told in a logical order.  In the case of Shipwreck, the most sensible organization is to tell the story chronologically.  I doubt that there was even a debate about how Shackelton’s story should be told.  For an added impact, the story, almost exclusively, follows the crew of the Endurance.  The story begins by briefly describing the leader’s previous treks to the Antarctic and leads into describing the preparations that were made before the ship could set sail.  Of course, the story continues in chronological order with the crew’s stop at South Georgia Island, their battle with the ice, the treks both on foot and in the boats, until it finally ends when the group separates for the first time.  The only time the chronological order is broken is during the chapter “Camp Wild”.  We heard in detail each event that occurred as the six men left the others behind in order to continue in their search for help, and readers witness when it is finally found after three of the men travel twenty-nine miles by foot.  Throughout these events, readers are never told how the crew members left behind are faring on Elephant Island.  There are many references to Shackelton’s concern for his crew, but we are not told about their condition.  The chapter “Camp Wild” rewinds the story four months and relives the experiences of the remaining men.  Besides this exception, the story remains strictly chronological and the narrator remains as a shadow to the entire crew.  Readers can feel the impact of this organization when Shackelton learns of the events that have transpired since he last left the whaling station.  We learn that the boat that was meant to meet their crew on the other side of Antarctica also met a terrible fate and that all of England was fascinated to know how the Endurance had fared.  We learn about these events as the crew does, and that reminds us that we forgot about the outside world just as the men must have forgotten how important their trip was to others also.  The organization of Shipwreck is logical and helps to present their adventure in a sensible and impacting manner. 

           Authentic facts create the entire purpose of writing nonfiction.  Gathering these facts would be no easy feat; however by looking over the bibliography Armstrong used a variety of sources to create her story.  As I was reading this book the quotes and photos always stuck out to me as being one of the most authentic touches in the book.  Rightfully so, these quotes come from a primary source-the actual Endurance diaries of crew members.  This change in point of view creates an informative dynamic.  I was interested in Shackelton, but I was also interested in the other crew members, including Worsley, Wild, and especially Blackborrow.  By including details from crew members’ diaries readers were given the broader context of the struggle.  Instead of it being just Shackelton’s battle (as history sometimes tells us), the inclusion of other perspectives helped us to understand that the root of the story lies in the efforts of everyone.  It wasn’t just Shackelton’s story to tell; it was the whole crew’s.