Script analysis

Scott removes his gloves in Antarctica because that would be appropriate in society. This must be painful, but even in his disillusionment, he’s still tied to social norms.

Scott’s “English Charity” is tested with Evans. He hits Evans and sees this as taking one step closer to becoming an animal (as suggested by Amundsen). Amundsen asks him if he’s more concerned that Evans is dying or that he hit him, one answer being focused on society and the other being focused on humanity.

II.1

SOCIETY

Scott wants nothing more than personal glory, but drinks to the queen, putting on his social mask even in the afterlife.

Scott realizes he must find new rules “in myself.” He’s making his choice to trump his social upbringing. He also says, “strength is in the memories of home.” This is taking him closer to a humanistic approach toward life because he is placing value in human connections beyond society or fame.

Scott talks with Kath about finding himself in Antarctica. She challenges him that he should go somewhere where he becomes alive instead of going somewhere for fame or because of its inherent danger.

Kath will have Scott’s child with or without wedlock. This hints at Kath having fewer religious restraints than other people at the time.

Evans probably went to church based on his death scene. He reverts to childhood (II.6). This is possibly a glimpse into how he was raised. He received a reward if everything was tidy before Sunday service.

Oates repeats the prayer “Lord have mercy” three times while Evans dies. This implies a deep-rooted religious nature, whether or not his current actions denote this same outlook.

Kath is not religious. She didn’t “believe [one could] find the dead by dying.” She doesn’t believe in reconnecting with the dead after death. She says this as a reason that she didn’t need to be scrutinized on her every move on board the ship.

Kath had no interest in England’s hoopla surrounding Scott’s death.

Scott wants her to “try to make him [Peter] believe in a God. At least it’s comforting.” This serves two purposes: it raises awareness that Scott potentially did not have a God to believe in during his darkest hour and he ends with a focus on humanity instead of society. He doesn’t necessarily want Peter to have religion to fit in to society, but he realizes a need for human comfort.

With the exception of the time Scott says he will do twice the rotations for Evans, Wilson, Oates, Bowers, and Evans do all the work at camp throughout the play (not Scott).

Bowers and Owens continue to joke throughout the scene, but Wilson keeps them on task.

Amundsen sees the world through rationale, realistic lenses. He sees things as they are. He makes Machiavellian choices, based on the desired outcome. People and animals are tools to reach success, and tools can be disposed of when they are useless.

Scott is defined by keeping the rules. At this point in the play, he knows how to do things because he was taught how to do things. His English pride drives him to make his decisions. He defiantly assures Amundsen he won’t leave his Englishness in the Wilderness. He will stay the course “among civilized men.”

As a chink in his English pride armor, he lets it slip to Amundsen that he hates Social Conventions. He tells him he doesn’t “have much patience for that society chatter.”

Amundsen thinks Scott was right to hit Evans. He got what he deserved. Scott’s social constraints beg to differ.

In this Devil/ Angel Scene, Amundsen makes Scott question if he’s more upset that Evans is dying or that he betrayed his English reserve. When Scott is taken away from the public eye, we can often get a glimpse of the real Scott. In this scene, he agrees (in private) that he must leave Evans behind.

The transformation of Scott losing who he was and becoming Amundsen has begun. This is evident when Amundsen starts finishing Scott’s lines. As soon as Scott regains composure, he tells Amundsen, “You disgust me.”

II.8

ETHICS (Moral)

Nature won’t allow Scott to follow social norms regarding Evans’s marker. He must make slight concessions dictated by the icy ground.

Ethical questioning takes place about suicide. Society would say “no.” Actually, Wilson says, “no,” but Bowers and Scott say, “yes.” Bowers’s argument is so they won’t become animals. He’s afraid he’ll instinctively degrade to that.

Wilson refuses to give pills unless it’s an order. This poses the ethical question of where do lines get drawn in the sand. If it truly is wrong that Wilson gives the pills, will he receive “ethical amnesty” because he was following an order?

1. 
   Who is the protagonist? Robert Falcon Scott
   
   1. 
      Why is he the protagonist? Scott is the protagonist because this is his story. The story is focused on his journey to self-realization.
      
   2. 
      What type of character is this? He’s mostly an archetypical character. We are, for the most part, watching a hero’s journey. The stakes are different than many heroes’ journeys (i.e. they take place in his head).
      
2. 
   Who is the antagonist? Society is the antagonist. Amundsen is not.
   
   1. 
      Why do you think this character is the antagonist? Even though this is an idea and not a realized character, it is solely the convention used to put obstacles in Scott’s journey toward self-realization. When he defeats Society, he thinks for himself (which, as an aside is what Amundsen has wanted), and the play is over.
      
   2. 
      What type of character is this? Representative. Society represents the mental oppression Scott has had since he joined the Navy at 13 (maybe even longer).
      
3. 
   Who are the other principal characters? Amundsen
   
   1. 
      Why do you think these characters are principal characters? Amundsen accompanies Scott’s journey every step of the way ever since he was Scott’s emcee. He also undergoes some changes as the transformation to one person happens, for example he has some Scott in him when he is shocked about aeroplanes flying over the Pole.
      
   2. 
      What are the functions of each of the principal characters? He primarily challenges Scott’s ideals and offers him someone with whom he can be honest.
      
   3. 
      What type of characters are these? This device is very unique. He is an extraordinary character.
      

WHO ARE THE SECONDARY CHARACTERS?

1. 
   Why are they secondary characters? All of them function as characters that help tell the story of Scott. Although Scott has important, meaningful conversations with them, his growth is not connected to them.
   
2. 
   What is the function of each character?
   
   1. 
      Kathleen – Confidant.
      
   2. 
      Wilson – Norm Character
      
   3. 
      Bowers – Norm Character
      
   4. 
      Oates – Norm Character
      
   5. 
      Evans – Norm Character
      
3. 
   What characters are not seen on stage? The following list represents characters alluded to in the play, yet they never appear.
   
   1. 
      Society – See Principal Characters section.
      
   2. 
      Mabel Beardsley – Kathleen’s friend who let Scott in.
      
   3. 
      Peter Markham Scott – Scott and Kathleen’s son.
      
   4. 
      Mrs. Bowers – Scott writes to her in farewell letter.
      
   5. 
      Mrs. Wilson – Scott writes to her in farewell letter.
      
   6. 
      Members of the society – in attendance at social gathering.
      

THE BIG QUESTIONS

What is the significance of the title?
What is the significance of the characters names?
Are there discussions or debates that seem separate from the plot but in some way relate to the main idea of the play?
Are there any lengthy monologues that contain social issues?

Are there any epigrams, allusions, imagery, or intentional symbolism?

If there is a prologue or epilogue, what is the central idea it contains?