This book takes two Arctic expeditions, in 1913 and 2012, and examines the psychology of those who undertook them. From the derring-do of the early adventurers to the quest for scientific knowledge of the present day, it looks in detail at two groups of three landed on a very remote island. The depiction of the privations of life in the Antarctic climate are portrayed in fine detail and leave one failing to understand why anyone would put themselves through such torture. In both cases the impact on the minds of the explorers is graphically depicted. In the case of the earlier expedition we also follow the main party from whom the trio become separated.
On the whole the writing is well paced and lucid. I both enjoyed and learned from this book. ( )

Mostly I enjoyed this book a lot. It was easy to read. Certain things were completely unbelievable i.e the character who won't admit they've broken their ankle - talk about suicidal tendencies.
But I liked the parallel stories and the investigation of small group dynamics in an extreme situation. ( )

I couldn't put this book down. I love an Antarctic exploration tale! This follows two groups of explorers 100 years apart; the (fictional) 1913 expedition is well known to the modern-day group who are researching Everland, an Antarctic island, and that trip ended in controversy and tragedy. The modern-day group find out more about what really happened on that expedition, challenging the accepted version of events, and find out more about themselves as their trip begins to have parallels to the 1913 one.
I enjoyed this far more than Rebecca Hunt's previous one, I loved the atmospheric writing in this one, and the fact that although there were common themes and similarities between the two trips Hunt doesn't hit you over the head with them. I also liked the relationships between the modern day group, and the shift as time went on. A great read. ( )

Loved this book what an adventure thid book took me on and loved every minute of this story good story lines and characters well thought out and finely put together in some parts of the story gave me chills but that I think is a good thing as it saids something about the story in other words loved this book and would happily recommend this book to all my friends and a big thank you to the author Rebecca Hunt thank you very much for the privilege of reading your wonderful book and with all that said keep smiling and happy reading all with love from wee me.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ( )

Moving back and forth in time across an entire century, Everland is the story of two very different groups of explorers who undertake two very different Antarctic expeditions to the same place. The first, in 1913, is set in the heyday of British polar exploration; the second, marking the centenary of the first, takes place in 2012. Despite the passing of a full century, unmistakeable and eerie parallels exist between both expeditions.

In March 1913, the captain of the British ship Kismet, had, a month earlier, dropped the mate and two others off in a dinghy named the Joseph Evelyn to begin their journey for a short stay at an unmapped island the mate christened Everland. The idea was that while the men, Napps, Millet-Bass, and Dinners, were exploring the island, the rest of the Kismet's crew would be sailing around Cape Athena "for a last geologizing excursion," to meet back up with the explorers in just two weeks. The Kismet sails off, but immediately problems set in, beginning with a storm that made the four-hour dinghy journey last about six days; unbeknownst to the three explorers, the Kismet had also suffered in the same storm and had to stop to make repairs. It wasn't until April that the Kismet returned to take the three-man team home, but only one badly-frostbitten, nearly-dead man was found on the island. What happened on that island became the stuff of legend. In fact, one hundred years later, in celebration of another three-person expedition that is about to be launched to Everland from the Antarctic base Aegeus, the film night pick is a 60s "classic" called Everland, a movie the group knows by heart about the 1913 ill-fated venture based on the "famous book" written by the captain of the Kismet. The novel goes back and forth between the two expeditions, chronicling the events during both. The similarities are notable -- the flaring resentments, the tensions, the dangers and ultimately the choices that are made among each team for survival echo across the century.

The idea brought out in this novel that reality is often pushed aside, replaced to suit various motivations, and can leave an altered version of events to be taken as fact by following generations In the case of the 1913 expedition, at the outset the reader is given the modern-day understanding of events that coincide with the book written by the captain and then the movie. Then, little by little the true events come to light, as the author fills us about what actually happened to these men. In the second expedition, the situation is not only manipulated by one of team members, but after a particularly dramatic scene, a deal to elevate one story over another is tacitly agreed to for reasons particular to and kept secret between the parties. In both cases, the story that emerges is based on collaboration and self-serving motivations, while the real truth of both will remain behind forever on Everland. In the meantime, reputations are made, both positive and negative.

I bought this book it thinking it was along the lines of a Scott or Shackleton type historical fiction novel, but I got so much more. I really liked the two stories, although the 1913 setting for me was much more interesting. In terms of survival, both narratives were filled with tension, although the modern explorers came equipped with technology that the earlier ones could never have dreamed of, and they were only an airplane flight away from rescue, so that sort of lessened the drama for me. In setting up the often-striking parallels between the two, I suppose to some readers it might seem contrived (and I suppose maybe it is a little), but it works well. More than anything, though, I absolutely loved how the author let the idea of the distortion of reality play out through the novel, even before the reader fully comes to understand why and how it's important. I also walked away with pity for the so-called "villain" of the piece, as the real truth turned the established history on its head.

I've only offered a bare-bones outline, but it's going on my shelf of favorite books of the year. I have to admit that things started out a bit slowly, but I hung in there and was greatly rewarded. Also, I found myself backtracking to the chapter headings to keep the chronology straight, since not only does the book go back and forth over a hundred years, but within the 1913 time frame, it goes from the expedition to back on the Kismet and the crew on board. Otherwise, it is a very engrossing read that left me frustrated whenever I had to put it down. Highly, highly recommended. ( )