Charles Francis Hall may well be the most singular explorer in the entire history of the western fascination with the Arctic regions. Unlike the vast majority of such men, he never served in the Navy or merchant marine of any nation, nor did he have any family or local connections with whaling, fishing, sail-making or any other nautical trade. Although he published a sort of newspaper in Cincinnati, it would be a bit of a stretch to call him a “journalist,” and while for a time he had a business making engraved seals for business use, he himself was not a particularly accomplished engraver. Never apparently much of a family man, he more or less abandoned his wife and children when he first set off for the Arctic, and they were almost never the subject of his letters and journals. Indeed, if it were not for the singular leap he made out of the ordinary life of commerce and middle-class life, he might very well have never made much of a mark in any of his endeavors. Hall’s destiny was to do one thing, to do it with faith and fury and a determination which bordered on the monomaniacal – and yet, in so doing, he revealed a deeply humane and conflicted character, at once absolutely unique and yet absolutely a man of his time.
One of the most notable aspects of Hall's career was his close reliance on his Inuit guides, "Joe" Ebierbing and "Hannah" Tookoolito. Throughout his career, they were Hall’s most faithful and trusted companions, accompanying him on numerous sledging expeditions, providing food and shelter, and translating and interpreting at hundreds of interviews with Inuit who had stories to tell about the Franklin expedition. No only were they tireless and constant in their support for Hall’s often very demanding Arctic plans, but, between expeditions, they accompanied him throughout the United States, as well as permitting Hall to arrange for their exhibition in New York and Boston to raise funds for further missions, as well as appearing alongside him on his east coast lecture tour (see
here for details of his Providence engagement).
 |
| Hall in a German graphic novel |
And yet, astonishingly, they remained constant despite the death of two of their children while working for Hall, even though in each case the deaths were at least partly due to Hall’s demands – in the first case, for exhibitions and lectures, and in the second, for a difficult sledge-journey to King William Island (their second child, indeed, was named “King William” by Hall). Hall could be an imperious master, especially when his ‘sacred cause’ of finding Franklin’s men was at stake; Ebierbing, in his only surviving letter, recalled that during the attempt to reach King William, “Mr. Hall tease me all time. Make me go their [sic].” Yet not once, during the entire time of their association, did “Hannah” or “Joe” waver in their service to this man who, without their assistance, would likely have never earned the sobriquet he so dearly coveted – “Charles Hall, Arctic Explorer.”
When Chauncey Loomis arrived at "Thank God Harbor" to exhume Hall and conduct tests for arsenic, he -- like Owen Beattie -- felt that establishing the cause of death would be sufficient service to science and history to justify disturbing his bones. As
this photo shows, the body was in considerably poorer shape than those uncovered at Beechey Island, although traces of his beard can be seen. Loomis felt the evidence was less than conclusive, but for my part I am personally convinced that Hall
was poisoned with arsenic, most likely by Bessels.
Hall's death had many reverberations. One of the documents I found among the Hall papers at the Smithsonian was a printed copy of a
petition circulated in Congress by Hall's widow, Mercy Ann Hall. In tones that evoke those of Lady Franklin, Mrs. Hall allowed that her late husband, "in his devotion to duty, was unsparing of his family and himself," asked only for "tender consideration" and some small "pecuniary assistance" (i.e, money) -- the amount was not specified. She was eventually granted a pension of $40 a month (about $750 in today's currency).
 |
| Hannah's Grave |
"Joe" and "Hannah" returned to Groton where, as Joe wrote with some pride, their daughter Panik "go to school every day." Alas, there were not many more days remaining; her health had never been good, and she died at the age of nine. Hannah herself followed her adopted daughter to the grave on New Year's eve of 1876; Joe returned to the Arctic, serving as a guide for the Schwatka expedition in search of Franklin records from 1878 to 1880, and died some years later under uncertain circumstances. You can visit the graves of Hannah, little "Butterfly," and Panik at the Starr Burying Ground in Groton. A memorial stone for two other Inuit, Cudlargo and Ooseekong, stands nearby; see
this article by Kenn Harper for more details.
We'll have many judgments to make about Hall, but love him or hate him, it's hard not to admire his persistence. And, in a field of endeavor crowded with fateful, haunting endings, his may well have been strangest of all. Weird and Tragic shores, indeed.
I have become significantly invested in the correlation of explorer’s mental health and their preparation for the explorations they are planning, and this book is no exception. As I was reading, I began to highlight specific parts of Charles Francis Hall’s journey that I believe played a significant role in his mental health for each of his explorations. Before Hall’s first exploration It was documented that he spent hours reading about the Arctic to prepare because he was concerned about survival. He felt this “calling” that there were Franklin Expedition survivors and that he must find them. He wanted to escape the community of life and encounter new realities. He had a clear reason for wanting to go to the Arctic and did extensive research. When he eventually made it to the Arctic, he had the capacity to reason on whether certain trips were safe. For example, when he wanted to set out to King William Island, but “…a storm forced Hall to recognize the dangers of the autumn season…” presented that year (Loomis 77). He still had reasoning, but as the journey went on, he experienced the psychological symptoms of cabin fever. He could not control the hypersensitivity he had and paranoia, so the Captain had to soothe him. Hall did absolutely prepare for his first exploration of the Arctic with facts and information; however, he failed to acknowledge the psychological effects of being trapped with the same people in isolation. He did not study how to respond and the appropriate remedies to help him.
ReplyDeleteBefore completing his second exploration, he did not take the time to recognize the extent to the mental health issues he developed from the first, nor did he take steps to prepare himself for the effects again. Instead, Hall was focused on obtaining and raising money, as well as seamen, to help him on his venture. He did lectures, wrote a book, and tried to get private investments in his exploration. Without focusing on the preparation of his mental health and just his physical well-being, on his second exploration he once again became paranoid, began to resent the Eskimos (the only people helping him in exploration), and even murdered a man. He even thought a man was plotting to kill him and eat him as “salty meat.” Hall not preparing mentally for this voyage and acknowledging the psychological issues he experienced on his first voyage, just set him up for more mental health challenges on this second voyage.
Continued:
ReplyDeleteAs soon as he came home from his second exploration, he once again just began jumping into planning his third voyage to the North Pole without reflecting on his past. He automatically began lobbying for funding for his third exploration through committees, the government, and if needed to private investors. He did have some personal growth as he showed signs “… of growing maturity and self-control that were to be evident in the short remainder of his life” (Loomis 218). Even though he appeared to have self-control and maturity blooming, he still had the psychological inability to trust others and a suspicious, paranoid nature that is not good for isolated sea exploration. He did not see a therapist or evaluate these emotions, but instead just kept pushing for more fame and discovery. Before even setting off on the exploration of the North Pole he “…expressed fears of insubordination among some of his officers and men” (Loomis 229). He wanted all the control of the ship and over everyone. He was the commander and demanded that everyone listen to only him, but he still had the paranoia creeping up.
Simply put, for his first Arctic encounter he prepared logically, but not emotionally and psychologically. Then, for his second expedition he focused on raising money through lectures and his book, instead of paying attention to his mental well-being that was affected in his first exploration. He began to quickly deteriorate mentally as he became suspicious of others, became resentful, became paranoid, and even murdered someone. Now, for his third exploration he was so focused on his government funding and being commander and in control of the exploration that he did not take a second to recognize what all this busy planning and constant exploring was doing to him mentally. He only worried about his basic needs of survival being met without considering the psychological effects of isolation at sea. I am honestly worried to see how this third exploration goes in the last third of the novel.
Charles Francis Hall reminds me a lot of Chris McCandless from Jon Krakauer's Into the Wild . For one, Hall deserts a pretty average, societal normalized life, to live a life instead of adventure and exploration. He too abandons his family as did McCandless, and they both hardly mention them in their journals and letters. Both men also meet their very demise brought on by what seems like an addiction to adventure, exploration, and discovering the unknown. In addition, both men’s deaths have lead to curiosity among the public for years to come, and inspired authors to write books about them .
ReplyDeleteJessica,
DeleteThere are deffinitely a lot of similarities between the two of their stories. I feel like there is some sort of hyperfixation woven into this. To an extent I get it. We are all searching for a purpose, to make us memorable, to find a meaning in our actions, and these guys think that they've done it. But it just seems so drastic to cut off everyone and to become so obsessive that you would die for the thing. It really feels into what Megan was saying about mental health, and makes me wonder not if they become mentally ill because of their travels but they travel because they are mentally ill. Hyperfixation is a part of many mental illnesses, and this kind of persistence, to the point where you would let it kill you, is harmful to the point where it had to have not been a result of coincindence but of something deeper rooted.
Tayler
When reading “Weird and Tragic Shores” I was captured with the character of Charles Francis Hall, who seemed to have leaped out of the pages of an adventure novel rather instead of existing in the real world. This is especially funny to me as Loomis connects Hall’s character to the 16th president of the United States noting that Hall “evoke[s] the image of a young Lincoln, a youth in homespun reading by firelight” (27). As I continued down the rabbit hole, I found that Loomis was spot on in his connection between Hall and Lincoln. The two are commonly attributed as consuming all the knowledge they could in their youths, and popularly called self-self-made men. I found Hall especially endearing when Loomis writes: “Hall’s notebooks are relics of an unfocused but energetic effort in self-education” (41). A passion for lifelong learning is always a good thing. And in Hall’s case, this desire would allow him to succeed in the Arctic in ways other explorers failed in that he would be willing to adapt to the practices of Inuit people to increase his chance of survival. Additionally, Hall’s unfocused effort of self-education is reflected in his way of writing and set of strange idiosyncrasies. The best example of this can be seen in Halls writing when he is on the brink of starvation, noting the precise measurements of a piece of food he ate: “’1 ¼ inch wide, 2 inches long, and ¾ of an inch thick’” (99). Even Loomis gives a light ribbing to Hall stating that “even in dire straits, Hall would be exact in his measurements” (99). As far as first impressions go, I would say that Hall is charismatic if not a bit unstable.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading this book so far I see a lot of similarities between Charles and Chris from Into the Wild. They both decided to travel, not seem to be prepared for the trip, and be careless about their families.
ReplyDeleteI think Charles situation is a lot different at the same time because at least with Chris he didn’t have a wife and children. But Charles on the other hand has a family and decides to still go!
Madeleine Frost
ReplyDeleteIn reading the first half or so of the novel, Hall’s “obsessive independence” (Loomis 112) is painfully obvious. In many of his journal entries, as well as through his actions, it is clear that Hall enjoys his autonomy. In reference to a particular passage in chapter 3, Hall shows a stubborn independence. In reference to the “Eskimos”, his journal entry reads: “They are a people knowing no restraint. They will be INDEPENDENT in the fullest signification of the word! We Americans talk about Freedom and Independence. We are far behind these Northerners. While we are pleased with shadows, these dusky fellows enjoy the substance! DO AS THEY PLEASE, without anyone having the acknowledged right or power to say, Why do you do so?” (112). Following this entry, Loomis explains how Hall typically admired the “Eskimos’ independence, but when it interfered with what he wanted to do, he was angered; independence then seemed irresponsibility” (112). Hall, as demonstrated through this passage, seems to like independence when it suits him. If others are experiencing the independence he, perhaps deep down, wants to experience for himself, he becomes envious and thus shames the former for their independent practices. He wants to do what he wants to do when he wants to do it. We also see this a bit later in the novel in chapter four. Loomis writes: He knew that again his main problem would be raising money, and that to raise money he would have to publicize his exploits, giving lectures and possibly writing a book” (134). Hall recognizes that in order to achieve his dream, he must be proactive. Instead of waiting for someone to fund his exploration for him or with him, he realizes what must be done and does it himself. He puts all the pieces in place so he can achieve his goals. Hall is nothing if not passionate about exploring — he truly does not want anything to get in his way of exploring.
I just do not like this book and I do not like Hall at all. I find him to be so full of himself and completely disillusioned. He thinks he is the perfect type of man and that he knows everything and can succeed. This illusionment and superiority complex is what got him killed. He thought he could survive anything, but he was ill prepared for the coldness and illnesses that they can contract. Hall never saw his family, I read somewhere in the book that he only saw his 10 year old 3 times in his life. He is an absent father, crude, racist and just plain bad.
ReplyDeleteI was really hoping to warm up to Hall as the story unfolded, but unfortunately, that didn’t happen. I wanted to comment briefly on Hall’s relationship to the Inuit and how he treated them on his expeditions. Oftentimes, native people were infantilized by explorers, and it feels like Hall does the same thing with Tookoolito and Ebierbing. It’s also remarked that Hall had something of a missionary sensibility [he connected “Civilization” and “Christianity” on more than one occasion (p. 115)]; I can’t help but think of missionaries that converted natives and the colonialist history wrapped up in that. Hall’s ego is also massive (which honestly feels like an understatement), and he doesn’t always want to acknowledge how helpful the Inuit were to him. Instead, he sometimes tries to frame it as if the Inuit depended on him, which feels massively exploitative. While Hall is exploring and he feels like he’s discovering all of these things, where is the line between exploration and exploitation? By not giving credit to those who helped him and acting as if he’s done this all on his own with little aid, it’s highly exploitative.
ReplyDeleteWhat is interesting about Charles Francis Hall is that before he went out on his expedition he worked as an editor. He had no knowledge on exploration but set his mind on finding Sir John Franklin and his men. Hall was very full of himself and seemed very selfish. He ends up leaving his family behind to go on the exploration. In the book it mentions how he saw his kid three times in ten years, which is just terrible. At another point in the book, Hall is preparing to go back to the Artic and there is a chance he might not be put in command. He will not accept this and it says that he will not take any orders from anyone. This right here shows a lot about Hall’s character. While he is in the Artic, there are several occasions where he is angry with the Eskimos for having their own beliefs. He tries to change their ways and doesn’t like how they have silly superstitions. There is a point when one of his Eskimo friends is dying and they close her in an igloo to die. He opens it up and stays by her side, then he proceeds to have a vigil for her and has them all partake in it. He does not care that it isn’t how they do things. He is all about himself and does not want anyone telling him what to do.
ReplyDeleteI think it is interesting to see Hall sort of going against the grain of his society and immersing himself within the Inuit culture while people in his society would look at him as “sinking down to their level.” This is juxtaposed with his societal conditioning that keeps him in the belief of white superiority. He believes that his Christian views are superior and right. There is one point where the Inuit share their hunt with others, he is appalled over this "charity". He thinks that they had worked so hard for the seal meat, and that the others have no right to ask for a portion(91).
ReplyDeleteI enjoy the small comments and opinions provided by the narrator of the story. The narrator often points out Hall's hypocrisy. For example, after sharing Hall's angry journal entry about Ebierbing and Ugarng sharing with an engeko, the narrator points out that Hall would have been dead if it weren't for the help of the Inuit people.
From the start, I connected Hall's drive to become an explorer, with the story of Chris McCandless. After taking a look at Hall's story, however, I see the two are not the same. McCandless chose the life of an explorer, with no experience, to find himself. He wanted to get away from his family (more so parents) and experience life without his toxic parents around him. In Hall's case, he also was not an explorer, but chose this path to learn more about the Franklin Expedition and understand what happened. Perhaps he also was not happy with his life, as he essentially abandoned his family. I found it interesting that he was so quick to leave and have no concern about his wife and family that he left behind. Instead, in a sense, created his own family by bonding closely with the Inuit people.
ReplyDeleteI find it very random, but also very interesting in my opinion that, he was so quick to leave and become so close with people of a completely different culture/world. I find this especially interesting because most people of this time seemed very curious about new things , but all seemed to be stuck in their way and the lives they lived. Societally, Hall had a job as a husband and father, to provide. He completely goes outside of these societal norms, so I believe that is also something to talk about when it comes to Hall. He seems to be an almost arrogant and overly ambitious character, while also showing in a weird way to be a compassionate person when it came to the Inuit, in certain parts of the book. He seemed very interested obviously in these Inuit people and this alone was something that most men of the Victorian Era would not be doing(get up and leave to got to the artic becoming extremely involved in another culture),unless he was an experience explorer. I think this random career and life choice of Hall's is very telling of who he was.
Alexandra Ritacco
ReplyDeleteHall is an interesting fellow that I am rather unsure how to feel about. Just like my fellow classmates, I have found the book a rough one to get through. Though because I am intrigued between the relationship of exploration and the people they meet along the way, and my essay deals directly with the relationship between Inuit people and those like Hall, I'm doing my best to get through. It is taking me significantly longer than my classmates to finish it, but nonetheless I want to and want to take a moment to comment on Hall himself. While Hall is not entirely likeable, his determination is a bit admirable. The whole semester we asked the question of "why". Why are people so driven to explore? Hall is, by far, one of the most determined people we've encountered in this class. He is stubborn, disagreeable, and thick-headed. When we discussed Chris, the words sociopath and psychopath were thrown around. I didn't like that diagnosis for him. That being said, I'm giving a familar theory for Hall. That is narcissism. Hall has some strong narcissistic traits. He disregards those around him unless they can give him something. He had little interest in his family and only cared about his goal. Even though he set up his Inuit friends well Connecticut, there was still proof of some mistreatment. For example, Joe's letters. But Hall has to keep them enough to be friends because without the Inuit people, the north would be hell. The Inuit people have live there for centuries. They can survive that terrain like another day. Others? Highly unlikely. Hall kept people close to use them because his whole life surrounded his one goal that Hall himself could not achieve solely.
While it is hard not to admire Hall's persistence, and while the connection to Alexander Supertramp is obvious, I still feel that disdain towards Supertramp in me that is causing me to have reservations, to say the least, about Hall. You can be the master of your own destiny, sure, but you're not immortal. you can't be so full of yourself to the point where you believe you can survive anything and at that point, if your death is linked to your pride and hubris, then you're just asking for it at that point.
ReplyDelete