Saying "sacrificial suicide" gives it the connotations of a religious sacrifice, which is extremely different from personal sacrifice and doesn't fit here at all.
What really struck me, thinking about it - and I should edit this in, probaly -was how differently the two words hit me - I was actually surprised to see it referred to as a suicide, even though that's what it was. So I guess I myself think about the word suicide in a very specific sense - almost so that it doesn't mean technically "end one's own life" but rather more "give up on life" or "not want to live anymore." Since Oates was ending his life not because he didn't want to live but rather because he hoped it would help his companions, it doesn't come across as suicide to me.
I figured the authors normally stayed away from it because it is a more negative term, but also they were possibly just like me and didn't think of it as suicide. He was sacrificing himself, but he was also committing suicide. I don't think cultural background is likely to have had much to do with it - I'd assume all the authors I'm reading are from pretty similar backgrounds as me and as each other. But the last author was focused not on Oates or on the scope of the journey as a whole - of which Oates' actions are a significant part - but rather specifically on Wilson. Oates' part was not the main focus, so the author is more likely to have used a more simple term, rather than thinking about his actions and what they meant. Like, "Then Oates killed himself. . . ok, I'll write that Oates' committed suicide," rather than "Then Oates walked into the snow to save the rest of the group," which is more likely to lead someone to use the word sacrifice.
Scott did indeed fail to use the most effective methods possible, despite having been advised to by Fridtjof Nansen, an experienced arctic traveller and all-around cool guy. However! There were other factors - Scott had scientific goals in his mission, whereas Amundsen was simply racing towards the pole. In fact, upon discovering Amundsen's camp, Scott considered changing his plans to head towards the pole more quickly and decided not to. So they weren't making the same attempt simply with different equipment. The use of sled-dogs would probably have greatly increased Scott and his party's chances of survival but might not have made a difference in who reached the pole first.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-09-24 10:20 pm (UTC)What really struck me, thinking about it - and I should edit this in, probaly -was how differently the two words hit me - I was actually surprised to see it referred to as a suicide, even though that's what it was. So I guess I myself think about the word suicide in a very specific sense - almost so that it doesn't mean technically "end one's own life" but rather more "give up on life" or "not want to live anymore." Since Oates was ending his life not because he didn't want to live but rather because he hoped it would help his companions, it doesn't come across as suicide to me.
I figured the authors normally stayed away from it because it is a more negative term, but also they were possibly just like me and didn't think of it as suicide. He was sacrificing himself, but he was also committing suicide. I don't think cultural background is likely to have had much to do with it - I'd assume all the authors I'm reading are from pretty similar backgrounds as me and as each other. But the last author was focused not on Oates or on the scope of the journey as a whole - of which Oates' actions are a significant part - but rather specifically on Wilson. Oates' part was not the main focus, so the author is more likely to have used a more simple term, rather than thinking about his actions and what they meant. Like, "Then Oates killed himself. . . ok, I'll write that Oates' committed suicide," rather than "Then Oates walked into the snow to save the rest of the group," which is more likely to lead someone to use the word sacrifice.
Scott did indeed fail to use the most effective methods possible, despite having been advised to by Fridtjof Nansen, an experienced arctic traveller and all-around cool guy. However! There were other factors - Scott had scientific goals in his mission, whereas Amundsen was simply racing towards the pole. In fact, upon discovering Amundsen's camp, Scott considered changing his plans to head towards the pole more quickly and decided not to. So they weren't making the same attempt simply with different equipment. The use of sled-dogs would probably have greatly increased Scott and his party's chances of survival but might not have made a difference in who reached the pole first.