Frank Hurley: The Man Who Made History

Archaeology and Frank Hurley: the Man Who Made History both deal with the personal impact of discovery. Archaeology (1973) is a poem by W. H. Auden. Frank Hurley: The Man Who Made History (2004) is a documentary written and directed by Simon Nasht, starring Australian photographer Frank Hurley (1885-1962). The subjects of the texts gain knowledge and personal and creative insight through their discoveries. Archaeology's subject, although not immediately clear, could be considered to be the narrator. Also in the texts, evidence is shown as unreliable with certain questions about the past being unanswerable. However, this does not keep figures within the texts, and perhaps the responder, from drawing meaning from them. Overall, the texts deal

In particular, this is shown when Frank Hurley encounters Macquarie Island and is thus confronted with the power of nature. This leads to his passion for both travelling and photography. Initially, the modern colour images of Macquarie Island are juxtaposed with the black-and-white footage of the ship and with earlier footage of the city. This causes it to feel vibrant in comparison, mirroring Hurley's own sense of wonder, also evident in words from his diary. This tone carries over into the next part of the story (Antarctica), where it is subverted by the freezing conditions. Combining colour footage with Hurley's photographs shows the viewer how discovery impacted his work, also done in the rest of the documentary. However, here, the comparison between them demonstrates the technical limitations Hurley was under and the difficulties in capturing reality. This is addressed later when it is his justification for forgery. The use of footage from 50 years later, when Hurley is describing the incident, shows the lasting impact of the expedition. It also prepares the viewer for the rest of the story, which continues through these years. As such, this part references many aspects shown later in the documentary. Simultaneously, both the viewer and Hurley are introduced to his passion for travelling. This is fitting, as the experience acted

These are the philosophical conclusions the narrator comes to and then summarises in the coda. This essentially states that archaeology is unimportant due to its failure to capture the human spirit. The archaeologist himself, therefore, might be a personification of archaeologists or archaeology as a whole. Exact details about his study are not included, and the ambiguity of his conclusions, the most emphasized fact, applies to all ancient history. Personification of concepts or large groups are present the poem: e.g. "the criminal in us." This simplifies the concepts being referred to, both making them more accessible, and expressing them in fewer words. Therefore, doing this tightens the structure of the poem. The archaeologist’s inability to answer the questions posed by the narrator both parallels his lack of awareness of the narrator's viewpoint, and discredits him to the audience. This vindicates the narrator's final dismissal of 'history'. The narrator, of course, can only make discoveries if they are a character themself, with a unique perspective which may or may not reflect the authors. If not, they are a persona used to consider an issue from a new perspective. The visibility of the narrator is demonstrated through their use of colloquial language - "that's a stumper". In the coda and title, attention is also