Does the ending of "Endurance: Shackleton's Incredible Voyage" by Alfred Lansing sound reasonable?

Let me provide my own answer to see if I can get more answers.

I will make a bold claim that Alfred Lansing made this up and also influenced other authors.

The question confused me for a long time and I suddenly realize that the only way find out whether that was the case or not is to check Shackleton's own account for that meeting. So that is what Shackleton wrote in "South",

“Mr. Sørlle came out to the door and said, “Well?” “Don’t you know me?” I said. “I know your voice,” he replied doubtfully. “You’re the mate of the Daisy.” “My name is Shackleton,” I said. Immediately he put out his hand and said, “Come in. Come in.” “Tell me, when was the war over?” I asked. ...

Was it possible Shackleton forgot (or too embarrassed)to mention someone cried? I then check with Frank Worsley 's "Shackleton's boat journey" for account of that meeting,

Sørlle came out and Shackleton said "Do you know me?" Sørlle said: "NO." Then I said:" Do you know me?" He looked at me and said emphatically "No", and evidently did not want to! When Shackleton told him we had lost out ship and crossed the island, Sørlle almost dragged us in. Sir Ernest, to be polite, said to Sørlle: "I'm afraid we smell." But replied:"That doesn't matter, we're used to it on a whaling station!"

Again, no one cried.

Kim Heacox in his book "Shackleton: The Antarctic Challenge" wrote,

"My name is Shackleton" The disbelief was unanimous, and at least one old whaler who witnessed the exchange turned away and wept tears of joy

At least this writing makes more sense than Alfred Lansing's words.

So my next question is why Alfred Lansing made this up?

BTW, I am a Chinese, live my entire life in China and English is my second language. So I may miss something importantly here but I hope not.

Shackleton is my role model. I read all the books about him and the endurance trip except for "Shackleton" by Huntford Roland (Hodder & Stoughton 1985). That was rather an old book I can't find here. So I don't know if that one recorded the meeting or not.

--- update ---

I am adding another detail in Alfred Lansing's book I find strange (the only 2 places in his book I think that didn't make sense).

“Would you please take us to Anton Andersen,” he said softly. The foreman shook his head. Anton Andersen was not at Stromness any longer, he explained. He had been replaced by the regular factory manager, Thoralf Sørlle. The Englishman seemed pleased. “Good,” he said. “I know Sørlle well.

Neither did Shackleton nor Worsley mentioned that at all in their books. They both said they looked for Sørlle directly. How likely is that they both said this part wrong ?

So there are two things here. First, Lansing's wording. "Some say that..." says that he doesn't know: he is saying something reported by some sources and not others. To me, the phrasing strongly implies that he has access to sources which say this as well as sources that don't, and is unsure if it was true.

What source might that have been? Lansing would not have been able to interview Shackleton, Worsley, or Crean, who had all died by that point. He may have been able to interview Sørlle - I can't find dates for him. But it is very likely he would have been able to get information from someone on the Norwegian side - many would still have been alive by 1959. He would also have had access to the private papers of both Shackleton and Worsley - as Wikipedia notes, "Virtually every diary kept during the expedition was made available to the author", and both had extensive correspondence, lecture notes, etc, which is now at the Scott Polar in Cambridge and all would have been available to Lansing. It is very likely that somewhere in there, or from a second-hand account, is a more detailed account of the meeting.

So it is very plausible he had a source for this, even if he did not specifically say where.

Secondly, if it is true, why would they not mention it? I think an assumption based purely on the wording of Shackleton and Worsley's memoirs is missing a key detail: the cultural context.

Both these men were born in the 1870s, and had gone to sea at a young age: they had lived their entire life under a culture that would strongly discourage outward displays of emotion, the famous "stiff upper lip". It was not expected that men would cry: if they did, you probably wouldn't mention it unless you wanted to make a point about them.

What we're seeing is a gently edited version of the expedition: Shackleton is glossing over details he doesn't think are quite appropriate, or don't fit with the tone of the story.

Consider that throughout South - two years of incredibly high stress and emotion - everyone is calm, and stoic. No-one cries. No-one weeps, or swears. There are only a couple of times where Shackleton admits to any kind of strong emotion on the part of his crew - and always it's a brief thing, improving under good leadership, presented to show how well everyone is doing. For example, when out on the ice before Endurance sinks, we learn that:

I knew how important it was to keep the men cheerful, and that the depression occasioned by our surroundings and our precarious position could to some extent be alleviated by increasing the rations, at least until we were more accustomed to our new mode of life. That this was successful is shown in their diaries.

A little later, when the Endurance sinks, he quotes a diary - so someone else's words - and again he is keen to stress they all cheered up quickly:

"The loss of the ship sent a slight wave of depression over the camp. No one said much, but we cannot be blamed for feeling it in a sentimental way ...the actual parting was not without its pathos, quite apart from one's own desolation, and I doubt if there was one amongst us who did not feel some personal emotion when Sir Ernest, standing on the top of the look-out, said somewhat sadly and quietly, 'She's gone, boys.'"

"It must, however, be said that we did not give way to depression for long, for soon every one was as cheery as usual ..."

The psychological effect of a slight increase in the rations soon neutralized any tendency to downheartedness...

Later he acknowledges that the party he had left behind on Elephant Island were in a position where "...the physical discomforts were tending to produce acute mental depression" but again, good leadership bucks everyone up:

I think without doubt that all the party who were stranded on Elephant Island owe their lives to [Wild]. The demons of depression could find no foothold when he was around; and, not content with merely "telling," he was "doing" as much as, and very often more than, the rest. He showed wonderful capabilities of leadership and more than justified the absolute confidence that I placed in him. Hussey, with his cheeriness and his banjo, was another vital factor in chasing away any tendency to downheartedness.

In reality, we know things were more stressed. For example, the carpenter, McNish, famously "mutinied" in some way - accounts differ as to exactly how - and Shackleton bore enough of a grudge he did not nominate him for the medal the rest of the crew received - but this is completely absent from both books. Shackleton is telling a heroic story, and he is choosing what details to mention in order to present it the best way.