Kon-Tiki
NOTE:
This material is provided to facilitate better understanding of the book Kon-Tiki
by Thor
Heyerdahl.
About The Kon-Tiki
Expeditions. These two pages include valuable background information about the
Kon-Tiki Expedition and other work by Thor Heyerdahl: Page 1
and Page 2.
About The Scientific
Method. This is a book about a
major experiment run by a group of Norwegian explorers. To understand the book properly, you
need to understand the basic components of the Scientific Method; Page
3.
About Further
Voyages. Since Heyerdahl?s
experiment, his grandsons have replicated his work (to some extent). See Page
4 for more on this follow-up.
How to Read This Book. Check out the structure of this
book. Start by reading the
Foreword. Notice that in this book
there is a section of white pages in the middle of the book. Before you read the book, read the
Biographical Background and the Historical Background. While you read, you should consult the
map at the beginning of the book.
As you read, you may find the list of Literary Allusions helpful in
understanding the context of the book.
Finally, you should read the Critical Excerpts after you have finished
the book.
How to Read Each
Chapter. Notice that this book was
written in Topical Outline Format.
In this method, the writer provides a brief outline of each chapter at
the very beginning of each chapter.
You should read the outline for each chapter before beginning to read
the chapter. Be absolutely sure
you understand the key words in the Topical Outline Format. By carefully reading the topics,
and looking up each word that you don?t know, and actively thinking about the
meaning, you can save yourself a lot of trouble and time as you read the
chapter.
STUDY QUESTIONS (Chapter by Chapter)
Chapter 1: (From the Topical Outline Format). BE SURE to look up these words: Retrospect, Current (n.) People (v.)
What original
observations got Heyerdahl thinking about the issue that would later become the
Kon-Tiki Expedition?
What basic research
questions was Heyerdahl interested in?
What kinds of sources
did he consult/refer to to help him focus his question (his review of
literature)? Does he name those sources? Why? Why not?
If you could summarize
his literature review on the research topic, what important points did he learn
from his review of literature?
By the end of chapter
1, after much observation, a question formulation, and a review of literature,
it is clear that Heyerdahl has a hypothesis. What is that hypothesis?
Chapter 2: (From the Topical Outline Format). BE SURE to look up these words: Turning
point, resource, triumvirate, saboteurs, desiderata.
Why does the old man
in the museum object to ?arguments??
What does Heyerdahl
claim supports his conclusions?
What does the old man
see as the ?task of science??
Heyerdahl talks much
about the people he discussed his theory with. Why does he not name them?
One way to support a
proposed research project is to get the opinions of experts. Who are the experts Heyerdahl
consults? What are their
qualifications as experts? What do they believe about rafts?
Where does Heyerdahl
get his idea for a balsa raft?
Which people used these kinds of rafts? Does Heyerdahl provide evidence that Tiki?s people used
these rafts?
Heyerdahl also talks
to his friends. What were their
original objections to his plan?
Who are the men
Heyerdahl selects to go with him on the raft? What does each man potentially contribute to the expedition?
What ?lucky breaks?
does Heyerdahl experience in putting together his expedition?
What modern items does
Heyerdahl plan to bring with him on the raft? How will those affect the testing of his hypothesis?
What setbacks does
Heyerdahl experience as he puts the expedition together?
How is nationality
importing in getting this project going?
How was the project
finally funded?
POSSIBLE
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
Imagine you are Thor
Heyerdahl. You are going to write
to the National Geographic Society for funding. Write the first parts of a research proposal to get
funding for the Kon-Tiki expedition.
In your research proposal, include your research question, your
hypothesis, the research you have done to support your hypothesis, and your
proposed method for undertaking the testing of the hypothesis. Include a timeline for the
project.
Heyerdahl uses many metaphors and similes to develop his writing. This style of writing can be hard to understand, because it sets up comparisons that the reader may/may not understand.
A metaphor is a direct claim that X = Y. Thus X has all of the attributes of Y. Example: That man is a rat. (Rats are dirty, disease-carrying creatures that are generally hated by most people. Thus, most people probably do not like this man because of some of his personal characteristics.)
A simile is similar to a metaphor, but it usually focuses on one characteristic of comparison and it often uses comparative structures such as ?like? and ?as.? Example: The boy moves like a bat in the night. (Bats move swiftly and without impediment in the night. Thus, the boy walks smoothly without difficulty.)
On p. 22, the author develops a metaphor:
?They [specialists] limit their own scope in order to be able to dig in the depths with more concentration for details. Modern research demands that every branch shall dig in its own hole. It?s not usual for anyone to sort out what comes up out of the holes and try to put it all together.?
Here the writer is talking about specialists in many fields but is talking about them as though they were all archeologists ? they ?dig? (investigate) ?in holes?(areas of research) and examine ?what comes out of the holes? (results of investigation) and don?t ?put it all together? (connect different areas of research).
On p. 23, the author develops a simile:
?But to solve the problems of the Pacific without throwing light on them from all sides was, it seemed to me, like doing a puzzle and only using the pieces of one color.
Here the author is comparing problem solving to doing puzzles and failing to look at all the sides of the problem to using puzzles pieces of only one color.
As you read this book, look for more metaphors and similes.