Kon-Tiki

This is the first person account of Thor Heyerdahl of his 1947 voyage with five companions across the South Pacific; over 4,000 nautical miles in 101 days with five companions on a balsa log raft. There are various genres this book could be said to fall into: anthropology, adventure/exploration and memoir, and I have mixed feelings about its success in each.

The entire purpose of the voyage was "to support a theory that the South Sea Islands were populated from Peru." Heyerdahl did have some compelling points for his theory. Given his expeditions sailing in craft of ancient design, Heyerdahl has good reason to claim that the ocean is "a conveyer, not an isolator." (Although in that case one must ask why Old and New Worlds lost contact show more for centuries.) Right in the front matter is a map showing the Humboldt currents and trade winds--going west, not east, making it seem plausible the islands were peopled from the Americas rather than Asia. And the sweet potato, which comes from South America, is a Polynesian staple. Nevertheless, Heyerdahl couldn't even get a legitimate scholar to look at his manuscript, because the Incas didn't have boats--only rafts which were believed unseaworthy. So Heyerdahl decided to have constructed a craft made of the same design and materials as pre-Columbian Peruvians and sail it from Peru across the Pacific to one of the South Sea Islands to prove it could be done, so his theory could be taken seriously. From what I can gather, despite the success of his voyage, this is considered by anthropologists today to be at best a fringe theory, if not downright crackpot. Worse is Heyerdahl's fixation that every "high" aspect of pre-Columbian New World came from "legendary white people" who voyaged to the New World, presumably from Europe, and created Aztec, Inca and Polynesian civilization and then were displaced by later Amerindian settlers. So as anthropology, although there's not much discussion of it, for me the book fails pretty resoundingly. Especially when you consider his craft had to be towed out of harbor, didn't land so much as wreck itself on a South Sea Island reef, and that, as Heyerdahl admits, it was sheer luck they used just cut balsa wood which still had enough sap to keep the craft afloat. Had they used dried logs as planned, they would have floundered.

And then there's the memoir/adventure tale aspect, which I consider a qualified success. Qualified because note the above part about luck--and admittedly guts. But I'm somewhat a fan of tales of exploration and I couldn't help compare Heyerdahl to his compatriot Roald Amundsen, the polar explorer. Amundsen famously said that "adventure is just bad planning." He won that race to the South Pole because of rational and efficient planning, preparedness, experience and skill--little of which seemed evident in Heyerdahl. Reading of how Heyerdahl prepared and planned for the Kon-Tiki expedition on the other hand, it's hard for me to understand how he didn't wind up with a Darwin Award. Several maritime experts told him the Kon Tiki was unseaworthy, just as anthropologists had told him his migration theories were unsound--he launched anyway. And as memoir, if you're expecting to find much psychological insight into what he and his five companions went through on a raft for nearly four months, you're going to be disappointed.

Ah, but there are some redeeming qualities to reading this--namely as a tale of the sea. It was often (although perhaps not often enough) fascinating to read about the marine life they came across, the storms and dangers they faced. An encounter with a whale shark was particularly memorable--as was just the abundance of food available to them living off the sea in that raft. They had enough flying fish jumping into the raft to make fishing superfluous the way Heyerdahl told it. Crab, squid, even plankton around them could make a tasty meal, although their favorite was the Bonito fish. So it's as an account of nature and the sea that this tale makes up points for me, even if I look at the theories that inspired this voyage with a jaundiced eye. show less

There is BAD speculative/alternative/fringe history. Think David Hatcher Childress, Von Daniken, and their ilk. There is BETTER speculative/alternative/fringe history. Think Graham Hancock and the author of this work: Thor Heyerdahl. It is disingenuous to put someone like Von Daniken or Tsoukalos in the same category as Hancock or Heyerdahl. Thor Heyerdahl's great 1947 work Kon Tiki concerned his theory that balsawood rafts from ancient Peru could have made the ocean journey to the islands of Polynesia. How did sweet potatoes reach the area? What of Polynesian myths of settlers from the east? The gripping first-person narrative of Heyerdahl explains his theory, the building of the raft, and his journey, with his companions, across the show more Pacific. As a first person travel story it is grand and gripping. No wonder it sold so many copies, engendered many copycats, and spawned a documentary film. (A documentary film I grew up watching clips from in various forms on old A&E and Discovery channels in the 1980s and 1990s back when they were good, documentary channels.) There are some spots of the is 1947 book that read funny to modern ears: some subtle racism or Eurocentrism. Some funny old fashioned terms. (And some odd translation choices.) But all-in-all, it's a classic of the speculative history genre and for good reason: it's a gripping yarn of can-do post-WWII attitude. This version is illustrated and "enriched" with a supplementary section that provides some good pics and some odd commentary and context. But, a good paperback version to have. A good book. show less

Crackpot science, excellent writing. I hadn't read this since grade school and was instantly reminded of why it became a classic, despite it's ridiculous theories of Polynesian origins. Nice description of the entire trip, from getting the balsa logs in the Andes to surviving the final wreck. High adventure, indeed.

Only the elements mattered. And the elements seemed to ignore the little raft. Or perhaps they accepted it as a natural object, which did not break the harmony of the sea but adapted itself to current and sea like bird and fish. Instead of being a fearsome enemy, flinging itself at us, the elements had become a reliable friend which steadily and surely helped us onward.

I don't think i've ever had much respect for explorer/adventurer types. I’m not saying thats a good thing it just is. There always seems like it took a lot of people to get the one or two you’ve heard of where they wanted to go. Plus the use of natives for african/mountain expeditions is practically cheating ;) . Even with the arctic expeditions lets face it the show more huskies were doing most of the heavy lifting :P .

Anyway... these guys i can respect... because they’re idiots! I mean, not only no natives who might know what they’re doing but they don’t even have any sailors at all on they’re experimental sea voyage. Just 6 crazy scandanavians on a type of raft that hasn’t been used for hundreds of years.

I love that this is experimental archeaology, and as always with that, they learn a lot of interesting stuff no one knew before.

The writing is far better than i expected too. For non-fiction it has aquite a flourish to it at times. Some of the incidents might be a little truncated compared to what you might get in a hollywoodized version but its still very compelling.

In fact i havn’t read anything which made the oceans sound this interesting since Verne and 20,000 Leagues... except this is real!

For long stretches it seems like this was far easier a voyage than you might expect but then here and there you realise just how close it all came to disaster. I also reallu like how much science stuff was being done onboard, testing different things, sending data to various institutes etc.
Its like a space mission at times, in more ways than one, as it soon becomes apparent that the raft can’t be turned araound or even slowed, so anything thing (or anyone) that goes overboard is just going to drift away with no chance of rescue, very space like.

Due to how well its written i was already on 4 stars, then raised it to 5 due to all the info i was getting i hadn’t heard before. And that was even before many of the really compelling incidents occurred so absolutely 5 stars.

PS. They don't eat any Dolphins. They keep referring to the Doradoe, aka Mahi Mahi, aka the dolphinfish as a Dolpin, that was annoying, its just a fish :lol . Although they are pretty beligerant to some of the other aquatic life, but not Dolphins!

Edit: New research might support Thor's theory https://sciencenorway.no/archaeology-history-society-and-culture/new-research-su... . show less

Although I read this over 30 years ago, I wanted to re-read it in light of recent DNA research the appears to confirm Heyeredahl's theory that some Polynesian's immigrated to eastern Pacific islands from South America, not from the west. Given the new evidence the book now has even greater weight and importance, not only as an influential work of exploration and a literary achievement, but the testing of a scientific theory that turned out to be correct. The book explores the Earth while also working out a new theory, comparable to Charles Darwin's The Voyage of the Beagle which contained notes about his evolving theory of the fixity of species. When I first read it, I didn't give much credence to his theory because who knew, and anyway show more if that's what it took to write a great adventure story so be it. But on re-reading it so much more satisfying and interesting knowing it is correct.

Kon-Tiki was published just 3 years after the end of WWII, one of the earliest post-war outdoor adventure books, and as such was influential with many that followed. There have been nine more raft expeditions, the latest in 2015, that recreated Heyeredahl's original. The longest, Las Balsas in 1973, went all the way to Australia and is the longest raft journey in history. The writing is vivid and joyful to read. This is a perfect book, there are not many in this world but I place this on a lightly stacked top shelf of any outdoor literature library.

(read 1981 and 2020) show less

Have you ever wanted to build a huge raft out of gigantic balsa trees that are found in the rainy, steamy jungles of Ecuador, assemble and bind them using vines and other natural ropes, not using any nails or metal wires of any kind in the construction, invite 5 of your friends to join you, and then launch from the shores of Peru to embark on a 4,300 nautical mile journey (a distance of travel equivalent from Chicago to Moscow!) across the Pacific Ocean to land on one of the tiny islands found in French Polynesia?

If so, then go pick up Thor Heyerdahl’s fantastic and adventurous Kon-Tiki!

Thor wanted to prove a theory of his: that Incan Indians in ancient times sailed from Peru, landed and populated the islands located in the show more Polynesian Triangle. He stated that similar structures of pyramids and statues located in the jungles in Peru were also found on the islands in the Pacific. Archeologists and anthropologists he presented his theory to stated that it was impossible for humans to cross such a vast distance in a wooden raft while battling the elements in a vast and chaotic sea and SURVIVE.

So determined was Mr. Heyerdahl to prove these nay-sayers wrong that he decided to build a raft just like the ancient Inca had built them. He used the blueprints drawn up by the Spanish conquistadors who saw these ancient vessels in person long ago for its formation. Did I mention this voyage took place around 1947, well before GPS was a thing?

I found the whole book to be fascinating and the story had me day-dreaming about sailing on a raft while traversing the rough seas. The men became connected to nature; they came to know the currents and the trade winds; fish of all kinds would join them on their quest; when the rhythm of the ocean changed, they knew. The billions of stars that shone at night were their guides. The great ocean, the blue skies, the clouds, the raft herself – these were all the men knew for 3 whole months.

That’s pretty damn inspiring. Humans are born to travel, to go where no Man has gone before. The urge to explore the mysterious, the wild, and the untamed; that’s innate in us all.

I highly recommend this jewel. It will leave you wanting more. show less

This was a lot of fun to read. I enjoyed everything about this adventure. Heyerdahl is a fabulous storyteller and really funny too. Although slightly inaccurate, Heyerdahl was convinced there was a connection between the peoples of South America and the population of the Polynesian (Easter/Tahitian) Islands. Building a raft made of the same materials the Incas would have used (balsa wood, bamboo and other natural elements), Heyerdahl and five companions spent 101 days crossing 4,300 nautical miles of the Pacific ocean in all kinds of weather to prove the point. The six men (five from Norway and one Swede) took turns cooking and steering and got along surprisingly well for a group of grown men stuck in the middle of the Pacific for show more almost four months. They endured raging seas, wild winds and all sorts of aquatic creatures that insisted on joining them on the raft. The episode with the squid was especially disturbing.
The photography, while in 1940s black and white, is a helpful addition to the story. Imagining the size and heft of the raft would be difficult without it. show less