This book is a biography of Zweig, recording twelve events that changed human history, including "The Fall of Byzantium", "A Minute of Waterloo" and "The Struggle of Antarctic Exploration". Among them, what impressed me the most was the Antarctic struggle.
The story tells that Scott and his party went to the South Pole. They competed with Amundsen and others for the first place, but they lost. On the way home, five people cheered each other up and died unfortunately, but they brought many precious samples of stories to Britain.
Judging from the story told in the article, Scott and his party did lose, but he was a loser, with twelve historical moments, twelve masters and twelve stars. They may succeed or fail, but they are all the same. They are all people who have made great contributions. In that case, why care about failure? Only by taking failure as success can we light up our sky!
Why is such a failure not equal to success?