|
|
Does anybody think they have a reasonably clear idea of what Sir Joseph Blaine looks like? I've always visualized him as old-ish, thin but somewhat spry, something like the late Wilfred Hyde-White, but early in LOM his face is described as large and round. Is he supposed to be big and middle-aged? I know he's presumably still of an age to contemplate marriage.
On another subject, there's a discussion, also early in the book, of the chase of the Azul by the privateer Spartan, and I can't seem to visualize the geometry. The Surprise, duded up to look like the Azul, comes on the stern chase at night, and Jack realizes that the Azul is firing three guns at the Sparta, who is following directly in her wake. But one of the guns is apparently on the quarterdeck. As I understand it, the quarterdeck is below the level of the poop deck, so how could a quarterdeck gun be firing directly astern at a target--wouldn't the poop deck be in the way? Not to mention the mizzenmast.
In general, I have mixed feelings about LOM. It's very exciting--lots of things going on, pretty much nonstop. But it feels contrived to me, as though O'Brian were making it up to Jack for the turn he played on him in Reverse of the Medal. Everything works out _too_ well; it seems just a bit too pat for me.
One more thing. After the spectacular prize-taking in the Spartan affair, the point is made that, barring disaster, Jack now has enough money to last him the rest of his life, particularly as the great lawsuit is conveniently decided in his favor. That situation holds, as best I recall (the books are not at hand), until Yellow Admiral, at the start of which he's suddenly on the brink of poverty, having to sell off property and worried about his future. Did I miss something? All I recall by way of explanation is something in passing about condemned prizes, but what prizes would there have been at that time in the war, and when was he supposed to have taken them? YA is my least-favorite book in the canon, poorly plotted to my taste, and this sudden poverty seems to me particularly contrived.
Bob Fleisher
Houston, TX
As best I recall, Sir Joseph is described as pale-faced (was glabrous the word POB used?), and somehow or other I got the impression that if he is not actually obese, he is at least flabby.
As for Jack's changes in fortune, I too find them unconvincing. I wonder why POB needed to add these financial fluctuations in the latter books. I have to admit that from Commodore onward I have found the books to be disappointing, and have not reread them, but I can't recall what significance Jack's money problems had on the plots, other than adding an element of distress and unease.
Gerry Strey
Madison, Wisconsin
At 1:48 AM -0500 10/9/2002, Bob Fleisher wrote:
On another subject, there's a discussion, also early in the book, of the chase of the Azul by the privateer Spartan, and I can't seem to visualize the geometry. The Surprise, duded up to look like the Azul, comes on the stern chase at night, and Jack realizes that the Azul is firing three guns at the Sparta, who is following directly in her wake. But one of the guns is apparently on the quarterdeck. As I understand it, the quarterdeck is below the level of the poop deck, so how could a quarterdeck gun be firing directly astern at a target--wouldn't the poop deck be in the way? Not to mention the mizzenmast.
Among warships, a quarterdeck and a poop deck were generally found only on ships of the line, and very rarely on frigates or smaller vessels. Among merchant ships, both decks would likely only be found on larger passenger carrying East Indiamen. A smaller ship such as the Azul would have only a quarterdeck.
In general, I have mixed feelings about LOM. It's very exciting--lots of things going on, pretty much nonstop. But it feels contrived to me, as though O'Brian were making it up to Jack for the turn he played on him in Reverse of the Medal. Everything works out _too_ well; it seems just a bit too pat for me.
One impression I had of LOM was that it was borrowing much from Post Captain. I sometimes mix up the Bellone and the Spartan, and the cutting out of the Fanciulla/Diane from a Channel port. And in both books, Jack starts out with financial troubles that are resolved by the end, while pursuing his goal of being appointed Post Captain.
Don Seltzer
Gerry wrote:
As best I recall, Sir Joseph is described as pale-faced (was glabrous the word POB used?), and somehow or other I got the impression that if he is not actually obese, he is at least flabby.
But glabrous doesn't mean pale, fat OR flabby. Thus the OED:
glabrous (_________), a. [f. L. glaber without hair, smooth, bald (see glad) + -ous.] Free from hair, down, or the like; having a smooth skin or surface. Now only as a scientific term.
Howard
Who is somewhat glabrous himself
I seem to remember this discussion about what Blaine looked like from a few months ago & I'm not sure we reached a general conclusion. For myself I always pictured him as a stoutish man.
Not sure that all ships, especially Frigates & below had poop decks.
This sudden poverty has been noted here before. Maybe its suddeness had to do with who was doing POB's editing?
Ted
POB generally used contemporary sources, but may have occasionally been misled when he relied on Admiral Smyth's Sailor's Word Book, which was published in 1867. The numerous references to the Azul as a"barque", and "barque-rigged" are an anachronistic slip. In 1813, such a vessel would have been spelled bark.
Another anachronism repeated throughout the canon is referring to the "last dogwatch" instead of the second dogwatch. This is a RN usage that became popular in the 20th century.
Don Seltzer
In the early chapters of M&C, POB used a simple literary trick involving his three main characters, which has been previously discussed.
In LOM, he employs a similar technique/trick regarding Jack and Stephen. Be the first to spot it and win 5 minutes of eternal fame, courtesy of Charlezzzz.
Don Seltzer
He put them on a ship together?
Alec
Hmmm, the only 'trick' that comes to mind in M&C is that each of the three central characters starts off his morning by muttering "Christ". I dont have the passages to hand, but I believe Dillon is singing as he shaves, Stephen is desheveled and heartsick on his hilltop home, and Jack has been suddenly awoke in his cabin.
Now, I havent come across anything so neat as that in my reread of LOM (of course I have only just made my way into the 2nd chapter). But there is a link between Jack and Stephen.
They have both suffered a cruel blow, lost the love of their lives. Jack mourns the Navy, Stephen mourns Diana. Both men are stoicly going on about their business, but both are susceptible to sudden pains of loss.
Surely Don had something cleverer in mind, him being an uncommon deep old file, but might I perhaps get partial credit, or an "E" for effort, at least?
Vanessa, frowsty and dissolute.
Vanessa, you are halfway there, and only need to backtrack a little. Don't look for anything overly clever, just a simple, but neat little touch.
I only noticed it because POB made a point of it in his notes.
Don Seltzer
OK, each character is introduced with a similar phrase ...
"Ever since Jack Aubrey had been dismissed the service..."
and
"Ever since Stephen Maturin had become rich..."
Then POB goes on to describe the effect these recent reverses have had on their respective lives.
If it ain't that I give up and beg to be let in on the secret.
Vanessa, who seems to be the only lissun playing this game anyhoo.
We have a winner! Vanessa may apply at Kelly's in Doylstown for her prize. Even before he began writing LOM, POB wrote in his notes that he wished to start chapter 1 with "Ever since SM had become rich..." and chapter 2 with "Ever since JA had been dismissed...". **
In the final version, both passages were in the first chapter, with the JA first (making for a stronger opening, IMHO).
In addition to her 5 minutes of fame, Vanessa will also be receiving a copy of this page, so that she may review the other related notes that POB made.
Next contest, on Monday, will be Guess the Alternative Endings.
**The POB notes are provided through the courtesy of the Lilly Library, Bloomington, IN
Don Seltzer
"Polly, an enchanting young person whose black hair and blue eyes brought Diana even more strongly to mind, played some variations on a theme by Pergolesi...."
A midi file of a canzonetta by Pergolesi:
http://www.karadar.com/Dictionary/pergolesi.html
A movement from his Stabat Mater:
http://stage.vitaminic.com/main/chamber_works/singles
He seems to have gotten left out of the "Evenings With the Captain" CD's. Perhaps there will be another volume.
Edmund
LOM ends with the Surprise going to Sweden, the reunion of Stephen and Diana, and one of the happier endings in the canon with a scene almost literally out of an Italian opera.
But POB's notes indicate that very early on, he was considering a very different tragic end, perhaps the final book in the canon, and wrote down a few lines about two alternative endings.
Beginning with the final setting in Sweden, how would you end LOM? The prize is 15 minutes of fame to each of the two answers that match POB's ideas.
Don Seltzer
Stephen dies of the laudanum overdose and Jack blames Diana.
/g.
I'd have Diana fall down the tower and be killed, or if you feel that that (IMO) undeserving female rates a more glamorous death, crash her balloon (but the horse survives).
Gerry Strey
Madison, Wisconsin
Stephen and Diana fly away in a red balloon, singing, sipping laudanum together, and are last seen over Lapland, flying north. They are flying still and sipping yet.
Surprise sails out through the Kattegat and heads north after them, and grounds on a floating island, the back of Monstro the Whale. The officers and crew set up a cricket pitch on her huge back and are last seen playing, playing, playing as they pass through the ice fields. They are playing forever, in a game of stupefying boredom. The rum will long since have run out, and Saint Famine is their only audience, crying out, "Well played, oh, well played. Hor, hor, hor."
When Britain again has need of them, it is rumored, they will float and fly back; Stephen and Diana will require a divorce, Jack will hopelessly demand his back pay. Britain will turn to some obscure Australian actor in her moment of greatest despair, and will make him Lord Mayor of London.
Charlezzzzz
If O'Brian really thought about ending the series with the tragic ending to LOM, I suspect he planned to crash both Stephen and Diana in the balloon. It's always seemed to me that there was a great deal of lead-up to the balloon, and not much payoff.
Bob Fleisher
Houston, TX
I agree with you and Gerry about the balloon. It was foreshadowed from the very beginning of the book, and then all the air leaked out before it ever got off the ground.
Katherine
Why do I see a falling balloon featuring in here, bearing -- perhaps -- Diana and Stephen?
Bruce Trinque
41°37'52"N 72°22'29"W
Stephen kills Jagiello in a duel and is seriously wounded, having to operate on himself. Jack refuses to allow Diana on the ship to nurse Stephen, so she has to follow in her balloon, and elopes with the balloon (pilot? who drives those things?) Then POB said, wait, I've used that one before...-RD, which obviously the real unreal ending has been revealed, but I like Charlezzzzz's the best.
If they suspect me of intelligence, I am sure it will soon blow over (TFOW, p.184)
Jack is slowly expiring in the lantern light between 2 cannons. A concerned Maturin bends over him."Kiss me,Steven",murmurs Aubrey, as his life fades.
Marion
We have some fine imaginations among the lissuns, and even a few that think like POB. Among the entries submitted so far, we have one winner. Another is not quite correct, but is pointed in the same direction.
Don Seltzer
Bob Fleischer wrote:
If O'Brian really thought about ending the series with the tragic ending to LOM, I suspect he planned to crash both Stephen and Diana in the balloon. It's always seemed to me that there was a great deal of lead-up to the balloon, and not much payoff.
You mean, instead of a lead-up, O'Brian couldn't get the lead out? It went over like a lead balloon?
sorry
Marian
Stephen is killed in a duel with Jagiello, after leaving his fortune to Sophie. Diana, conscience-stricken, takes off in her balloon, never to be seen again. Jack unable, and unwilling, to fritter away his wife's new fortune, settles down to life as a country squire.
Bob Kegel
46°59'18.661"N 123°49'29.827"W
Stephen dies from the fall down the stairs?
Rowen
Yes, and doesn't Stephen have a strange, surreal vision or dream of Diana in a balloon that seems to suggest death or disaster?
Gerry Strey
Madison, Wisconsin
Stephen dies of the fall induced by the laudanum overdose. Jack blames Diana, insults her. Jagiello is compelled to defend her honor. Jack kills/seriously wounds Jagiello. Diana throws herself from the basket of the balloon and falls to her death, leaving one nasty letter for Sophie with accusations and information about Jack's peccadilloes, and another guilt-inducing note for Jack. Jack, overcome with remorse and grief for Stephen, and then battered by Diana's viciousness, but unaware of the contents of her letter to Sophie, sails back to England. On the way a French ship is encountered. Jack hastily scribbles a letter to Sophie as they close for the battle. The French attempt to board; Jack takes foolish risks because of his fey mood, throws himself into the pitched battle, and, although they win, is mortally wounded (mortal, because there is no Stephen around to 'roust out his brains and set 'em to right'). The incriminating letter reaches Sophie, together with news of all the deaths. Sophie swoons, recovers to read Jack's last letter to her, and then Diana's accusations, then sings the final, haunting aria as she plunges the letter opener into her breast and dies. After the final curtain all the principals and the conductor appear on stage to tumultuous applause.
Rowen
Rowen, that's awful! Have you no heart? Clearly you've been listening to too much Verdi; or Puccini; or Glinka; or someone else not worthy to kiss Mozart's shoes; or Handel's sandals! Big moneymaker *you'd* be as a novelist!
Marian
I am just overwhelmed by the imagination behind these entries. I am sorely tempted to leave the contest open just to see what comes in overnight, but the truth is that we now have both winners.
POB wrote "I might have DV reduced to exhibiting herself in balloons. SM arrives, says (though terrified of heights) may I come too? They rise very high float away and away above sea above ice beyond all recall"
Charlezzzz wrote:
Stephen and Diana fly away in a red balloon, singing, sipping laudanum together, and are last seen over Lapland, flying north. They are flying still and sipping yet.
and much more that POB certainly intended, though he didn't actually jot it down.
On another sheet, POB wrote "Thought for -another book-(crossed out) an
ultimate naval tale. SM, in Baltic, finds DV, perhaps neglected by
Jagiello, perhaps ill-used. Fights Jagiello -
Rosemary Davis was close, but it was Bob Kegel who suggested
Stephen is killed in a duel with Jagiello, and some fanciful stuff that
POB never got around to putting on paper.
Charlezzzz may repair to Kelly's to withdraw 30 minutes of fame, retaining
half for himself and forwarding the balance to Bob. Both will receive a
copy of the relevant pages for further study.
Rowen deserves some sort of Honourable Mention.
These notes are provided through the courtesy of the Lilly Library,
Bloomington, IN.
Don Seltzer, off to set up the VCR for the first episode of The Ship
on 10/14/02 8:13 PM, Don Seltzer at dseltzer@DRAPER.COM wrote:
Charlezzzz may repair to Kelly's to withdraw 30 minutes of fame, retaining
half for himself and forwarding the balance to Bob. Both will receive a copy
of the relevant pages for further study.
Done and done. My half hour begins tomorrow at noon. Bob's half hour has
just concluded to tumultuous, though secret, applause.
Rowen deserves some sort of Honourable Mention.
She may, when she comes to Doylestown, feed the alligators.
Charlezzzzz
Thank you kindly, Don! I'm just pleased you didn't write "dishonourable
mention"!
And what joy, Charlezzzz! Allie and I are old friends and it will be a
delight to renew our acquaintance. I'll be sure to bring along only the very
best Iowa beef for them.
Rowen, choosing to ignore the less delightful implication of "feed the
alligators
POB began writing LOM in January, 1987. On the 16th of that month, he
wrote down a one page "tentative general view".
The introductory chapter of 9000+ words was noted as done.
Ch. 2 has Jack and Stephen at sea, with Stephen explaining the situation.
Ch. 3 has gunnery exercises and general scenes of life aboard. A prize is
taken and word received of the privateer Spartan.
Ch. 4 The sound of a battle is heard, and the Spartan taken. The Surprise
returns to Shelmerston with prizes.
Ch. 5 Stephen meets Sir Joseph in London and learns that Jagiello is dead,
and Diana living in poverty. He heads for Sweden.
Ch. 6 Stephen and Diana reunite, Stephen has his drug horrors and Diana
shows kindness.
Ch. 7 With either Babbington or another old friend such as Heneage in
nominal command, Jack has his successful attack on the French.
At this point, POB decides on another approach.
"No: a less improbable sequence is that SM should learn of the proposed
attack from Blaine or that he should prompt it; that he should rejoin JA,
participate in it. Then to Sweden in the Surprise, there be reconciled,
and there be joined by JA in repaired Surprise ready for South America."
With this modified plot line, chapters 5 on are revised as follows
Ch. 5 At London meeting with Blaine, Stephen learns of the possible mission
for Jack, and of Diana's balloon flights. No Jagiello; something about
list of dead, Jag., French agent, Wray.
Ch. 6 Stephen joins Jack for the battle.
Ch. 7 To Sweden and Diana.
Ch. 8 Scene with Jack and Sophie, talk of reinstatement, meeting with
Melville, problem of accepting a free pardon. "Qu. would he in fact?"
Ch. 9 The Surprise goes to the Baltic.
These notes courtesy of the Lilly Library, Bloomington IN
Don Seltzer
In these notes or any others that you have seen, does POB ever refer
to a Jagiello-Cherubino connection? Could he have spared Jagiello's
life just for the sake of the delightful "Ah, tutti contenti saremo
così" scene?
Generally, I was wondering to what extent the Dryden quotes and other
literary allusions are part of the books' structure or whether they
were thrown in as a relish.
As always, thanks for posting these notes.
Katherine
This isn't a proper Group Read or POB question (I'm not even reading
LOM just now), but another vessel/rigging question.
LOM once again mentions the "ship-rigged sloop."
Would there be advantage gained by having all square sails on
what I assume is the relatively small hull of a sloop? For that
matter, would a sloop likely have three masts?
I came upon yet another rigging-related site:
http://www.geocities.com/cutthroadisland/ShipDescrip.html
but this "ship-rigged sloop" business still has me befuddled.
Marshall Rafferty
________
In the RN of the period, "sloop" meant that the vessel was commanded by a Master
& Commander... irrespective of rig. The civilian meaning of "fore-and-aft rigged
with a single foresail" did not apply in the navy.
µ
Mark Iliff
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 04:53:53 +0100, Mark Iliff wrote:
In the RN of the period, "sloop" meant that the vessel was commanded by
a Master & Commander... irrespective of rig.
Ah, right you are! A little digging on my part reveals that even a
ship of the line could be designated a sloop when so commanded
for troopship or storage duties.
On the other hand, that almost makes the reference "Yet she was still
a frigate, and for her there would be no glory in capturing anything
of nominally inferior rank, such as the heavier post-ship and any of
the sloops, ship-rigged or otherwise" seem to imply that in this
context "sloop" refers to size, not command; but I may be reading
"nominally inferior rank" wrong.
I see on more reading that this entire sloop business is a bit
muddled.
Marshall
Seems clear to me- the ships in question were all troop or storage ships,
hence commanded by a master and called sloops even if they were of first rate
size.
John B
I'm sure you're right; however, at the risk of belaboring the point, I'll
mention that the passage was referring to the taking of French or American vessels.
Would they have followed the somewhat idiosyncratic RN designations?
Marshall
No doubt someone more expert will correct me, but I believe the RN did have
ship rigged sloops of about 16-18 guns, rather like a minature frigate. Of course
a brig of 18 guns would also be a sloop, just not a ship rigged sloop.
The French certainly had Covettes of that sort & perhaps the US Navy too?
Ted
At 8:50 AM +1100 10/28/2002, Ted wrote:
The French certainly had Corvettes of that sort & perhaps the US Navy too?
The American navy generally followed the same classification scheme as the
RN. Sloops of war were either 2 masted brig-sloops, or 3 masted ship-rigged
sloops, typically of about 14 - 18 guns. In a slight departure from the RN,
these were commanded by "Masters Commandant". The sloops of the USN had phenomenal
success against their RN counterparts.
The French navy had slightly different catagories, and referred to the larger
ship sloops and also the 20 - 22 gun "Post ships" as corvettes.
Don Seltzer
Perhaps one of the many music buffs here could help me.
Page 240 ~Harper.
Stephen is contemplating his evening with Blaine...
'And from this he moved to the opera, where they had heard a truly brilliant performance of La Nozze de Figaro, brilliant from the first notes of the overture to what Stephen always looked upon as the true end,before the hurlyburly of jovial peasants-the part where from a deas silence the dumbfounded Conte sings 'Contessa perdona, perdona, perdona.....together with the Contessa's exquisite replyand the crowd's words to the effect that they would now live happily ever after-'Ahi tutti contenti saremo cosi'- but never quite to his satisfaction.
Then to the last Paragragh of the book
.'and there the amazed foremast hands saw a blue and gold coach and four,escorted by a troop a cavalry in mauve coats with silver facings, driving slowly along the quay with their captain and a swedish offivcer on the box,their surgeon and his mate leaning out of the windows,and all of them, now joined by the lady on deck singing 'ah tutti contenti saremo cosi'.....
Are there any musical undercurrents or themes here which someone, like me, sadly ignorant of all things operatic might have missed?
Recently in his excellent notes Don indicated that POB had determined to finish the series much earlier than 'Blue at the Mizzen' and he mentioned what was intended to be the final book?
Was it LOTM-the final paragragh certainly has a ring of 'thats all folks' to it.
alec
Very early on, POB considered a few alternate endings to the book that would
become LOM, including an unhappy conclusion to the canon with a duel between
Stephen and Jagiello in which Stephen would be killed.
I don't think that he ever seriously pursued this plot line, and all of his
other planning notes show a happy reconciliation. The inclusion of the Figaro
opera is almost certainly intended as a musical foreshadowing. On one page,
in which he outlines the chapters yet to be written, he refers to the reconciliation
of Stephen and Diana as "Contesse perdona".
The short description of the final chapter is as follows:
"SM & DV - balloon - overdose - fall Don Seltzer
In his handling of the Sethian Mutiny Jack shows great skill in the art of man-management and in the use of acceptable compromise.
I have often tried to figure out if there is any other theme or message to be taken from this episode, but without much success.
Somehow, I feel that O Brian may have intended something by his use of the concept of covering something up so you can't see it. But that still everyone knows it's there.
Maybe the importance of perception over reality-but somehow I just can't get there. Maybe it's because there is no place to go?
alec
I know that O'Brian arranges to have people we like 'knocked on the head'
from time to time. Maybe by way of a wake up call-'this is war and our heroes
do get killed.'
But one death that always seemed to me to be strangley contrived was the drowning
of Dumamel.
He had paid his dues. Returned the Blue Peter. Set up Wray and Ledward. Stephen
had greatly compromised Dundas and Duhamel was to sail out of the books never
to be seen again.
Yet O'Brian felt the need to send him to the bottom of the ocean, dragged
down by the weight of his gold, his bankroll to a new life across the ocean.
Nah, I never understood that one.
alec
I always had my suspicions about that one. It was _so_ contrived
that I felt it could be a 'cover story' and that the it was
cooked up either to;
a) Give Duhamel a 'clean start' for his new life in Canada.
I would not have been surprised if Duhamel had turned up again
in a later book, perhaps working from Canada against the US.
On the other hand 'accidents do happen' and POB may have
intended to convey this, as well as the fact that Stephens
humourous 'dips' were in fact potentially very dangerous.
Rick
"Contrary to popular belief, penguins are not the salvation of modern
technology. Neither do they throw parties for the urban proletariat."
Hear hear! It seemed to me a piece of gratuitous misery,
that a man who had "paid his dues" and had no further part to play in the
plot should be disposed of out of hand - and so miserably.
--
Thanks Rick --Mmm food for thought there Ok
Much and all as I would like to agree with options (1) or (2) above, I can't find the slightest hint that this might be the case.
In fact the worrying line for me is Stephen's -
'I should not have mentioned his name had he being living.'
Because to tell the full story to Jack and give it meaning the name Duhamel had to be used.
My feeling is that in innate intelligence instinct of O Brian felt then that Duhamel could not live following the disclosure of his name so he had to go.
The only crumb of hope I get (and this is a pretty small crumb) is that it is certainly usual for Irish Catholics-(and I would guess Catalan Catholics too ) to make reference to the fact that a person is dead at the first mention of their name to a third party who clearly cannot know.
So on page 45, I would have expected Stephen to say-
'I will tell you this, Jack: the Frenchman was Duhamel, God rest his soul, with whom we had so much to do in Paris.
But then there is there is Dundas- who surely would relate the sad drowning to Jack at some stage in the future-unless the man that drowned was not Duhamel at all- but ???
Methinks me grasp at straws. hehehe
alec
Sorry Rick I was so busy listening to myself that I forgot to say that I like your Option 3. And it's the one I'm settling on (for the present!)
thanks again
alec
Guess I appear to to flogging a dead horse here-but it's a Bank holiday here and I've got a little spare time.
SM Page 322/3 While captured and travelling by coach-Duhamel ill
'He(Stephen) could at the same time put an end to Duhamel, for he had also renewed his store of sudden death and in one minute file he had enough to deal with fifty Duhamels and plenty to spare; but with this escort it would serve no good purpose and in any case he had never, as a physician, intentionally injured any man: he doubted that he could bring himself to do it, whatever extremity.
Is there a hint here that if at some stage Stephen was acting in a capacity other than that of 'physician' and that it served 'good purpose' that he could do the deed?
Of course the 'physician' exemption was need here because he had recently dispatched the two French spies in his capacity as an intelligence agent
In 'The Commodore'(108/109) Stephen relects again on Duhamel(who gave an accurate pistol) but gives no further hint as to his fate, but does use the words 'whom he had thoroughly liked'.
So on balance I have come to the conclusion that if Duhamel was dispenced with by English intelligence-Stephen was not complicit.
But maybe Blaine could have been, in what he might have seen as Stephen's long term interests.
BTW Rick -what is your'e personal view of Duhamel's death?
alec
In POB's planning notes*, Duhamel's name comes up frequently as a possible
means by which Wray's treason would eventually be exposed. IIRC,
"Stephen's French agent friend" is mentioned as early as the notes for the
books to follow IM, about the same time that POB decided to make Wray a
traitor. By the time of ROTM, POB is considering the possible ways for
Duhamel to come forward, and also the return of the Blue Peter. He seems
to struggle a bit in coming up with a scenario that satisfies him. There
is no hint, however, of Duhamel's ultimate fate.
Why does Duhamel drown offstage, between books? POB doesn't say, so I can
only speculate. In LOM, POB wanted Wray's guilt exposed, but not in a
manner that would easily allow for Jack's reinstatement into the RN. POB
wanted to eliminate the possibility of Duhamel testifying on Jack's behalf,
hence the exile to Canada. Perhaps between books, POB decided that even
that solution was not good enough, so he invented the Frenchman's
unfortunate demise, throwing in the extra touch of drowning by gold, to
make a further point about wealth.
*The POB notes are provided through the courtesy of the Lilly Library,
Bloomington IN
Don Seltzer
on 10/28/02 9:27 AM, Don Seltzer at dseltzer@DRAPER.COM wrote:
Perhaps between books, POB decided that even that solution was not good
enough, so he invented the Frenchman's unfortunate demise, throwing in the extra
touch of drowning by gold, to make a further point about wealth.
It began with Dillon, of course, but as book followed book, POB became a
savage god toward his creatures; he killed them more and more easily.
Charlezzzzz
Don wrote:
SNIP
POB wanted to eliminate the possibility of Duhamel testifying on Jack's
behalf,hence the exile to Canada. Perhaps between books, POB decided that even
that solution was not good enough, so he invented the Frenchman's unfortunate
demise, throwing in the extra touch of drowning by gold, to make a further point
about wealth.
You come very close to eliminating our (well Rick's) little conspiracy theory which I've grown quite attached to.
Me, I'm going to hold on the grassy knoll and smoking gun scenario.
Or even the knocked on the head and shot around the ankles theory: with Blaine looking at Duhamel's gold on his desk and mumbling -'all for the good of the country, all for the good of the country.'
alec
In my brain, I like to think the Dumamel staged his own death, so as to
throw the hounds off the scent.
He would have quite a few people interested in his existence or
non-existence. Some to the good, some to the bad.
So I think he staged his own death - sent a corpse (easily acquired) to
the bottom weighted with rocks, himself escaping on another ship with his
money. Probably not to the original destination, either.
He would have had to completely trusted Stephen - and he wouldn't have,
being an intelligence agent himself.
So he stages his death, buys an estate in Sweden, and lives his life out
in calm contemplation of little joys.
Susan (and that's how her brain stays happy)
Susan-For a while there you probably thought that I was going along with Rick's theory.
Me go along with Silly old Rick's idea of a British 'dirty trick'? Perish the thought.
Yep Duhamel and his progeny went on to do very well in Sweden.
Not many people know this but a direct descendent of his(lets call him Bjorn) starred in the Band ABBA whose song Waterloo(in praise of Nelson) won the Eurovision song contest in the early 1970's
http://www.lyricsxp.com/lyrics/w/waterloo_abba.html
Alec
BTW Rick -what is your'e personal view of Duhamel's death?
Blaine, dead or alive, but probably dead.
Duhamel was doubley dangerous as he knew of M. Talleyrands
contacts with the British.
Stephen would have suspected, of course, even if it _had_ been
an accident, and would have enquired no further in order to
preserve his doubt over an ugly act. Blaine would have allowed
Stephen his opportunity for self deception.
Remember that, in one book (I forget which), Stephen is
concerned that he might meet a like fate were his usefulness to
end.
But we, like Stephen, will never know for sure...
[Screen fades to black. Blaine speaks: 'so Sir, how far can we
trust His Majesties Francophone Americans?']
Rick
the Band ABBA whose song Waterloo(in praise of Nelson)
???????????????????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-- Hear hear! It seemed to me a piece of gratuitous misery, that a man who
had "paid his dues" and had no further part to play in the plot should be disposed
of out of hand - and so miserably.
I wonder if this is one time when POB shows a little cruelty? I can think
of one or two other instances in other books too. Or maybe he is showing realism
in that the real world does not seem to much care about paying dues & fairness?
Ted
Inspired by Charlezzzzz pudding story I decided to check back.
page 62/63
A crash somewhere forward,not unlike the firing of a twelve pounder,interupted
him.....'
snip
'Oh sir, if you please' cried the tall, pale frightened midshipman at the
cabin door. 'Mr Cornwallis's duty,but the digesting machine has burst.'
Babbington checks and returns(my words)
'Nobody dead '-and the surgeon says their scalds are of no consequence -will
heal in a month or so-but I am very much concerned to have to tell you sir,that
the pudding is spread just about equally over the cook and his mates and the
deck-head. They thought it might cook quicker if they put a smoothing-iron in
the safety valve.'
'It was a pity about the pudding' said Jack when they were back in the cabin......'
hehe
I wonder what type of contraption this digester was. It appears to have been
some type of early pressure cooker-
A visit to Google came up with this-
http://www.fis.uc.pt/museu/81ing.htm
The small print of the left reads-
'Papin's digester in bronze, with a lid which is closed and held in place
by thick pieces of iron, which serves to soften matter with the help of rarefied
water vapour. An iron oven with a little grill and a movable tripod into which
lighted coals can be placed.'
This is a 'scientific' version but I reckon the pudding digester might not
have been so much different???
alec
Adam Hart Davis is just this moment using a replica of a Papin
digester in his series "What The Stuarts Did For Us". He stuck half a
shoulder of lamb in it. Apparently Papin demonstrated it for the
Royal Society on 15th April 1682.
Martin
And Adam Hart-Davis is the son of Rupert Hart-Davis who was POB's publisher in the 1950s.
Do you think he lurks here?
Adjoined to What an unbelievable co incidence
Following my earlier post on digesters..
I just switched on the TV to BBC2 and there is an explanation on /illustration of Papin's Digester.
What are the chances of that happening?
It ois indded very strange for earlier todaty i decided to try and follow my dormant theory on the Sethians and the covering on the name Seth on the ship and the concept of perception and reality.
After two hours of reading and Googlng the single and only thing I had recorded on Word was- and this was Sethian related-
Coincidence" to a "believer" may be a method of communication or sign that communication occurs between the two dimensions--physical and spiritual (nonphysical).
"Coincidence" to a "skeptic" is simply a random or chance event. "Believers" (especially Seth fans--have another explanation for what is usually perceived as a random or chance event). All of these perspectives are based on "tests" that are NOT verifying to anyone outside that system of beliefs.
Strange day all round
Thanks be to God for Mandarretto
a
A crash somewhere forward,not unlike the firing of a twelve pounder,interupted
him.....' >
When I was a child, my mother had a very similar incident with a pressure
cooker. It may have sounded like the firing of a twelve pounder for all
I know. There were no casualties, but the kitchen ceiling was covered
with stewed tomatoes. Evidently the safety valve had gotten plugged up.
I wouldn't have one of the infernal machines. I can do enough damage
with a microwave.
Katherine
I can do enough damage with a microwave.
Think of the microwave bomb in "Under Siege"
--
Minor Spoilers LOTM and after
I'm just trying to figure out something in my head.
Padeen started stealing laudanum and to cover up the theft he replaced the 'stolen' liquid with brandy. Initially anyway.
Are we made aware if he continues to do this. I just have this idea of Stephen drinking a supposed laudanum dose which is in fact composed largely(and presumably in ever larger percentages) of brandy.
And I'm having difficulty figuring out how he didn't smoke it?
In religion class in school whenever we asked a question that the Teachers did not know the answer to(or knew there was no credible answer to) their reply was-
'that is one of the Seven Great Mysteries'.
At least I think it was Seven.
There was no comeback to this answer as there was really no explaining any of these 'mysteries'.
We were advised that what we needed was a leap of faith!
alec
Hmm good question Alec,
I seem to remember Stephen thinking that the lessening effect of his daily dose was due to his body's increasing toleration of the drug.
However, as a man of medicine, one would presume that he would have smoked it earlier, or at least had his suspicions.
Having never taken laudenum I've no idea what it tastes of. Does the brandy completely mask any opium flavour? If so, then additional thinning of the laudenum by Padeen's brandy top-ups would go un-noticed at the time of drinking. Any slaves to the poppy out there care to enlighten us?
Lindsay
Well, laudanum is a tincture of opium, which is opium suspended in alcohol.
Opiates taste extremely bitter and would (even in the increasingly small
proportions created by Padeen's dilution) tend to be the stronger of the two
tastes; but since the preparation already contains alcohol, it wouldn't seem
as odd as it would if he were diluting it with anything else. I also
recalled Stephen attributing this to his somehow developing a growing
tolerance for laudanum; in effect, he was experiencing the equivalent of a
reduction cure (where an addict's dose is gradually reduced, as opposed to
"cold turkey" where it is stopped abruptly). -RD, friend of poppies, not to
say slave
I fully understand the concept of Stephen being gradually weaned off opiates.
It was the ever increasing strength of brandy which I was alluding to. I would have thought a liquid which went from say 10% alcohol to say 80%/90%(now brandy) would not have fooled a physician.
But I take your point about the opiate being the predominant 'taste' and am happy to rest it there.
Thanks
alec
You're not alone. POB presents Stephen as pretty ignorant about addiction as
well somewhat immune to its effects. Actually, he's immune to the clues,
too. On page 200, he gives Jack a dose:
"Take a sup of this.'
On page 254, after he drops, and breaks his laudanum bottle:
" The cabin was filled with the smell more of brandy than of laudanum, and
for a moment he stared at the broken pieces, perceiving the contradiction
but lacking the time and mental energy to resolve it. "
Stephen didn't smoke it because POB didn't want him to. It was time shift
the burden of laudanum from Stephen to Padeen, for purposes that will become
clear in TTGS, and this was the method he chose. While it doesn't jibe with
my observations of addictive behavior, perhaps POB had different
observations.
Bob Kegel
I think the lack of mental energy - or lack of mental will to spend the
energy - is an important point here.
Denial. Lack of will to do anything about something you suspect.
Haven't we all ignored an awareness of a problem? Decided not to process
clues presented to us?
We're busy with other things that demand all our energy, our emotions, our
skills. So other things slide.
Plus all that other stuff Bob says. :)
Susan (ignoring the clues from her grumbling stomach right now, because
10:00am is neither breakfast nor lunch so it can just WAIT)
Thanks Bob and Susan -and only for Susan I wouldn't have known about Bob's post 'cos it never reached rainy Ireland! But I have since checked it out on the alternative archives.
The laudanum 'theme' is very much clearer in my mind now-thanks again to all.
alec
Who has now taken to diluting his Mandaretto with Napoleon Cognac. Yummy yummy.
As Susan suggested, I think most of Stephen's "ignorance" is willful;
"denial," as we'd call it. But in this little passage above, which I
remember reading recently in its larger context, Stephen is well aware of
what he's doing -- but *Jack* isn't aware of it. Stephen is deliberately
deceiving Jack because he knows that Jack doesn't like laudanum and has
refused it from him the past. I've wondered each time I've read this how
Jack would have reacted to know that Stephen was both giving him laudanum
and lying about it.
Marian
Laudanum was an alcoholic solution, although I would presume that the
alcohol was not brandy. But it would have helped to mask a small change in
the flavour of the concoction. As for noticing that the effects of his 200
drops were more drunkeness than opioid, I couldn't say, but this sounds
like an ideal way to withdraw: small reductions in dose with no
psychological input (I'm cutting down, I must feel bad). Provided you can
get over the alcohol problem afterwards of course.
But, as the wise lissun said, if you have a vague feeling that something is
wrong, it usually gets ignored. I try not to ignore it; usually instinct is
right and I'm about to ruin an experiment by daft omission of a crucial
step. If I had a coin for every time I'd done that last, I could retire now!
Heather
In his notes*, POB has a half page of what appears to be dosage
calculations, perhaps related to Padeen's gradual dilution of the laudanum
supply by steady withdrawals replaced by an equal amount of brandy. I
can't make too much sense of POB's arithmetic, but among the numbers are 20
litres, perhaps the volume of Stephen's carboy, and 125 ml, perhaps the
small bottle which Padeen used for his thefts.
Using these shaky assumptions, if Padeen made repeated thefts from an
otherwise untouched carboy and replaced with brandy, the concentration of
the drug would gradually diminish to half of its original strength after
112 such withdrawals. Another 112 withdrawals to cut the concentration in
half again, to 25% of the original. I don't know if Padeen stole daily, or
every few days, but such a theft could go on for months.
Assuming that Stephen was also making steady withdrawals for his patients
and his own use, Padeen's theft/replacement would dilute the supply more
quickly. If Stephen's usage happened to equal Padeen's 125 ml theft, it
would take only 80 such withdrawals to dilute to 50%, and 120 to 25%.
After 144 withdrawals and thefts, the carboy would hold only 2 litres, of
10% strength.
Note to HRG: Calculated using iteration.
*Courtesy of the Lilly Library, Bloomington IN
Don Seltzer
Don Seltzer In his notes*, POB has a half page of what appears to be dosage calculations,
perhaps related to Padeen's gradual dilution of the laudanum supply by steady
withdrawals replaced by an equal amount of brandy. I can't make too much sense
of POB's arithmetic, but among the numbers are 20 litres, perhaps the volume
of Stephen's carboy, and 125 ml, perhaps the small bottle which Padeen used
for his thefts.
The LOTM mentions 13-gallon carboys. What are these litres of which
you speak, eh?
Using these shaky assumptions, if Padeen made repeated thefts from an otherwise
untouched carboy and replaced with brandy, the concentration of the drug would
gradually diminish to half of its original strength after 112 such withdrawals.
Another 112 withdrawals to cut the concentration in half again, to 25% of the
original. I don't know if Padeen stole daily, or every few days, but such a
theft could go on for months.
Wouldn't Padeen's dose become more and more diluted too?
Assuming that Stephen was also making steady withdrawals for his patients
and his own use, Padeen's theft/replacement would dilute the supply more quickly.
If Stephen's usage happened to equal Padeen's 125 ml theft, it would take only
80 such withdrawals to dilute to 50%, and 120 to 25%. After 144 withdrawals
and thefts, the carboy would hold only 2 litres, of 10% strength.
Also LOTM: Padeen had become a 60 drops a day man. Stephen shocks
Martin with his "moderate" dose of 2000 drops.
Note to HRG: Calculated using iteration.
A powerful tool, sir. A powerful tool.
/g.
Just to clarify my initial post . It was never to question the gradual weakening of the level of opiate . It was the concverse to enquire how the ever increasing level of brandy could go undetected- by smell and taste.
But I felt that BoB K's/Susan C's and Marian's posts yesterday dealt well with the issue. It was Bob who poiinted out that even POB was dropping hints (to the reader) -which Stephen should have picked up on. And the reasons why he didn't were well aired.
Thanks Don -once again(re-iteration?) for sharing some of the POB notes.
alec
Whatever the notes say, in LOM he writes of " eleven-gallon carboys, each
representing more than fifteen thousand ordinary hospital doses." POB also
describes the "usual hospital dose" of laudanum as 25 drops. 15,000 such
doses add up to a bit over 5 UK gallons, not 11.
125 ml equals 1927.454 drops, about a month's supply for "a sixty-drops a
day man." Using these shaky assumptions, the 112 withdrawals Don
calculated would take 9 years.
Stephen's poor grasp of mathematics appears to mirror POB's. No wonder he
switched Stephen to coca where dosages may be expressed in vague terms.
Bob Kegel
I always thought that Stephen's laudanum was the proper buffer any
man of honour, strong sensibilty, & with too self enquiring a mind
might require to make life liveable within the confines of his own
mind.
To me one of POB's most telling passages is when Stephen is
talking with the Scottish surgeon about the death of the spirit &
by how many years this might proceed bodily death (actually it is
mainly the surgeon talking to Stephen, after he is asked a
question). Such sense & sensibility. Then later the man does
something so crass that one cringes. Clever, hurt, bloke that POB.
Ted
We move on to "Thirteen Gun Salute" tomorrow.
I found "Letter of Marque" re-marque-ably funny, full of
one-line zingers. On a serious tone, however, POB
reflected several times in LOM about the writer's craft
and tribulations: Possibly even the title was chosen
with an eye to something that is written: a Letter?
p.17 (Blue Breeches): "The fact of the matter is, that I
am an author" . . . and in answer to Stephen's civil
enquiries he said that he worked mostly on tales of
former times and Gothic manners. . . "But as for the
number that you so politely ask after. . . I am afraid it
is so small that I am ashamed to mention it: I doubt I
have published more than a score. Not, mark you . . .
that I have not conceived, worked out and entirely
composed at least ten times as many, and on this very
sward too, excellent tales, capital tales that have made
me (a partial judge, I confess) laugh aloud with
pleasure. But you must understand, sir, that each man has
his particular way of writing, and mine is by saying my
pieces over as I walk - I find the physical motion dispel
the gross humours and encourage the flow of ideas. Yet
that is where the danger lies: if it encourage them too
vigorously, if my piece is formed to my full
satisfaction, as just now I conceived the chapter in
which Sophonisba confines Roderigo in the Iron Maiden on
pretence of wanton play and begins to turn the screw, why
then it is done, finished; and my mind, my imagination
will have nothing more to do with it - declines even to
write it down, or, on compulsion, records a mere frigid
catalogue of unlikely statements. The only way for me to
succeed is by attaining a near-success, a coitus
interruptus with my Muse, if you will forgive me the
expression, and then running home to my pen for the full
consummation. And this I cannot induce my bookseller to
understand: I tell him that the work of the mind is
essentially different from manual labour; I tell him that
in the second case mere industry and application will hew
a forest of wood and carry an ocean of water, whereas in
the first . . . and he sends word that the press is at a
stand, that he must have the promised twenty sheets by
return." Blue Breeches repeated his Greek remark (Oh that
the false dogs might be choked with their own dung!") . .
.
P.61 (Stephan): "You were telling me about your
publishers."
P.179 (Martin): "When Mowett told me he meant to write a
very ambitious piece called The Sea-Officer's Tragedy,
based on Captain Aubrey's career, his victories and his
misfortunes, I told him I hoped he would make it end
happy. "I cannot possibly do that," says he. "Since it
is a tragedy, it must end in disaster." I begged his
pardon for disagreeing, but I had the support of the
greatest authority in the learned world, Aristotle
himself, in saying that although tragedy necessarily
dealt with the doings of great-minded men or women, in a
high and serious manner, it by no means necessarily ended
unhappy: and I quoted the lines I have ventured to render
thus: The nature of the tragedy's action has always
required that the scope should be as full as can be
without obscuring the plot, and that the number of events
making a probable or necessary sequence that will change
a man's state from unhappiness to happiness or from
happiness to unhappiness should be the smallest possible,
and desired him to observe that not only was the change
from evil to good eminently possible in tragedy, but that
Aristotle put it first."
At 11:02 AM -0800 10/31/2002, Susan Wenger wrote:
POB reflected several times in LOM about the writer's craft and tribulations:
Possibly even the title was chosen with an eye to something that is written:
a Letter?
I wonder who did choose the titles, POB or his editor? In his notes, POB
simply referred to Book XII. There is a suggestion, however, for a title
that is in keeping with Aristotle's remarks on tragedy (see below).
The comments regarding the writing process and publishers seem
autobiographical. I can see no purpose to the scene with Blue Breeches
other than to needle his editor, and perhaps satisfy some deadline by
padding out the first chapter.
p.17 (Blue Breeches): "...And this I cannot induce my bookseller to understand:
I tell him that the work of the mind is essentially different from manual labour;
I tell him that in the second case mere industry and application will hew a
forest of wood and carry an ocean of water, whereas in the first . . . and he
sends word that the press is at a stand, that he must have the promised twenty
sheets by return."
P.61 (Stephan): "You were telling me about your publishers." P.179 (Martin): "...The nature of the tragedy's action has always required
that the scope should be as full as can be without obscuring the plot, and that
the number of events making a probable or necessary sequence that will change
a man's state from unhappiness to happiness or from happiness to unhappiness
should be the smallest possible, and desired him to observe that not only was
the change from evil to good eminently possible in tragedy, but that Aristotle
put it first."
POB's early choice of title for this book was "Return to Grace".
Provided through the courtesy of the Lilly Library, Bloomington IN
Don Seltzer
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:02:48 -0800, Susan wrote:
p.17 (Blue Breeches): "The fact of the matter is, that I am an author"
. . . and in answer to Stephen's civil enquiries he said that he worked mostly
on tales of former times and Gothic manners. . .
And to stray (inevitably) there is yet another hint of Stephen's contempt
for the neo-cults of druidism which recurs in the canon:
"'Is it perhaps a druidical dell, sir?' asked Stephen, smiling as he shook
his head," as they go in their search for the bustards.
I'm thinking that this may mirror POB's feeling for fantasy writing in general.
Did he ever read or mention LOTR? I would be surprised.
In some of his characters, and certainly in his short stories, he visits the
dark places of the human psyche; but sprites or elves? I can't imagine him tolerating
them.
Marshall
And it's probably safe to guess POB would not have owned any of Mr. Kinkade's
"paintings."
Robin (god it's embarrassing to find out Kinkade lives an hour away from here)
Perhaps not sprites or elves, but Awkward Davies is surely an Orc.
Greg
For several of his books, POB kept a record of page count and words per day
output. For LOM, there is a sheet entitled "Book XII (A Return to
Grace?)", dated 25 March 1987.
POB had begun writing in January, and this sheet shows his progress through
the first five chapters by the end of March.
Chapter I was 20 manuscript pages and 9000 words, perhaps giving special
meaning to the speech of 'Blue Breeches' who complains of his demanding
publisher requiring twenty pages at once.
Chapter II, 11000 words
By his own count, POB had 54000 words and five chapters written in just
three months. He noted in the margin a possible Chapter IIIa to include
the aftermath of the capture of the Spartan, covering the return with the
prizes and the possibly meeting with the Constitution.
He then sets the barest outline of the final four chapters, filling in the
word counts as he completes them.
His total count (including an apparent mistake in addition) was 98000+ words.
Provided through the courtesy of the Lilly Library, Bloomington IN
Don Seltzer
In chapter 1 of LOM, Jack is given a gift of a letter from Nelson, originally
sent to Adm Russell. It is a rather ordinary, almost dull letter, but Jack accepts
it as a valuable good luck ch
arm. I was hoping to find some indication that
POB owned this particular letter, but it seems not to be the case
In his notes* for this scene, POB wrote "Let N now an aged admiral call on
or come up to JA to show his good will..." Jack and this unnamed admiral are
to discuss their mutual dislike of the French. POB hoped to include a letter
from Nelson that echoed this dislike, but apparently did not find one that would
suit. He writes "Nelson's piece about hating Frenchmen was not in a letter:
it was his words to an unnamed mid: but this mid, now older, might have quoted
N in a letter to JA"
Instead, POB settled on selecting an actual elder admiral, Thomas Macnamara
Russell, with a real grievance against the French from the previous war (the
Hussar and La Sibylle 1783 action, as described). He then researched for a suitable
letter. The letter is real, and was sent in October 1803.
*Provide through the courtesy of the Lilly Library, Bloomington IN
Don Seltzer
From: Charles Munoz
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 7:21 PM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM Are Endings Really So Important Contest
From: Rowen 84
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM Are Endings Really So Important Contest
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 8:58 PM
Subject: GRP:LOM A Tentative General View
From: Katherine T
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM A Tentative General View
From: Marshall Rafferty
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 9:22 PM
Subject: GRP:LOM Ship-rigging again
At, or about:
47°40'54"N. 122°22'8"W.
From: Mark Iliff
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM Ship-rigging again
51º27'46"N
57'42"W
From: Marshall Rafferty
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM Ship-rigging again
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 2:36 AM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM Ship-rigging again
From: Marshall Rafferty
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM Ship-rigging again
From: Ted
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 4:50 PM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM Ship-rigging again
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: GRP:LOM Ship-rigging again
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 4:58 AM
Subject: GROUPRead: LOTM; Music question
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOTM; Music question
delirium - explanation - reconciliation -
the ship - tutti contenti"
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 6:01 AM
Subject: GROUPRead:TLOM-Sethian Mutiny
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 3:37 AM
Subject: GROUPRead: LOTM. Duhamel drowned
From: Rick Ansell
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOTM. Duhamel drowned
b) Give Duhamel a 'deeper cover' for his new career as a
_British_ agent.
c) Cover up his demise as someone 'to dangerous to live' - he
was certainly a potential danger to Stephen, had he 'turned'
again.
--
- nicked from M Malthouse
From: John Gosden
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOTM. Duhamel drowned
John R. Gosden
7*51'59"N / 98*20'28"E
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 4:44 AM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOTM. Duhamel drowned
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 5:05 AM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOTM. Duhamel drowned
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 6:34 AM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOTM. Duhamel drowned
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOM. Duhamel drowned
From: Charles Munoz
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOM. Duhamel drowned
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOM. Duhamel drowned
From: Susan Collicott
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOM. Duhamel drowned
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOM. Duhamel drowned
From: Rick Ansell
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOTM. Duhamel drowned
From: John Gosden
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 11:34 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOM. Duhamel drowned
John R. Gosden
7*51'59"N / 98*20'28"E
From: Ted
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 1:12 AM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: LOTM. Duhamel drowned
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 11:48 AM
Subject: GROUPRead: TLOM-That exploding digester
From: Martin
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: TLOM-That exploding digester
Martin @ home:
50° 44' 58" N
1° 58' 35" W
From: Adam Quinan
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: TLOM-That exploding digester
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: TLOM-That exploding digester?Co incidence
From: Katherine T
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: TLOM-That exploding digester
From: John Gosden
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 11:45 PM
Subject: Re: GROUPRead: TLOM-That exploding digester
John R. Gosden
7*51'59"N / 98*20'28"E
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 8:21 AM
Subject: Stephen's laudanum
From: Skylarker
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
51"13'N 04"25'E
From: Rosemary Davis
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 10:46 AM
Subject: laudanum
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: laudanum
From: Bob Kegel
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 12:56 PM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
'What is it?'
'Physic.'
'It tastes like brandy.'
'So much the better.'
46°59'18.661"N 123°49'29.827"W
From: Susan Collicott
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
From: Marian Van Til
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
From: Heather Robertson
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
off to the apothecary to pick up some laudanum for the mad cat, Branston
Dill Pickle, who's fascinated with this typing thing
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:55 AM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
From: Gustaf Erikson
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: [] Stephen's laudanum
From: Alec O' Flaherty
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
From: Bob Kegel
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:11 PM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
46°59'18.661"N 123°49'29.827"W
(No iterations were harmed in the preparation of this message)
From: Ted
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: Stephen's laudanum
From: Susan Wenger
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 2:02 PM
Subject: GroupRead: Letter of Marque
(Mowett): "Yes, sir: I was about to say that they were
the most hellish procrastinators - "
"Oh how dreadful," cried Fanny. "Do they go to - to
special houses, or do they . . . "
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: GroupRead: Letter of Marque
(Mowett): "Yes, sir: I was about to say that they were the most hellish procrastinators
- "
"Oh how dreadful," cried Fanny. "Do they go to - to special houses, or do they
. . . "
From: Marshall Rafferty
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: GroupRead: Letter of Marque
From: Robin Welch
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: GroupRead: Letter of Marque
From: Greg White
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: GroupRead: Letter of Marque
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:00 PM
Subject: GRP:LOM The Final Accounting
Chapter III, 14500
Chapter IV, 12500
Chapter V, 7000
Chapter VI was to be be 13000 or more, but came in at only 11000
Chapter VII was planned to be 12000, but was actually 8000, completed on 22
June
Chapter VIII was 11500, completed on 22 July
Chapter XI was 10000+, completed on 10 Aug 1987
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 9:44 PM
Subject: GRP:LOM The Nelson Letter
Return to Main Page