|
|
First Page of Master and Commander Discussion
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: I need a break
In a message dated 9/16/01 11:58:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jim-jill@JUNO.COM writes:
My major discovery on the 3rd reading of MAC was that Stephen is not portrayed as nautically challenged. Clumsy, yes, but quite knowledgeable about sailing. He is actually askng why don't they do this or that during the battle they are witnessing from the Rock: pg. 400: "Why do they not make sail and bear up?" The later Stephen would not (could not) ask that.
An excellent observation, Jill. I confess that as many times as I have read M&C, I had really recognized that aspect. I think this is another example of how POB, like many other authors of series fiction, did not arrive at his final conception of the central characters in the first volume. Like Stephen's intelligence activities, it seems that his perpetual nautical incapacity was a later creation.
Bruce Trinque
41*37'53"N 72*22'51"W
I meant to say:
An excellent observation, Jill. I confess that as many times as I have read M&C, I had NOT really recognized that aspect.
Bruce Trinque
41*37'53"N 72*22'51"W
Bruce and Jill,
(It took me a bit of time to find the page.)
What about on page 313 of the Norton edition;
'Well then sir,' said Mowett, pointing over the grey hissing sea to his right in the general direction of Barcelona, 'that is what we call a lee shore.'
'Ah?' said Stephen, with a certain interest lighting his eye. 'The phenomenon you dislike so much? It is not a mere prejudice - a weak superstitious traditional belief?'
One of the things about Stephen is that he likes to parade his nautical knowledge to acquaintances who know less than he does. (Now here I'm getting a bit ahead of M&C). But he often confuses port and starboard, windward and leeward, and "by and large." He is a bit of an intellectual snob, but I love him for it.
Ray McP
Hi Jill,
I've been rereading M&C trying to look at it from a more critical point of view. But I get so hung up in the story that I forget to "study" it. I have dogearred some pages containing phrases that knock me out. One was on page 195 of the Norton edition wherein he was chastising the midshipmen for not keeping up with their journals. POB writes: "But he did not seem convinced and desired them to sit down on that locker, take those pens and these sheets of paper, to pass him yonder book, WHICH WOULD ANSWER ADMIRABLEY FOR THEM TO BE READ TO OUT OF FROM." What tortured syntax!!!
Ray McP
Ah, this has come up before, though I confess I certainly don't remember all the comments about it. I can picture O'Brian writing this with a hint of a smirk. Tortured? But we know *exactly* what he means.
Marian
A sentence ended with four prepositions. Doesn't Churchill have one somewhere, also about a book, that ends with six? Funny, allusive POB.
Charlezzzz
There is another oddity on page 251 (Norton) that I don't remember POB using anywhere else. He writes
" '. . .a round called the sardana; and if you will reach my your fiddle I will play you the air of the one I have in mind. Though you must imagine I am a harsh braying hoboy.' PLAYS."
The change in tense brought me up short.
Ray McP
A favorite Churchill story is about him being criticized for ending a sentence with just one preposition - whereupon he allowed that the criticism was "an execrable solecism up with which I will not put".
Jim (amateur grammarian)
In a message dated 9/18/01 1:29:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, raymcp999@YAHOO.COM writes:
Sorry Marian--I'm a relative newcomer to the gunroom. It seemed tortured to me because I could imagine Jack saying it but could not imagine POB writing it. Maybe it should have been in quotes.
My impression is that POB was indeed conveying Jack's words to the hapless midshipmen.
Bruce Trinque
41*37'53"N 72*22'51"W
My friends, I just finished rereading M&C recently, and my chief complaint is that I still don't understand the fight between the French and the British in the last thirty pages or so. Why did they allow Jack to pass intelligence on the French fleet to the British commander? Whose side were those Spanish ships on? Could the fast ship going between them actually get them to wipe each other out? (Why didn't this happen in other battles? Is that why Nelson won at Trafalgar?) Am I correct in thinking that the French and the British were both at Gibraltar refitting their ships at the same time? Wotthehell is going on?
On the other hand, the end of Jack's courtmartial is a delight.
Sue Reynolds, terminally bewildered. Could some kind lissun take me by the hand and explain where everyone is and what they are doing during the sea battles? Thank you.
I confess that I don't much like Dillon, may he rest in peace.
From our first acquaintance on page 55 of the Norton paperback:
"[...] he said. 'Is the Captain on deck?'
'Oh no, sir, no,' said the marine. 'Breakfast only just carrying in this moment. Two hard-boiled eggs and one soft.'
The soft-boiled egg was for Miss Smith, to recruit her from her labours of the night, as both the marine and Mr. Dillon knew well; but the marine's knowing look met with a total lack of response. James Dillon's mouth tightened, and for a fleeting moment as he ran up the ladder to the sudden brilliance of the quarter-deck it wore a positively angry expression. [...]"
Personally, I rather liked Miss Smith without closer acquaintance. As well as the cheerful notion that she requires sustenance, and the happy acquiescence of the ship's community in her role. But not James Dillon. No. From the first, we have a priggish young man, given to judging his betters against a standard by no means universal. This is an adept and completely unremarked precursor to the later attitude of Dillon toward Jack.
And the skill of POB lies in his consistency, not merely this surely intentional hint of things to come. For people like this are often given to acting self-satisfied to the point of rousing distaste -- while internally they judge themselves inadequate in all things. And POB may or may not have been intentional in making this correlation. It may have been merely intuitive that he made a man so insecure as Dillon the choice for this role as Prig of the Fleet.
Of course, his insecurity was intentional as well (it's merely the correlation of the two that may have been intuitive). Later, we have Dillon terribly grieved at the choice to let a fellow Irish rebel remain undetected after the man threatens Dillon himself with denunciation. Mind you, he already had decided not to reveal the nasty fellow. Made every effort to keep the Sophie from the encounter in the first place. So he's made his decision long before the confrontation. A confident man would have scorned the man's loss of honor, his unnecessary use of a demeaning threat when past companionship had guaranteed safety. But Dillon is not confident in himself. His self-doubt is at least as bad as Hornblower's and lies in a more fatal place: his honor.
His anger at himself surfaces as anger at Jack, and puzzles Jack extremely. This fuels much narrative, and after many pages we reach the finale for Dillon on the deck of the Cacafuego. Jack looks on Dillon fallen, and
"[...] thought he was only hurt; but turning him saw the great wound in his heart."
What a lovely symmetry of physical with metaphorical.
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret)
--------------------------------------------
Admiring the author if not all his creatures
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
From: "sue reynolds"
[...] my chief complaint is that I still don't
understand the fight between the French and the
British in the last thirty pages or so. Why [...]
My impression is that POB was working closely from contemporary reports in
writing the descriptions in M&C. And doubtless later as well, but here
particularly we see that Stephen is playing a role that an actual
non-combatant played in the real engagement of Speedy, while in later
volumes POB is careful to limit Stephen's role to his matured character.
Another little bit of evidence: we have Jack picking up a severed backstay
of the Cacafuego and taking it to a capstan. POB's casual narrative
inclusion of the fact does not provide any explanation of what this might
have accomplished. At first read, many moons (nay, solstices), gone, I
thought his intent was to help bind the two vessels together, where the
Cacafuego's guns could not sweep the Sophie's deck because they could not be
depressed so low. But right after that Jack orders the two vessels poled
apart so that the Caca's cannot board Sophie.
That sort of confusing detail is very likely in a contemporary account.
Perhaps Cochrane did have the vessels held together, but with lines they
could extend at will to prevent an easy passage between the two vessels.
Perhaps, he did it, and then saw the new threat and freed the line but
forgot to mention it. Or perhaps the intent was obvious to someone versed in
the vessels and as familiar with the form of battle as most contemporary
readers would have been.
Sue Reynolds, terminally bewildered. Could some kind
lissun take me by the hand and explain where everyone
is and what they are doing during the sea battles?
Eagerly awaiting the answer. Haven't got to those last pages yet on this
pass, so I have no recent memories of the text to fuel speculation at all at
all.
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret)
In a message dated 9/19/01 5:08:54 PM, simsgw@CS.STANFORD.EDU writes:
Another little bit of evidence: we have Jack picking up a severed backstay
of the Cacafuego and taking it to a capstan. POB's casual narrative
inclusion of the fact does not provide any explanation of what this might
have accomplished.
One of the first things I learned going aboard my first ship, a carrier, was
that a "real sailor" automatically straightens up any little shipboard mess
he comes across. If it's loose, secure it. And so I did (usually.) That's
what Jack was doing--an automatic sailorly reaction while bigger things were
going on.
Charlezzzz, remembering how, when a ship meets its first swell past the
sea buoy and takes its first roll, loose doors slam, loose tools fall off
work benches, loose books fall off racks. Slam, bam, wham, and people run to
secure things that they shd have secured before sailing, the grass-combing
lubbers.
Speaking of Dillon's demise reminded me of this earlier scene in the
gunroom. Dillon is in tearing high spirits (after the encounter with the
gunboats I believe) and from page 323 of the Norton paperback:
"[...] 'What a relief it is, to be fighting with king's ships again, rather
than these damned privateers,' he observed, à propos of nothing, when the
young men and the purser had withdrawn.
'What a romantic creature you are, to be sure,' said Stephen. 'A ball fired
from a privateer's cannon makes the same hole as a king's.'
'Me, romantic?' cried James with real indignation, an angry light coming
into his green eyes. [A very angry man, our Dillon, but most especially in
matters touching on his sense of self.]
'Yes, my dear,' said Stephen, taking snuff. 'You will be telling me next
about their divine right.'
'Well, at least even you, with your wild enthusiastic levelling notions,
will not deny that the King is the soul fount of honour?'
'Not I,' said Stephen. 'Not for a moment.' [...]"
A charming ambiguous withdrawal from the field of battle from Stephen, when
it became evident that any further debate would wound his friend. One might
think this reverence for kings a strange attitude in an Irishman, but in the
various Celtic cultures it's a recurring division of the spirit. A great
sense of 'we're as good as any in the next dale' pervades these peoples --
accompanied by a strain of romantic reverence for great heroes and heroines.
And what are Kings and Queens but heroes and heroines incarnate? (Sadly that
makes the feet of pottery too often evident, but...)
And how like the insecure Dillon to find justification and nobility for his
own acts in the grace of a king. Even a king not his own, for all love.
As we struggle in the Gunroom to leave the events of last week to the world
on deck, a passing parallel lies in this account. Like Dillon, many people
are puzzled to know what response is noble as well as effective when pain is
caused not by Kings avowed, but by their privateers, secretly commissioned
and renounced when exposed.
My own views have been imposed on your company too much already, so I'll
just say that I agree with Stephen and find their balls no more penetrating
than a king's, nor less.
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret)
Excellent post, Gary, thank you for your insights. I confess, I'd never made
the connection with Dillon, the prig of the hard-boiled egg scene, and
Dillon, the prig who turns his nose up at Jack when he thinks he's interested
a bit too much in prizes or might be 'shy'. Yet there he is, from the moment
we meet him, his essential character naked for all to see.
I am amazed, amazed, at how often POB makes use of such foreshadowing
parallels, and how often I have failed to notice them until some wise lissun
kindly directs my attention.
These new insights make each reread another delight, if not almost another
book at times and make me look forward to seeing what new ideas appear in
each day's Gunroom posts.
My thanks, sir.
At 10:59 AM -0700 9/19/01, sue reynolds wrote:
Am I correct in thinking that the
French and the British were both at Gibraltar
refitting their ships at the same time?
I was confused by this, too. As near as I can make out, British
Gibraltar and Spanish/French Algeciras were on opposite sides of the
same bay. Talk about hard-to-live-with neighbors!
- EAL
From: Rowen84@AOL.COM
(and have we ever inquired whether this 'Miss Smith' is related to Jack's
'Miss Smith'?)
We have not! Not that I remember that is. Clearly, a kindred spirit if not
more. Did anyone catch sight of the back of her dress? Was it grass-stained
at all? Or was that another cheerful soul I'm remembering...
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret)
Gary Sims replied:
We have not! Not that I remember that is. Clearly, a kindred spirit if
not more. Did anyone catch sight of the back of her dress? Was it
grass-stained at all? Or was that another cheerful soul I'm
remembering...
Now where do you suppose the said Miss Smith would have found
*grass* on board ship? Some other method of "detection" must
needs be employed in this case....
(Amanda was, no doubt, the one with the seven-week private
smirk, not the grass stains.)
Marian
You might try some of these wargamer sites........they give some
diagrams, etc of the battle.........
http://www.wargamer.com/aos/alg_bay-algbay.asp
http://cfa.napoleonicwars.com/cabritapointscenario.htm
Dick Elliott
And if Miss Smith had been ashore I'm sure someone was detailed to remove
any evidence from her clothing. Probably a grass-combing [lubber].
Given this insight I am prepared to recognise the Mediterranean Miss Smith
as the older and more abandoned sister of the Halifax Miss Smith.
Martin Watts
"Gary W. Sims"
Speaking of Dillon's demise reminded me of this
earlier scene in the
gunroom. Dillon is in tearing high spirits (after
the encounter with the
gunboats I believe) (snip)
I think Dillon is looking for death in battle as a
relief from his personal misery.
Ray McP
At the end of the Cacafuego action, isn't the moment where Jack sees
Dillon's body phrased something like "saw the wound to his heart"? With
all that has gone on between them, there are several ways to read that.
-Jerry
Was there a real ship named Cacafuego? What is the
translation?
I won't tell you what my guess at a translation would
be.
Ray McP
You wd be quite correct in yr translation. Cacafuego not likely to have been
a formal name, but was a nickname given to many Spanish ships.
Charlezzzz, thinking hw unpleasant it must have been to be shot at by a
cacafuego
In a message Sent: Thursday, 20 September 2001 Reinhard Gloggengiesser
wrote:
Does anyone on the list know anything on the background of
POBs decision to give medical practices such a prominent
place in his books? It seems very unique to me when compared
to writers such as Forester or Pound.
Once POB had determined the character of Maturin, he was highly constrained
in what he could do.
Stephen is an Irish Roman Catholic, and as POB often points out, it was
impossible for a Roman Catholic to become a King's Officer, without, like
Dillon, maintaining a pretence with all the implications for one's self
respect that we observe in Dillon. So very few possibilities were open to
Stephen if he were to accompany a ship's captain on reasonably equal terms.
A surgeon provides an excellent opportunity for POB to display his
virtuosity in matters historical. But a ship's surgeon did not carry
sufficient status. In order to convince us that Stephen could treat with
Jack on reasonably equal terms, POB makes him a physician, and a
distinguished one at that. But POB really had very little choice in the
matter
Paul
Of course. She was a Spanish Fireshit.
Patrick ( T )
I always thought Cacafuego was the aftermath of a dish of chips and salsa
made with habanero chilis.
--
I stand to be corrected, but I think that POB here was retelling the
story of Cochrane's capture of his frigate whilst commanding the Speedy.
If I recall correctly, he did indeed leave just one man on the wheel,
and I think it was the surgeon.
I am not sure about this, as I am away from home, and don't have the
books to hand.
The correct name is "Cagafuego", "Cacafuego" is not
spanish.
And yes, it means "fire-shitter"
losmp
POB's father was a medical man.
Also: POB was sickly as a boy. Asthma? Tuberculosis?
It limited his opportunities, and he spent a lot of time
restrained from youthful activities, sports, group
education. He studied a lot of medical sources, hoping
to find something the doctors were missing in his own
treatment.
- Susan
Trying again.)
(Still catching up with three weeks' mail)
One Sept. 17, Pawel wrote: (quoting from M&C.):
"'Castlereagh hanging at the one masthead and Fitzgibbon at the other,'
thought Stephen, but with only the weariest gleam of spirit."
Stephen is referring to Lord Castlereagh's role in the United Irishmen's
rebellion in 1798.
Castlereagh was the nephew of the Viceroy, Camden, and on his personal staff
at Dublin Castle.
In Thomas Pakenham's "The Year of Liberty -the History of the Great Irish
Rebellion of 1798" he writes of Castlreagh:
"...the Viceroys' nephew, the protege of Pitt himself, Irish-born,
Cambridge-educated, brilliant, icy, twenty-nine year old Lord Castelreagh."
Castlereagh was actually related to the Fitzgeralds, to Stephen's "cousin",
Lord Edward.
Pakenham writes of his comparative moderation, compared, that is, with others
in the government. in dealing with the rebellion.
( The accounts of what happened, the atrocities that were committed on both
sides, is sickening.)
In a couple of months, 30,000 people were killed.
In 1800, and so, presumably, within Stephen's ken, Castelreagh was also
instrumental in the dissolution of the independant Irish Parliament, and the
resulting Union with England.
(This is another story, in which bribery and corruption played a well-known
role. The peers who were created at this time were known as "Union Peers.")
Castlereagh distinguished himself, if I remember ( I don't have any
references at hand) in the European negotiations after the defeat of Napoleon.
He committed suicide.
Daniel O'Connell is quoted as saying that "he could not, under Heaven,
apprehend how it was that they forgot to charge against Ireland the price of
the razor with which Castlereagh afterwards cut his throat."
I have not found any references to Fitzgibbon, but suspect that he was,
perhaps, an informer, like Major Sirr, whom Stephen also mentions
perjoratively.
Jean A.
As near as I can make out, British
Gibraltar and Spanish/French Algeciras were on opposite sides of the
same bay. Talk about hard-to-live-with neighbors!
In deed, there is a Spanish naval base across the bay from Gib. I think the
town is LeLinea, I was here in May, how fast one forgets... The road from
Spain to Gibralter crossed the military runway, so as you drive onto the
rock, be sure to look _all_ directions. ;)
Barney
O'Brian launched the Aubreyad at the request of a
publisher who was looking for a naval series that would
capitalize on the Hornblower tradition. O'Brian must
have had the very thoughts he set out on page 43 of
"Master and Commander," putting these words into
Stephen's mouth on deciding to take on the voyage:
For a philosopher, a student of human nature, what could
be better? The subjects of his inquiry shut up together,
unable to escape his gaze, their passions heightened by
the dangers of war, the hazards of their calling, their
isolation from women and their curious, but uniform,
diet. And by the glow of patriotic fervour, no doubt. .
. a ship must be a most instructive theatre for an
inquiring mind.
At the bottom of page 77 of Norton's M&C, the Sophie has just returned
from JA's trial run in her and a the cutter is taking Jack to see Mr.
Brown. Some of the seamen are talking:
'And short time for dinner, as will never be made up,' said a low voice
in the middle of the boat.
'Silence,' cried Mr. Babbington, with as much outrage as he could manage.
'Mr. Brown,' said Jack, with an earnest look, 'you can do me a very
essential service...'
This abrupt change in subjects, scenes without the customary chapter or
space divider, caused me a bit of confusion during my first read of the
book. POB uses this often and I first grew accustomed to, and then began
to like this convention.
I like it because it keeps you on your toes. It forces you to read
properly. I sometimes miss nuances that many of you refer to because
I read in the naval way - lose not a minute, we must leave with the tide.
I just finished my first Jane Austen book (Pride & Prejudice) and she
uses a similar but slightly different method. The book is written using
third-person - most of it following one person, Elizabeth. However, JA
occasionally turns it to an omniscient third-person and looks into the
actions, thoughts of other characters.
Again, this requires you to attend. It is easy to lose the thread of the
passage and I caught myself being amazed at Elizabeth's omniscient
knowledge of others' thoughts, before realizing I had once again missed
a shift in viewpoint and that it was the narrator, not Elizabeth who was
all-knowing.
Which I greatly enjoyed the book and look forward to more.
Nathan
This habit of POB's has caused me quite a bit of
confusion. It feels like a sudden swap to the next
space warp. Only I hafta warp back and reread it to
make sure the typesetter wasn't drunk and dropped a
page of the manuscript and the dpg ate it.
I'm still not sure about that dog.
Jim (could we cast Patrick Stewart somewhere?)
=====
Bothered me, too. But upon re-reading I noticed that
every leap in time was forshadowed. Took a bit of
getting used to and it was my first lesson (but only
the first) that with POB you need to read EVERY word.
=====
I think Nathan has articulated an aspect of POB's and JA's art very
well, and agree that such changes in subject and scene are some of the
most fun a reader can have.
And now we Janeites have proof that a male of the species can "get" her.
Isabelle Hayes
I feel like I've been caught eating quiche :). How 'bout those Bears....
Nathan, who figgered if JA is good enough for POB, she must be good
enough for me
Yeah really. So I'll take care of THAT (for myself anyways)...... ;^)
Yeah ok so Emma was good because of Gweneth. But really it failed the "Fighter
Pilot's Movie Greatness Test":
You rate a movie by the amount of skin, ordnance, and morts. ;^)
=====
On page 177 of the Norton edition, Stephen and Dillon are having their wine
fueled discussion of past times and present irritations:
He came down in half an hour, and as he stepped into the cabin he said,
as though he were catching straight on to an interrupted conversation, "And
then, of course, there is that whole question of promotion. I will tell
you, just for your secret ear alone and although it sounds odious, that I
thought I should be given command after that affair in the Dart; and being
passed over does rankle cruelly." He paused and then asked, "Who was it who
was said to have earned more by his prick than his practice?"
"Selden. But in this instance I conceive the common gossip is
altogether out; as I understand it, this was the ordinary operation of
interest. Mark you, I make no claim of outstanding chastity - I merely say
that in Jack Aubrey's case the consideration is irrelevant."
Dillon seems to be implying that Jack was promoted (while he himself was
not) because of his extracurricular activities. Jack believes he owes his
good fortune to his old friend Queeney who is now the Admiral's wife.
Surely the "common gossip" would not be implying that Jack's affair with Mrs
Harte got him promoted. That doesn't seem very likely. What does this
passage mean and who is Selden?
Mary A
...or at least I hope it isn't; and, in any event, even if PO'B didn't
actually write it this way, he never changed it when the proofs came back to
him, which is sort of like the same thing, almost:
This is from pp. 186-187 (Norton pb.): Jack and Stephen are at a party, and
Stephen's been drinking a bit, and we can assume that he's just beginning to
become pleasantly intoxicated, and here's the (beginning of the) sentence:
"After this both he and his attention wandered; holding a glass of
arrack-punch, he took up his stand next to an orange-tree, and he stood
loooking quite happy..."
You see? Stephen was "loooking" with three o's!, which is, I think, exactly
what Stephen would be doing in that state: looking at things just a bit
longer than normally: loooking, in other words.
'Tis a very goood use of creative spelling, IMHO.
John Finneran
A man who would name a horse potoooooooo would steal the
pennies from a dead man's ii
It would be a small delight if so, but unfortunately not. Apparently the
typooo crept in the later Harper-Collins/Norton editions. The 1970 Collins
edition has it as plain old looking.
Don Seltzer
Nathan Varnum wrote:
I feel like I've been caught eating quiche :). How 'bout those Bears....
Nathan, who figgered if JA is good enough for POB, she must be good
enough for me.
Genius knows no sex.
Ruth A., who once heard the POB canon described as "boy books."
Well, that's a little harsh, Ruth. We do know some. We just tend to drift
off in deep thoughts and miss more of our opportunities than our friends
could wish.
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret)
Ruth, in this comment I see high praise, indeed. Thank you for
giving men the benefit of the doubt.
Nathan
Speak for yourself. I'm pretty bright and ... , oh, never mind.
Mike, from a long line of geniuses.
40° 05' 27" N 088° 16' 57" W
Dull life that Genius leads.
Marian
Pooooor Genius.
"Gary W. Sims"
The soft-boiled egg was for Miss Smith, to recruit her
from her labours of the night, as both the marine and Mr.
Dillon knew well; but the marine's knowing look met with
a total lack of response. James Dillon's mouth tightened,
and for a fleeting moment as he ran up the ladder to the
sudden brilliance of the quarter-deck it wore a
positively angry expression. [...]"
Personally, I rather liked Miss Smith without closer
acquaintance. As well as the cheerful notion that she
requires sustenance, and the happy acquiescence of the
ship's community in her role. But not James Dillon. No.
From the first, we have a priggish young man, given to
judging his betters against a standard by no means
universal. This is an adept and completely unremarked
precursor to the later attitude of Dillon toward Jack.
I agree with the gist of Gary's post, but I'm not sure
about the above part. My impression was that Dillon was
not so aggrieved by Miss Smith requiring sustenance, but
more by the smarmy marine for smirking and gossiping
about goings-on in the captain's cabin.
What bothers me about this passage is the sentence that says the look met with
a total lack of response. And yet immediately after that sentence, James' mouth
tightened - isn't that a response? -S
From: "Susan Wenger"
My impression was that Dillon was
not so aggrieved by Miss Smith requiring sustenance, but
more by the smarmy marine for smirking and gossiping
about goings-on in the captain's cabin.
I hadn't considered that Susan. It is possible, but officers are rarely
reticent about correcting a rating who steps over the line. The tight mouth
and unvoiced anger sound like he's responding to something about which he
dare not speak his mind.
Have to think about it, but we're late for an appointment just now. Maybe
this problem of overly familiar crewmen was a standing one? And he did not
want to attempt another futile correction when he's due to leave the ship?
Ah well, something to think about while driving...
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret)
Actually, this doesn't detract at all from your "prig"
post. I think you hit on something I'd missed earlier -
the real flaw in James' essential nature. Whether he was
priggish about Miss Smith or priggish about the marine,
the "fleet prig" label is a good one.
- Susan
In a message dated 9/26/01 4:08:26 PM Central Daylight Time, camel@serv.net
writes:
What bothers me about this passage is the sentence that says the look met
with a total lack of response. And yet immediately after that sentence,
James' mouth tightened - isn't that a response?
Perhaps the marine caught his eye, looked "knowing," but was met by James'
stone face.
THEN, to himself, after the marine looks elsewhere, James tightens his mouth.
That's how I'd read it.
Deeply, obstinately ignorant, self-opinionated, and ill-informed,
Mary S
I had not thought to think of the term "prig" in connection with Dillon, but
it certainly seems to fit. He not only disapproves of Miss Smith, but he
disapproves of Mr Marshall as well. I gave up on Dillon entirely when he
threatened Marshall, who is a good seaman, a very competent navigator and a
kind man.
Dillon seems to be a useful contrast to Jack Aubrey, who shares some of
Dillon's traits and had a great deal of esteem for Dillon. They are both
very competent seamen and have a gift for fighting sucessful actions against
stonger opponents. Competence and Zeal combined. The difference is that
while Jack will regretfully tend to his duty, such as protecting his convoy,
and will decline an optional action if he does not really think he can win
or if the costs are too high, Dillon wants to go ahead no matter the
consequences and thinks of Jack as cowardly for not wanting to risk his men
in a foolhardy attack of the more powerful Cacafuego. Jack clearly is a
better leader because he has a care for his command that Dillon lacks.
Stephen has to point out to Dillon that it is easy for a welthy man to snear
at another for lusting after prize money. Dillon's envy of Jack for getting
a promotion when he did not is understandable, but not quite up to heroic
standards. Jack has a more generous spirit and throughout the series,
despite many disappointments and troubles never gives way to despair the way
Dillon does.
Mary A
One of my favorite scenes in M&C is the aftermath of Molly Harte's route. Pg
189
"What air was moving came from the westward-an unusual wind, and one that
brought all the foul reek of the tanneries drifting wetly across. But it
would serve to help the Sophie down the long harbor and out to sea. Out to
sea, where he could not be betrayed by his own tongue; where Stephen could
not get himself into bad odour with authority; and where that infernal child
Babbington did not have to be rescued form aged women of the town. And
where James Dillon could not fight a duel."
The next page and a half amuses me greatly, but I wonder about the quoted
paragraph. We know what kind of trouble Babbington was capable of and we
witnessed Jack's disgrace. Later we find out what Dillon's duel was about.
Do we ever find out what Stephen did to get into bad odour with authority?
Mary A
on page 89, Jack is going on about the marvelous smell of bacon and
describes it as "Araby left at the post"
Can anyone explain to me what this means? It reminds me more of a horse
race than breakfast!
Mary A
I read this as a reference to Lady Macbeth's "All the perfumes of
Araby will not sweeten this little hand". Jack is saying that the
smell of breakfast has fabled perfumes beaten by a mile (or six
furlongs at least).
Kerry
=====
sure it was that queenie was the object of jack's attentions during that
early time of his life. and it always seemed to me that she was probably
jack's first roll in the sack as well as his teacher in the three r's...
Never in life! Queeny!? No no no, wasn't it the dairy maid that his father
eventually married?
Sarah
I'm with Sarah on this one. I thought it was the dairy maid. It never
crossed my mind that Jack had had *that* sort of relationship with Queenie.
Mary A
Do we ever find out what Stephen did to get into bad odour with authority?
I believe that was Stephen's refusal to shake hands with Admiral
Harte. Or, more accurately, his refusal to shake two fingers...
--
How could he correct him just for looking "knowing?"
If he were to say "wipe that look off your face, Marine!" he just calls
attention to the matter - and invites the answer "what look, Sir?"
I would think the "total lack of response" a better answer to the problem.
Yes, I've heard there is an offense called "dumb insolence," but that is not
precisely the case here.
gluppit the prawling strangles, there, [FoW8]
Mary S
I've always read this passage as Dillon's being angry because he sees the captain's behavior in bringing his inamorata aboard as detrimental to discipline and the dignity of the service. The Marine's "knowing look" is evidence of both.
I've alway liked this passage--it is so incongruously domestic.
Gerry Strey
Jumping the gun a bit to Post Captain: Jack was
"crushed" by his failed affair with Molly Harte. I
believe he thought he loved her.
I think it was rather audacious of POB to make Queeny Jack's governess/cum nursemaid. He had not only to invent a fictional relationship for a real-life character, but to alter that character's life and personality significantly. Queeny didn't marry Lord Keith until around 1810, and was not a young woman by the standards of her time, being around 40. She was not the sort of person who would have uttered that flippant phrase about taking Jack into her bed when he had nightmares (at the age of 10 or so); in fact, she was rather a grim and censorious personality.
Gerry Strey
Good point, Gerry.
And I steadfastly disagree with any who think that O'Brian meant to imply
that Jack and Queenie ever had a sexual relationship. I'd like to see the
passage(s) that can be used to justify that interpretation. Certainly the
comment Gerry cites can't be used in that manner. Jack was a young
motherless boy and she a combination of mother/older sister/friend to him --
though O'Brian shifts Queenie's age to the extent that she's less than 10
years older than Jack (I don't have an exact reference to the passage where
their ages are mentioned; as I recall POB cites the age difference twice,
and isn't completely consistent with it.)
Marian
When I first read about Queenie I expected some
hanky-panky, but POB is much too sophisticated for
such obvious tomfoolery.
I think Queenie was Jack's first adolescent, mind
destroying crush. The one we all get before we even
know which end it goes in, and think it might kill us.
Some of the more socially inept of us even have more
than one :-)
Jim (wallowing in a sty of pubescent nostalgia)
=====
I originally posted this to sea-room last year, but it is appropriate to
both the M&C discussion and the current thread on Heneage Dundas.
The character of Heneage Dundas, friend of Jack Aubrey, makes a brief first
appearance at the end of M&C as commander of the sloop Calpe at Gibraltar.
He is based upon the real George Heneage Lawrence Dundas (in later books,
POB fictionalizes his relationship to Henry and Robert Dundas, First Lords
of the Admiralty). Sifting through the Naval Chronicle, I have gathered
the following information regarding his career at this time.
Just before the beginning of M&C, in February 1800, Lord Thomas Cochrane
was a junior (5th?) Lt. aboard the Queen Charlotte, Lord Keith's flagship.
Heneage Dundas appears to have also been aboard the Queen Charlotte in
February, junior to Cochrane. Upon Cochrane's promotion to Commander of the
Speedy, George Heneage Dundas moved up to 5th Lieutenant of the Queen
Charlotte. A month later, the Queen Charlotte was accidentally destroyed
by fire (Lt. Dillon provides an eye witness account in M&C). Dundas
distinguished himself during this disaster, earning a mention in the Naval
Chronicle:
"Mr. John Braid, Carpenter of the Queen Charlotte, reports, that about
twenty minutes after six o'clock in the morning, as he was dressing
himself, he heard throughout the Ship a general cry of "Fire" - On which he
immediately run up the fore ladder to get upon deck, and found the whole
half deck, the front bulk-head of the Admiral's cabin, the main-mast's
coat, and boat's covering on the booms, all in flames; which from every
report and probability, he apprehends was occasioned by some hay, which was
lying under the half deck, having been set on fire by a match in a tub,
which was usually kept there for signal guns. - The main sail at this time
was set, and almost entirely caught fire; the people not being able to come
to the clue garnets on account of the flames.
He immediately went to the forecastle, and found Lieutenant Dundas and the
Boatswain encouraging the people to get water to extinguish the fire. He
applied to Mr. Dundas, seeing no other Officer in the fore-part of the Ship
(and being unable to see any on the quarter deck, from the flames and smoke
between them) to give him assistance to drown the lower decks, and secure
the hatches, to prevent the fire falling down. Lieutenant Dundas
accordingly went down himself, with as many people as he could prevail upon
to follow him; and the lower deck ports were opened, the scuppers plugged,
the main and fore hatches secured, the cocks turned, and water drawn in at
the ports, and the pumps kept going by the people who came down, as long as
they could stand at them.
He thinks that by these exertions the lower deck was kept free from fire,
and the two magazines preserved for a long time from danger; nor did
Lieutenant Dundas, or he, quit this station, but remained there with all
the people who could be prevailed upon to stay, till several of the
middle-deck guns came through that deck.
About nine o'clock, Lieutenant Dundas and he, finding it impossible to
remain any longer below, went out at the foremost lower-deck port, and got
upon the forecastle; on which he apprehends there were then about one
hundred and fifty of the people drawing water, and throwing it as far aft
as possible upon the fire."
The Queen Charlotte eventually blew up with the loss of more than 600
people, including the Captain and her first Lieutenant. Dundas survived,
and was promoted to Commander the following December.
In July 1801, Admiral Linois's squadron sailed into Algeciras, with the
recently captured Cochrane aboard as prisoner. Commander Dundas of the
Calpe immediately sailed from Gibraltar to warn Admiral Saumarez off Cadiz.
During the ensuing battle, while Cochrane watched from Christy-Palliere's
cabin,
"The Hon. Captain Dundas, of his Majesty's polacre the Calpe, made his
vessel as useful as possible, and kept up a spirited fire on one of the
enemy's batteries."
--Rear-Admiral Sir James Saumarez
Dundas also sent one his sloop's boats in the unsuccessful attempt to
rescue the grounded Hannibal. The little Calpe participated in the chase
of the French-Spanish squadron several days later and assisted in the
capture of the French St. Antoine.
"My thanks are also due to Captain Holles, of the Thames, and to the Hon.
Captain Dundas, of the Calpe, whose assistance was particularly useful to
Captain Keats in securing the enemy's ship..."
--Rear-Admiral Sir James Saumarez
News of this battle reached the Admiralty at just about the same time as
Cochrane's report, delayed by Manley Dixon at Port Mahon, of the capture of
the El Gamo by the Speedy. Both Dundas and Cochrane were promoted to Post
Captain in August, 1801.
Now comes some confusion. In Syrett & DiNardo, Cochrane is listed as
having been posted on August 8, one day before Dundas. In his
autobiography, however, Cochrane complains about being unfairly posted just
after Dundas, whom he argues, was being rewarded for an action which
occurred after Cochrane's capture of the El Gamo. A navy list of this time
seems to bear him out; he is listed junior to Dundas. Apparently the
ensuing letter compaign of his father, Earl of Dundonald, and others of
influence managed to retroactively advance Cochrane past Dundas on the post
list.
Don Seltzer
Dundas also sent one his sloop's boats in the unsuccessful attempt to
rescue the grounded Hannibal. The little Calpe participated in the chase of
the French-Spanish squadron several days later and assisted in the capture of
the French St. Antoine.
This battle in M&C confuses me though I have read it more than once. The Hannibal
is grounded during the first part of the action while Jack watches from the
cabin of the Desaix with Captain Palliere. Then (on page 387) some boats came
from shore to aid the Hannibal, but who were they? Captain Palliere does not
fire at them so I thought they were French or Spanish. Later the Hannibal shows
up with Saumarez' squadron. Who did what to who and who got the 2 dollars?
Ray McP
Gibraltar Bay is a round body of water about 5 or 6 miles across, opening
up to the Mediterranean to the south. It is sufficiently wide that it could
be occupied by both the British and Spanish on opposite shores out of cannon
range. The British occupied the peninsula of Gibraltar, which formed the eastern
boundary of the bay. The Spanish fortications and anchorage were on the western
shore, at Algeciras, in plain view of the British naval base across the water.
When Admiral Linois arrived with his squadron, he chose to anchor under the
batteries of Algeciras rather than continue on through the Straits of Gibraltar.
Commander Dundas of the Calpe, anchored on the British side, set sail to warn
Admiral Saumarez's squadron which was blockading Cadiz in the Atlantic. When
Saumarez arrived, he immediately attacked the French ships anchored in the shallows
of the western side of the bay, hoping to repeat Nelson's victory of the Nile.
He did not have Nelson's luck, however. The wind died, and the Hannibal ran
aground.
When the French took possession of the Hannibal, they did not have a French
flag with them, so they raised the British ensign upside down as a sign of capture.
This was observed by the British naval dockyard only 5 miles away across the
bay, and misinterpreted as a distress call from the crew of the Hannibal. Many
of the dockyard force gallantly manned boats and rowed across the bay to aid
their comrades, only to be neatly captured by the French forces on board.
Which its all true, and happened just as POB described.
Don Seltzer
Do we ever find out what Stephen did to get into
bad odour with authority?
Methinks the reason he is in bad grace is for being
drunk and crude at the party. Speaking of his crew he
says: "Oh, yes, yes! The rest of them are certainly
coming ashore--they are lining the rail in the
shore-going rig, with money in their pockets, their
eyes staring out of their heads and their pricks a
yard long."
And then as the embarrassed ladies hurry off: "You
needn't hurry, ladies--they won't be allowed off the
sloop till the evening gun." (See page 188.)
Ray McP
No, those were Jack's comments, not Stephen's; but Stephen's perhaps, was
earlier on p. 186 in his meeting with Harte. "Civil insolence" it is called
there.
Rowen
I'm not getting your reasoning, Ray. *Jack,* not Stephen, makes these remarks
(Stephen regrets Jack's saying it, though remains silent about it).
Marian
Please forgive a pedant's first post, but surely it is Jack who is so crude
at the party? Stephen is a worry because he is a very strange creature; not
only a warranted surgeon but the particular friend of the Sophie's commander.
In his naivety I feel sure he would make mistakes which would look very like
giving himself the most terrible airs.
Mike French Welcome! Post more! I really did mean Jack NOT Stephen. The dog must have
been bothering me. :-)
Ray McP
One thing interesting about this passage is how POB worked a rather old joke
into his story: see
http://www.snopes.com/college/embarras/shortage.htm
DJD
By the time of Dillon's death, I believed that what
drove him throughout was self-loathing. He's an Irish
partisan who joins the British navy, a Protestant who
turns Catholic, a Catholic who takes the naval oath
against Catholicism, a first lieutenant who commits a
court marshallable (I made that word up) offense by
changing course without order, and a pompous sole who
lies about the presence of Manon aboard the
Christopher James.
I think what Dillon hated most about Jack was Jack's
comfort with and command of himself. And, of course,
that Jack was a Commander.
Vat denk je?
Ray McP
In a message dated 9-28-01 1:51:01 PM, raymcp999@YAHOO.COM writes:
He's an Irish
partisan who joins the British navy, a Protestant who
turns Catholic, a Catholic who takes the naval oath
against Catholicism, a first lieutenant who commits a
court marshallable (I made that word up) offense by
changing course without order, and a pompous sole
Brought aboard, no doubt, from one of those fishing boats. Or does this link
us back to the 'Outback' thread? "Serve with tartar sauce, a green salad,
and a nice white wine?"
Rowen
At that Jack's face would turn red and his eyes squeeze shut and he would
roar with laughter!
Ray McP
In a message dated 9/28/01 11:50:38 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
raymcp999@YAHOO.COM writes:
a pompous sole who
lies about the presence of Manon aboard the
Christopher James.
I think what Dillon hated most about Jack was Jack's
comfort with and command of himself. And, of course,
No way a pompous sole can command hisself.
What was the critical reaction to the book? Was there resentment and hostility to POB 'moving in' on the HH readers?
Barney
"...history permeates the very substance of the book. Patrick O'Brian's
sophisticated sea story belongs to the blue-ribbon category. It re-creates
with delightful subtley, the flavor of life aboard a midget British
man-of-war plying the western Mediterranean in the year 1800, a year of
indecisive naval skirmishes with France and Spain... The author's easy
command of the philosophical, political, sensual and social temper of the
times flavors a rich entertainment."
- New York Times Book Review, of M&C
Don Seltzer
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret) Yesterday it was "Eh, what's up, Jack?" Today its "imgregnable truths"; and
"clippers and huge ships." Somebody please stop this vile man before he shoots
again!
Marian,
As M&C sinks below the horizon, some quick passages I never got to admire
on-line or ask about in one case (all page numbers from the Norton
paperback):
~-~-~-~
" 'I am very happy to see you here, sir,' said Mrs. Harte, instantly
prepared to dislike him very much indeed."
Mere sentences later, Stephen snubs an arrogant Harte adroitly, with a
"civil insolence [that] so exactly matched his welcome that Molly Harte said
to herself, 'I shall like that man.'
The relationship in that marriage instantly lies before us.
~-~-~-~
" 'Sir, sir,' said Mowett, 'you are getting wet.'
'Yes,' said Stephen; and after a pause he added, 'It is the rain.' "
After a pause, mind you. He has considered the problem Mowett descried, and
concludes after consideration that... Now even for a professor that would be
considered distracted.
~-~-~-~
" [...]' You can only have one King. And a man's heart can only be in one
place at a time, unless he is a scrub.'
'What nonsense you do talk, to be sure,' said Stephen. 'What "balls", as you
sea-officers say; it is a matter of common observation that [...]' "
"Great balls of fire" seems an unlikely source for Stephen's comment, and
the coarser expressions are not normally used in the form "what balls." At
least not in my experience.
Reading this, I always wonder, is there some other expression that Stephen
is garbling here? Or did sea officers of that time indeed feel the recurring
need to derogate their adornments? Perhaps, in the stress of warfare, they
were getting in touch with their feminist side?
~-~-~-~
" She [...] lowered her bosom, the diamonds winking in the hollow, down
toward him, saying, 'You like him? You like him? You like him?'
Jack's eye grew less brotherly, oh far less brotherly, his glottis stiffened
and his heart began to thump. 'Oh, yes, I like him,' he said hoarsely.
'Timely, sir, bosun of the Superb,' said a tremendous voice at the opening
door, 'Oh, beg pardon, sir...' "
His glottis, hmm? And the unashamed choice of name for the bosun. If he were
telling this story orally, I believe POB would wink at us at that point, or
at least exhibit a wry smile. The unspoken thought: "Yes, I know it's a easy
chuckle, but it's charming anyway, isn't it?"
~-~-~-~
"[...] into the music room, Molly Harte to sit looking beautiful by her harp
and the rest to arrange themselves on the little gilt chairs.
'What are we to have?' asked a voice behind him, and turning Jack saw
Stephen, powdered, respectable apart from having forgotten his shirt, and
eager for the treat.
'Some Boccherini -- a 'cello piece -- and the Haydn trio that we arranged.
And Mrs Harte is going to play the harp. Come and sit by me.'
'Well, I suppose I shall have to,' said Stephen, 'the room being so crowded.
Yet I had hoped to enjoy this concert: it is the last we shall hear for some
time.'
'Nonsense,' said Jack, taking no notice [...]"
Whether I picture Stephen with no shirt under his waistcoat at all, or
merely wearing one that's seen too many dissections and resections for
civility, the echoes of their original meeting enchant me. Though I must
say, I resent Stephen continually objecting to the only musical talent I
possess myself: beating the time on my knee. Incorrectly.
~-~-~-~
Palliere wonders to Jack: 'You do not suppose they mean to retake the ship,
do you? What ARE they about?' And Jack, who realizes the misunderstanding,
hopes to minimize the harm by inviting Palliere to fire: 'But certainly if
you put a shot across the bow of the leading cutter [they will realize it's
hopeless and turn back].'
A gun is laid and then: 'But come,' said Captain Palliere, putting his hand
on the lock and smiling at Jack, 'perhaps it would be better not to fire.'
Which allows the rescue mission to reach the captured Hannibal and be
captured themselves, as pretty as you please.
Lovely interplay between two knowledgeable captains.
One of my favorite volumes. M&C shows the rough lashings here and there of a
prototype, but it's well done to say the least. All the fine elements of POB
are exhibited, and fortunately, he did not have a small-minded obsession
with consistency that prevented him making some interesting changes in the
character and circumstances of Jack and Stephen in later books.
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret)
Wonderful post, Gary! Thanks for sharing those gems with us. The family
jewels, so to speak? ;-)
As to the puzzle you mention below, I read it as Stephen meaning "What
arrogance you have to propose such nonsense..."
Rowen
In a message dated 10-3-01 1:12:56 PM, simsgw@CS.STANFORD.EDU writes:
'What nonsense you do talk, to be sure,' said Stephen. 'What "balls", as you
sea-officers say; it is a matter of common observation that [...]' "
The fuller expression would be "What a load of balls."
Viewers of "Yes Minister" or "Yes Prime Minister" may recall the
synonymous "Round Objects" ("Who is Round and why does he object?") and
"CGSM" ("Consignment of Geriatric Shoe Makers" ("Load of Old Cobblers")).
Martin @ home:
The use of the term "balls' to mean that a statement was nonsense or
stupidity was common in my young day 2nd half of the last age in
England. We occasionally waxed technical and used terms such as
testicles or bollocks.
Whether it was common usage in the Royal Navy of 1801 I don't know.
"Gary W. Sims"
One of my favorite volumes. M&C shows the rough
lashings here and there of a
prototype, but it's well done to say the least. All the
fine elements of POB
are exhibited, and fortunately, he did not have a
small-minded obsession
with consistency that prevented him making some
interesting changes in the
character and circumstances of Jack and Stephen in
later books.
I nod my head in admiration for Gary's point. Sure,
there were inconsistencies in the later books. Some came
out of the growth and development of the characters, and
changes in the characters that were unpredictable from
their introductions but not impossible over time. Some
were errors. However, I think Gary is totally in the
right of it: POB's very real NEED to tell the story of
what happened was admirably unhampered by the hobgoblins
of little minds.
From: Rowen84@AOL.COM
Wonderful post, Gary! Thanks for sharing those gems with us. The
family jewels, so to speak? ;-)
Why, Rowen, would I expose my arrogants to public critique?
As to the puzzle you mention below, I read it as Stephen meaning
"What arrogance you have to propose such nonsense..."
Now that is a plausible meaning. Just the sort of triple entendre Stephen
loves.
Gary W. Sims, Major, USAF(ret)
Reporting back after a trip to Europe - I attended a conference in the
beautiful (if trampled by tourists) city of Venice. Also had a few days to
visit the city - was surprised to see that with all the glorious naval
history of the Venetian Republic there is so little of it to remind us. The
Maritime Museum is a sad little affair, didn't see any replicas of historical
ships.
But I saw an Italian edition of TMC on sale at the street newspaper vendor
stall. Didn't have the Geoff Hunt cover art we are used to, but looked nice
nevertheless and stood out among the third rate detective novel that are the
usual fare in such places.
Now I'm catching up with Gunroom, somehow it's broadsides didn't sink my
mailbox (I didn't go nomail, trusting my large harddrive). Good to read all
the insights into M&C. It is a very different read the second time, when one
knows that there is the entire Canon to follow it. Still I think that the
best way to convert a novice to POB is through PC (especially if dealing with
someone who isn't a naval history buff).
Leaving out important happenings between the lines (chapters, volumes etc.)
is one of the most striking characteristics of POB's writing, in M&C it is
even more prominent than later in the Canon. For example, we have the
awkwardness of the crew and Jack getting to know each other on their first
voyage described in detail, then we jump in time, and the men are already
well trained and loyal to Jack. In later volumes the process of forming a
relationship with a new crew would be described, here we just get to see the
results. It is also interesting to see how the gunner's surgery by Stephen is
described only in retrospection, we know he'd be attempting the trepanation,
and then several pages later there is only a passing mention that the gunner
is alive and well. It is intersting to see how the later books fill up this
gap, when the surgery becomes a legend among the Surprises who follow Jack
and Stephen on their subsequent commands.
All this makes M&C probably the most difficult read in the Canon. Neither
worse, nor better, but definitely a bit different and harder to follow.
Now on to PC!
Pawel
--
(Behind on the Group Read, and still commenting on Master and Commander...)
PO'B was born in 1914, which would have made him 55 when M & C was published
(1969), so it was no doubt something of a personal joke when he inserted
into M & C some disparaging comments on turning fifty.
Stephen writes in his diary (p. 181, Norton pb): "It is odd -- will I say
heart-breaking? -- how cheerfulness goes: gaiety of mind, natural
free-springing joy. Authority is its great enemy -- the assumption of
authority. I know few men over fifty that seem to me entirely human:
virtually none who has long exercised authority. The senior post-captains
here; Admiral Wayne. Shrivelled men (shrivelled in essence: not, alas, in
belly). Pomp, an unwholesome diet, a cause of choler, a pleasure paid too
late and at too high a price, like lying with a peppered paramour."
More directly, there's "the unnatural death of Henry Gouges (had said, 'Ha,
ha, mates, I am fifty years old this day. Oh dear,' and had died sitting
there, still holding his untasted grog)" (p. 153).
Fortunately, things do get better eventually. Sorry I don't have the exact
passage at hand, but PO'B return to this joke again in one of his last books
(The Hundred Days possibly?) with the statement, "Eighty-five is a wonderful
age" (quotation from memory, and is approximate, but the age was PO'B's own
at the time).
John Finneran
Many people have noted the similarity of Jack and Toby of The Unknown Shore
to Jack and Stephen of Master and Commander and the rest of the Aubreyad.
This is no accident, of course; and I noted a few places in M & C, where
PO'B subtly alludes to TUS.
First, as you'll recall, when last we left our heroes, Jack and Toby (at the
end of TUS), they had arrived in a fashionable room, with various lords and
ladies lounging about, and descriptions of expensive furniture blocking them
in, notably "two gilt chairs", which Toby upsets in his eagerness to rush to
Georgiana (TUS, p.313, last page).
M & C picks up right where TUS left off:
Our heroes, now named Jack and Stephen, are again in a fashionable room,
this time "[t]he music-room in the Governor's House at Port Mahon, a tall,
handsome, pillared octagon", again with many local notables, and again the
gilt chairs, now "rows and rows of little gilt chairs" (M&C, p.7, opening
page); and again the order of this scene would be, at least metaphorically,
upset by the actions of Toby (Stephen).
TUS ended with Samuel Johnson (though not identified) in the room. In M &
C, when Jack meets Stephen for the second time, he (Jack) notes how he was
unable to learn Latin: "It was the same with Latin when I was a boy: and how
old Pagan used to flog me." (p. 16); which, it seems, is a parody on
Johnson's statement of how he did learn Latin: "My master whipt me very
well. Without that, Sir, I should have done nothing." (from Boswell's Life
of Johnson, with the assistance of Google).
Finally, and on a related note, at one point Jack and Stephen are speaking
of Dr. Johnson, and Stephen says, "What is more, he occupied the most vivid
dream I ever had in my life, not a week ago. How strange that you should
mention him today." (p. 147) We're given no further indication of what this
"vivid dream" was; but I like to think it was Stephen dreaming he was Toby
(thus incorporating TUS, and, by extension, also The Golden Ocean, into the
Aubreyad) and of speaking with Johnson, and then taking Georgiana by the
hand, and going off with her to speak of bats.
John Finneran
Finally, and on a related note, at one point Jack and Stephen are speaking
of Dr. Johnson, and Stephen says, "What is more, he occupied the most vivid
dream I ever had in my life, not a week ago. How strange that you should
mention him today." (p. 147) We're given no further indication of what this
"vivid dream" was; but I like to think it was Stephen dreaming he was Toby
(thus incorporating TUS, and, by extension, also The Golden Ocean, into the
Aubreyad) and of speaking with Johnson, and then taking Georgiana by the
hand, and going off with her to speak of bats.
Remarkable, John. I have long pondered on this unconsummated reference wch
POB clearly left hanging. But, never having had any solution to propound, I
have held off even pointing it out to the Gunroom. And here you sail up with
a most convincing answer to the problem: this is POB's innest of in jokes.
Congratulations.
Charlezzzz, venturing to point out that the "most vivid dream" may refer
to a youngish man's sexual dreams, wch may give us a hint that a "discussion
of bats" may have led to a different kind of conversation. Vive Toby! Vive
Stephen! And vive JF's continued insights.
Steve wrote: "Stephen is much less the incompetant seaman than he is later
in the series: his sealegs improve steadily through the book and right at
the end he makes some pretty knowlegable observations about the ships during
the battle of Algeceras. POB hasn't yet decided on SM's incompetence as a
running joke."
A fine post, Steve, most prodigious fine. A glass with you, sir!
A pity to pick just one point out of it, but perhaps I enjoy an odd
perspective on the above issue, having read M&C only AFTER I'd already met
(and come to love) Stephen in a couple of the later books in the Canon. I
believe you have the right of it: I was absolutely dumbfounded at Stephen's
relative lack of lubberliness when I first read M&C.
London Lois - which her books arrived yesterday - huzzah! - and she started
on her VERY OWN COPY of M&C last night, weighing anchor upon a voyage bound
to be both satisfyingly long and prodigious enjoyable, sure.
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
I've seen the "Group Read" header on several posts - can someone clue me in
on the rules for this?
I just finished M&C this morning and was particularly watching for any foreshadowing
of his intelligence role. There was none. He does ask to be set ashore near
Barcelona and stays for several days, during which he picks up the local gossip
and news of the Cacafuego, but it didn't seem that intelligence was his primary
motive. He also keeps his ears open and reports what he hears to Jack - eg the
discussion he overhears between two locals on Minorca that was mentioned yesterday.
Some more thoughts on M&C... This book seems to be less of a "series" than
the others; it is self-contained and complete. This makes sense if, as I suppose,
it was written before POB conceived the idea of a series. Stephen is much less
the incompetant seaman than he is later in the series: his sealegs improve steadily
through the book and right at the end he makes some pretty knowlegable observations
about the ships during the battle of Algeceras. POB hasn't yet decided on SM's
incompetence as a running joke.
And this is the only book that has three main (male) characters. The opening
scene of the book has Jack, Stephen and Dillon all exlaiming "Christ!" at roughly
simultaneous moments - a very nice way of tying the three men together.
Much more political discussion in this book than in any other. Stephen and
James have long talks about their history and politics; we never see Stephen
so self-revealing again.
Hope the listswains will bear with some belated thoughts on M&C in this and
following despatches - I'll soon catch up to the Group Read, but till then
....
Refs to the Norton hardcover ed. [BIG GRIN]
p 14-16 JA wakes up, heads straight for the naval outfitter's to acquire his
precious epaulette, then meets SM as he quits the shop. "May I propose a cup
of chocolate, or coffee?" says SM and JA accepts, admitting he has not
breakfasted. We may be sure, from what we learn of SM's circumstances, that
he too has not broken his fast, at least not in any substantial way. Now, in
later books, these are two true-believing, card-carrying coffee hounds of
the first water who despise chocolate for the grass-combing, double-poxed
beverage it is. Yet what do they order? CHOCOLATE!! Since HH was a coffee
hound too, was POB going another step in portraying JA as utterly unlike HH
via this incident?
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
Lois Anne du Toit
"Man is the only animal that both laughs and weeps for man alone is struck
by the difference between what things are and what they ought to be."
(William Hazlitt)
Norton h/c ed.
pp15 - 18: in the narrative, SM is "Maturin" or even "Mr Maturin". When we
next meet him at the beginning of Ch 2 (p34) he is become "Stephen Maturin"
(the first time we hear his first name) and by p36 he is "Stephen": whereas
JA is "Jack Aubrey" at first mention and then "Jack" thereafter. A narrative
device reflecting JA's growing liking for SM?
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
Norton h/c ed. p34ff
the "instant friendship" of JA and SM: having followed The Gunroom's
discussion of this phenomenon last month, may I offer this thought: while
the liking was real enough, we should be wary of believing that actual, warm
friendship had sprung into instant full bloom.
From JA's perspective: the meal at The Crown was particularly bibulous [p36
"gathering the empty decanters over to his side of the table"; p37 "Jack
filled their glasses (how the tide went in and out)"] and, even before it
began, JA was a little "heady" what with the joy of his promotion and the
added dimension that, for the interval of dinner, at least, he was not an
awful authority figure: p33 "Yet as he walked off to his meeting at the
Crown - to his meeting with an equal - there was a little greater eagerness
in his step than the mere Lieutenant Aubrey would have shown." Small wonder,
then, that he is overcome by an impulsive liking for his companion.
He repents of it the next morning, though: p50 "'A guest I know nothing
about, in a very small brig I have scarcely seen.' He pondered gloomily upon
the extreme care that should be taken with shipmates ... " So it seems that
the question "does drunk agree with sober?" might not, in his case,
necessarily be answered in the positive, and that this "instant friendship"
is not perceived by Jack as being "for real". Indeed, he feels the gloomiest
forbodings, not unnaturally, in view of Stephen's behaviour at the concert.
On SM's side, things are (predictably) more complex. Primo, there is his
desperate personal situation, cast adrift without means, cut off from Spain
by the war, sleeping rough - what must the impact of a large and bibulous
meal have been upon him? Small wonder he took Jack's offer of a job
(pp37-38) seriously - when you reflect upon it, it is an instance of
uncharacteristic obtuseness in Stephen to have overlooked the bantering
tone, the general jocosity of the situation ...
Secundo, he was clearly upset about his surly treatment of Jack the previous
evening: cf his reaction when Jack begs his pardon: p15 "'My dear sir,'
cried the man in the black coat, with an odd flush rising in his dead-white
face, 'you had every reason to be carried away ... May I propose a cup of
chocolate, or coffee? It would give me great pleasure.'" This desire to
repair the damage would have made Stephen the readier to respond to Jack's
friendly overtures, and goes a long way towards explaining why he opened so
much of his past to Jack to avoid giving an impression of "a most repulsive
or, indeed, a morose reserve" (p36).
As for Stephen's "morning after" reflections (p52ff), he is unsure whether
the job offer was serious or not: "'We had dined extremely well: four
bottles, or possibly five. I must not expose myself to an affront.'" Unlike
Jack, however, he retains a pleasant emotion for his dinner companion: "'Yet
he was such a pleasant, ingenuous companion.' He smiled at the
recollection."
No, upon the whole, no instant friendship: and probably a firmer foundation
for one in Stephen than in Jack.
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
I hadn't realised before that the Jack of the beginning of M&C is a creature
with little numeracy (p44 "... what with having dined extremely well and not
being good with figures at any time ...") and didn't consider himself much
of a navigator - p25: "'What's the master's name, Mr Williams?' 'Marshall,
sir, William Marshall. A prime navigator, I hear.' 'So much the better,'
said Jack, remembering his own struggles with the Requisite Tables and the
bizarre conclusions he had sometimes reached." This, together with his
memory of his mathematical struggles in boyhood (pp50-51), creates an
impression far different from the JA of the later books.
Again, HH was a brilliant mathematician and navigator: was POB's initial
intention to make JA HH's opposite in this aspect as well?
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
Norton h/c ed. p50
"... the nervous presence of the gunroom steward (the former captain's
steward had gone over to the Pallas) hovering with what had been Captain
Allen's invariable breakfast - a mug of small beer, hominy grits and cold
beef."
Passing hastily over Capt. Allen's taste in the article of breakfast, ain't
it amazing that this nervous figure is actually Preserved Killick? as we
discover on p57: "'Your coffee's up, sir,' said the steward. 'Thank you,
Killick...'"
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
Jack tries 12-pounders as chasers - they prove too much for Sophie. Is there
some reason why he does not consider 9-pounders? (norton h/c p70-71)
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
Norton h/c ed. p50
"... the nervous presence of the gunroom steward (the former captain's
steward had gone over to the Pallas) hovering with what had been Captain
Allen's invariable breakfast - a mug of small beer, hominy grits and cold
beef."
Interesting little passage. What part of the world is the ship in when this
occurs? Is not hominy a North American food? Is it really likely that
Captain Allen would be eating hominy grits for breakfast? (About as likely
as 13th century medieval monks growing/eating corn, ala Ellis Peters in one
of the Cadfael books I read the other day.)
Marian,
As I understand it, there's nothing special about
hominy - isn't it just a ground up, common plant? The
name might be different in different places.
Also, for quite a while people who lived in the South
and ate hominy grits were British subjects, were
visited by British ships etc.
=====
Which the ship is in Port Mahon.
Capt. Allen is an American: p12 " ... all that Jack knew of him was that he
was an American Loyalist ... " and p26 "'... all people from his [Allen's]
own part - the country up behind Halifax.'" (refs to Norton h/c ed.)
I had thought of hominy grits as being Southern cooking rather than
characteristic of the Northern States - but am merely an iggerant would-be
Limey.
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
Well, hominy is made from corn (Indian corn/maize), and I doubt it would be available in Majorca or even in England at the time. Perhaps the good captain, being American, had it sent from the states?
Gerry Strey
So it's not too strange that a Royal Navy captain
would be eating them.
Perhaps not if he was an American Loyalist, as Allen was (thanks for the
reference, London Lois: Capt. p. 12 " ... all that Jack knew of him was that
he was an American Loyalist ...).
But strange if he was from where O'Brian says he's from: p. 26 "'... all
people from his [Allen's] own part - the country up behind Halifax."
Unless O'Brian discovered a Northern hominy grits tradition which has been
most unstudiously ignored by historians and culinary artists alike.
Marian,
Well if he was a sailor all his life, it's possible
he put in to a Southern American port and tasted
grits. After teh American War if Independence, he
could have gotten a ready supply of the stuff - just
ground up corn as someone said. Pickings might have
become a little slim once the War of 1812 started ;^)
=====
Marian wrote:
wondering what exactly "up behind Halifax" means
"Inland from"?
Clive
In a message dated 10/11/01 11:09:36 AM Central Daylight Time,
gregg_germain@YAHOO.COM writes:
So it's not too strange that a Royal Navy captain
would be eating them.
Well, it kind of is, if he lived in or near Halifax Nova Scotia, as the text
seems to imply.
There's a Halifax in North Carolina, but it's small, and well inland.
Certainly plenty of Loyalists moved to Canada after the Revolution, but, I
would have thought, largely from Northern States.
For intelligence, there is nothing like a keen-witted, handsome woman, [DI 2]
Mary S
Halifax has a big hill in the middle of it with a
citadel on it. I spent 2 summers in HMCS Stadacona
there and "up behind Halifax" sounds quite logical to
me.
Jim (former naval person)
=====
Loyalists came from many parts of the former colonies, even from those
areas where grits would have been served. They were given free Crown
land to settle and farm "up behind Halifax" ie. in the hinterland of
Nova Scotia and Loyalists were also granted land along the north shore
of Lake Ontario and round the Golden Horseshoe into Niagara.
In England, the word "corn" is usually applied to wheat, or other
predominant cereal crop. I don't know whether Brother Cadfael was
described as growing corn or maize.
Jack tries 12-pounders as chasers - they prove too much for Sophie. Is
there
some reason why he does not consider 9-pounders? (norton h/c p70-71)
An interesting question! I have, unfortunatley no idea, the first thing that
lept into my mind was "Jack doesn't like 9lbers", but alas, this is not
true! In Surgeons Mate, JA remarks about a vessel pursuing them with "Lovely
long brass nines" as bow chasers which are "a destructive and effective
weapon in the right hands" (paraphrasing no direct quotes.. pls don't shoot
me).
So.. I dunno!
Andy
Perhaps the only reason is that Lord Cochrane tried 12-pounders as chasers in
the Speedy (and of course achieved only failure). But as to why he did not
then experiment with 9-pounders ... well, as I recollect Cochrane did not
address the question in his autobiography.
Bruce Trinque
Lois Anne du Toit wrote:
Jack tries 12-pounders as chasers - they prove too much for Sophie. Is there
some reason why he does not consider 9-pounders? (norton h/c p70-71)
The simple answer is that this incident is taken from Cochrane's
Autobiography, and Cochrane tried 12-pounders as chasers for the Speedy.
So why didn't Cochrane try 9-pounders? Perhaps they weren't available at
the dockyard in Port Mahon. 9-pounders were in great demand as chasers and
as light guns for the forecastle and quarterdeck of larger ships.
12-pounders were falling out of favor as newer frigates and the upper
gundeck of ships of the line were armed with 18-pounders. So, quite
possibly there was a glut of unwanted 12-pounders available.
Don Seltzer
Adam Wrote:
Loyalists came from many parts of the former colonies, even from those
areas where grits would have been served. They were given free Crown
land to settle and farm "up behind Halifax" ie. in the hinterland of
Nova Scotia and Loyalists were also granted land along the north shore
of Lake Ontario and round the Golden Horseshoe into Niagara.
Quite right!
One of the greatest contingents of Loyalists in the states, and the greatest
contingents of Scottish Loyalists were from North Carolina. It is entirely
possible that Allen was one of these, perhaps even probable. And it is
highly probable that he did indeed come to know and love hominy grits in NC.
Here are some url about the little known but extremely important battle of
Moore's Creek Bridge where the "Patriots" defeated the Loyalists (mostly Highland
Scots)and changed the British strategy in the Revolution. http://statelibrary.dcr.state.nc.us/nc/ncsites/moores.htm
http://www.nps.gov/mocr/
Pictures of re-enactment http://www.nps.gov/mocr/mocrevnt/index.htm
http://wilmmag.wilmington.net/597/moores.html
couple of other interesting urls
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/NCSCOTS/2000-02/0949683141
Following is a rather lengthy explanation of Scottish migration into this
area. Much is extracted (sometimes verbatim) from History of North Carolina
by Hugh T. Lefler and Albert Newsome.
"The earliest, largest, and most numerous settlement of Highlanders in
America was the one in NC in the years between 1732 and the American
Revolution". The Highland Scots were the only large group to come to NC
directly from their native land. As early as 1732 a few Scots had settled on
the Upper Cape Fear and were enthusiastic about the "salubrious climat,
fertile soil, and liberal government". In 1736 Alexander Clark, of Jura in
the Hebrides Isles, brought a shipload of his fellow countrymen to the
colony, where he found a "good number of Scotch." Three years later 350
Highlanders landed at Wilmington under the leadership of Neil McNeill and,
according to tradition, left the town because the settlers made fun of their
peculiar costumes and unusual language, and settled in the present
Fayetteville region. The newcomers, pleased with their new location and
future prospects, petitioned the Assembly in Feb. 1740, saying "If proper
encouragement be given them, they'll invite the rest of their firends and
acquaintances over." The Assembly, interested in promoting immigration, and
probably prodded by Governor Johnston, who was a native of Scotland, voted
to exempt the new settlers from all taxation for ten years. A similar
exemption from payment of any "Publick or County tax for Ten years" was
offered all Highlanders who should come to North Carolina in groups of 40 or
more, and the Governor was requested "to use his Interest,in such manner, as
he shall think most proper, to obtain an Instruction for giving
Encouragement to Protestants from foreign parts, to settle in Townships
within this Province."
The aftermath of the Battle of Culloden on April 16, 1746 created a
situation that led to thousands of Scots to come to North Carolina. The clan
system was broken up, estates confiscated, rents were increased, sheep
raising was substituted for regular agricultue which threw many Scots out of
work, and the Scots were forbidden to bear arms or to wear the costumes of
their clans.
There was one way out of this unhappy situation, After Culloden, the King
offered pardon to all "rebels" who would take the oath of allegiance to the
House of Hanover and emigrate to America. Thousands hastened to take
advantage of this offer, and there developed "a Carolina mania that was not
broken until theh Revolution."
The French and Indian War (1754-1763) interrupted immigration to the
colonies, but with the advent of peace, it was renewed on a larger scale
than ever. Thousands of Scots came to America--from the Scottish mainland
and also from the "Western Isles" of Jura, Islay, Argyleshire,Stonoway,
Skye, Lewis, Lochabar, Ross, and Sutherland, as well as from other island
groups. Between 1763 and 1769, the Scots Magazine mentioned four different
migrations from Islay to North Carolina. From 1768 to 1771 some 1600
Highlanders came into the Cape Fear River, and in the summer of 1770, 54
shiploads migrated from the Western Ilses to the province. In 1772 Governor
Martin wroth Lord Hillsborough, Secretary of State for the Colonies: "Near a
thousand people have arrived in Cape Fear River from the Scottish Isles
since the month of November with a view to settling in this province whose
prosperity and strength will receive great augmentation by the accession of
such a number of hardy, laborious and thrifty people."
the year of 1773 witnessed the heaviest emigration, approximately 4000
leaving that year, a godly portion of whom came to North Carolina, where
they found "the largest and most important settlement of Highlanders in
America." In 1775 Governor Martin estimated he could raise a Loyalist army
of 3000 Highlanders, which indicates that there were probably as many as
20,000 in the province.
The Highlanders who came to NC were among the most substantial and energetic
people of Scotland. Scottish journals referred to them as men "of wealth and
merit," as "the most wealthy and substantial people in Skye," and the
"finest set of fellows in the Highlands" who carried a least 6,000 lb
sterlingin ready cash with them." In 1772-1773 migration, it was claimed
that each person carried an average of 4 lb, and it was estimated that the
1500 emigrants from County Sunderland during these two years carried with
them 7500 lb, "which exceeds a year's rent of the whole county". \
The Scots continued to use Gaelic, and in 1756 Hugh McAden reported that
many of them "scarcely knew one word of English." But Gaelic gradually gave
way to English, although there were survivals of the ancient tongue for more
than a century.
Most of the Highlanders became farmers, and they were particularly important
in the production of naval stores from the vast forests of lon leaf pines.
Quite a number became merchants and, according to Governor Tryon, many of
them were "skilled mechanics." Some likewise entered the professions and
made distinctive contributions in politics, religion, education, and
milatary affairs.
Despite assiduous googling and searching of anything that might be attempted
to be searched, the following remain obscure to me: the light of the
listswains' wisdom upon these points will be much appreciated. Page refs to
Norton h/c
p 116 JA says: "Come in or out, there's a good fellow. Don't stand in the
door like a God-damned Lenten cock." ?? in some way a reference to the
Lenten abstinence from meat?
p 121; "There were plenty of people on the little quarterdeck - the master
at the con ... " What, pray, is the precise sense or meaning of "the con"?
From use of the term "the con" in naval fiction set in modern times (eg "Mr
X, you have the con") it appears to mean "the state of being in charge of
sailing the barky" but this may be a false description "and a false
description is anathema to the philosophic mind." (SM at M&C p151)
log book entries: eg p 152: "winds variable, SE by S, course S50W, distance
63 miles. - Latitude 42º32'N, longitude 4º17'E, Cape Creus S76ºW 12
leagues." Here I have 3 questions: "course S50W means course south west, but
the 50? Is it 50 degrees west of south? if so, why no º? - I note some
consistency in the course bearing (if it is one) being written thus with no
º . Then again, does "Cape Creus S76ºW" mean that Cape Creus bore 76 degrees
west of south, there being 90 degrees in all between south and west?
p146: JA's malapropism: "alas, poor Borwick." Has anyone ever discovered
(or did POB ever reveal) why "Borwick" should have sprung to Jack's mind to
be confused with Yorick? Was there some RN unfortunate by that name?
nightglass: I've cleverly mislaid my references to this, but it is a
tolerably common term. It was surprising to me that telescopes c1800 could
have been so fashioned as (apparently) to enhance vision at night: any
description of what constituted the difference between the common or garden
telescope and a nightglass would be most prodigious welcome.
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
At 2:37 PM +0100 10/15/2001, Lois Anne du Toit wrote:
p 121; "There were plenty of people on the little quarterdeck - the master
at the con ... " What, pray, is the precise sense or meaning of "the con"?
A very old term meaning to direct the helmsman by giving steering orders.
Early forms included Cun and Cond.
log book entries: eg p 152: "winds variable, SE by S, course S50W, distance
63 miles. - Latitude 42º32'N, longitude 4º17'E, Cape Creus S76ºW 12
leagues." Here I have 3 questions: "course S50W means course south west, but
the 50? Is it 50 degrees west of south? if so, why no º? - I note some
consistency in the course bearing (if it is one) being written thus with no
º . Then again, does "Cape Creus S76ºW" mean that Cape Creus bore 76 degrees
west of south, there being 90 degrees in all between south and west?
The mixed usage reflects the growing use of scientific instruments such as
the sextant and chronometer to mathematically calculate position and
direction. Wind direction, ship direction, and the bearing of an object in
view were generally given as compass points (SE by S). Determining the
direction of a distant point was by mathematically differencing the
latitudes and longitudes and putting the result in degrees. Today, we
would express that as degrees from North, either 0 - 360, or perhaps
+/-180 from North. In Jack's time, the convention was to specify degrees
from either North or South, and to use E and W instead of negative numbers.
So, today we would call "S76ºW" as 180 + 76 = 256°. "S76ºE" would be 180
- 76 = 104°.
nightglass: I've cleverly mislaid my references to this, but it is a
tolerably common term. It was surprising to me that telescopes c1800 could
have been so fashioned as (apparently) to enhance vision at night: any
description of what constituted the difference between the common or garden
telescope and a nightglass would be most prodigious welcome.
A simple telescope only requires two lenses, but a regular terrestial
telescope has three lenses, which results in an upright image. Each lens
absorbs a fair percentage of light, which is usually not a problem in
daytime.
A nightglass, or astronomical telescope uses only two lenses to maximize
the light reaching the eye. The penalty is that the image is upside down.
Don Seltzer
More likely "conn" and fairly modern, it means the one and only officer who
makes the decisions about ship actions. The Captain may arrive on the
bridge and tell the Officer of the Deck that the Captain has the conn. The
log would so record and the OOD would step to the side.
John
Hmm.
My understanding is that should the Captain or Master come up, the OOW shall report and should the C/M give "Carry on" the OOW remains in command.
If, at any time, the C/M *gives an order* (rather than making a suggestion to the OOW) then the C/M **has** command until he *specifically* returns it to the OOW.
The principle also applies to carrying a Pilot: once the request "Pilot, take charge" is made by the C/M, the OOW shall obey the Pilot's orders unless given a direct order by the C/M.
I'll have to do some digging to find my copies of "Bridge Management Procedures" & "Pilot, Take Charge", but "Practical Ship-Handling" is to hand and makes fascinating reading!
OK, I'm *really* behind, but I had a ton of library books to get
through before I felt I could start up with the group read (when Poul
Anderson died, I went through everything of his that the library had.)
So, I'm finally reading Master & Commander (and not rationing my pages
per day, until I'm caught up) and I reach the scene where Dillon is
irritated by the smirk on the face of the marine guarding the
Captain's cabin. Everyone knows that the softboiled egg is to revive
Miss Smith from her night's labors.
IIRC, it was discussed that Dillon may have been a bit disapproving of
Jack, having Miss Smith in his cabin.
However, Dillon was still on his old ship, getting ready to go to the
Sophie. It was the captain of Dillon's old ship (the name of which
escapes me, and M&C is at home) who was entertaining Miss Smith.
'Course, we may have completely dissected this by now, and I missed it
the first time by. ;-)
--
No, the discussion did reflect that it was his old captain involved with the
eggs, not Jack. You might have become mixed up because the discussion then
talked about his disapproval of Jack for a number of other reasons, including
his behavior with Diana, thinking him 'shy,' and thinking he was too
interested in money. The egg episode showed a certain rigid quality to
Dillon's thinking, a prudishness that foreshadowed his later disillusionment
with Jack and showed us his essential character from the very beginning.
Rowen
oops - I wrote Diana but I meant Molly Harte.
Rowen
Molly rather than Diana.
How could anyone confuse those two?
Martin @ home:
Both women, both with the same kind of behavior? ;-) [NOTE: this is a joke.
Please , D&S Party, do not flame me that Diana is not a loose woman like
Molly, etc, etc.!]
No, I didn't really confuse the two, just stuck in the wrong name because I
was also thinking about the Diana/Stephen posts which I had just read.
You must have missed my 'oops' that was sent immediately after. I realized
about the time i pushed the 'send' button that I'd typed in Diana instead of
Molly.
Rowen
Yes, it is A Separate Peace, by John Knowles...
I had the same impression as David about the discussion of Dillon and the
soft-boiled egg (i.e., that the reference on the list was to Jack, whereas
it was actually to the captain of his previous ship). I joined the list at
the very end of the M&C thread (and am just now rereading M&C in an effort
to catch up with the group read), so that may have contributed to my
confusion. Speaking of confusion, I love the bit in M&C where Jack proposes
a toast of "confusion to the Pope" when dining with Stephen and Dillon, not
knowing that they are both Catholics, and Stephen's response..."The poor
gentleman has Boney on his hands, and that is confusion enough, in all
conscience." Jack then graciously amends it to "confusion to Boney."
Thanks to Kerry and Marian for elucidating "root". (I now vaguely recall Gus
McRae's use of it - it's been a long time since I've read Lonesome Dove.) Another
H. Allen Smith fan on the list - all right! I thought I was the last of the
breed.
-RD, slightly less confused
References to Norton h/c ed.
M&C p 266: "On his knees and with his chin level with the top of the table,
Stephen watched the male mantis step cautiously towards the female mantis."
I've done a bit of practical experimentation, and I believe that anyone much
taller than I (5' 6") would find that position unsustainable for anything
more than a few seconds: I found myself uncomfortably bent at the waist. The
table may, of course, have been uncommonly high: but it's more likely that a
man taller than, say, 5' 7" or 5' 8" would sit on his heels rather than
kneel in order to bring his chin level with the tabletop.
I have actually always visualised Stephen as being much like Nelson in build
and was glad to have some slight and probably ill-founded reason to continue
to do so.
London Lois
51° 29' 00" N 000° 11' 00" W
Ah, but Lois, you can't have it both ways. As I recall, our resident Nelson
expert, Colin White, said, when last we argued about heights, that scholars
have concluded Nelson was 5' 7" (give or take a few millimeters).
BTW, if you haven't read Colin's book *1797: Nelson's Year of Destiny,* I
(and many others here) recommend it to you.
Marian, who pictures Stephen at no more than 5'4"
A minor curiosity, previously discussed in the Gunroom but, as far as I
can tell, not since 1996:
When Jack and Stephen first get together for a cup of chocolate (pp.
15-16 in the Norton paperback), upon entering the coffeeshop Stephen is
met with a discouraging inverted-pendulum "gesture of negation" from the
proprietor. My first guess as to the significance of this was that the
owner was telling Stephen that he had reached the end of his credit
line, and most other readers seem to agree with this. Of course,
Stephen and Jack nevertheless proceed to order chocolate, and get it,
probably because his new friendship with a solvent RN officer raises
Stephen's status in the owner's eyes. [there was a suggestion at one
point that this secretive gesture might have been the first hint of
Stephen's espionage activities; but that seems unlikely.]
Of course, as we now know, Stephen had spent the previous night "On a
Steep Hillside," since his credit was indeed entirely used up. My
question, however, is this: What is the significance of Stephen's next
comment, "The posts are wonderfully slow these days"? Was he actually
expecting a letter, or was he just "covering" for his embarrassment,
since he would rather not admit to Jack how dire the situation really
was?
(BTW interesting archives we have here . . . try searching through old
messages using the keyword "pendulum" . . . or, I suppose, any keyword
at all!)
--------------------
Steve Ross
One can reasonably suspect that POB himself in his early days in France may have received the "inverted pendulum" when walking into shops who knew his custom. Even more specifically, POB talks of one time (I believe it's in the King biography when his royality checks from England where suddenly stopped by a new law that forbade exporting more than a certain amount of funds per year from England. He, too, knew the pain of waiting for a letter.
John
: What is the significance of Stephen's next
comment, "The posts are wonderfully slow these days"? Was he actually
expecting a letter, or was he just "covering" for his embarrassment
I believe he was covering his inability to pay-
Blatherin' John B
After Jack and Stephen first meet, and before POB settled upon their tastes
as confirmed coffee drinkers, they share--or Stephen drinks (I don't
remember which) a pot of chocolate. Would that be sweetened chocolate
similar to what we're used to nowadays, or would it have been the
unsweetened and presumably bitter drink of the 18th century coffeehouses?
Ditto for the ships, like the Lively, that were chocolate as opposed to
coffee drinkers.
Bob Fleisher
--------------------------------------------
Amazed the fog of war still lies over these engagements
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
From: Charlezzzz@AOL.COM
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: M&C Groupread--the last battle sequence
From: Gary W. Sims
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 1:52 PM
Subject: Groupread M&C: An echoing view of Dillon's
--------------------------------------------
No great fan of kings, but no ready regicide,
and willing to let rule if they let live
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
From: Rowen84@AOL.COM
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: DIllon's Demise
Rowen
(and have we ever inquired whether this 'Miss Smith' is related to Jack's
'Miss Smith'?)
From: Eric A. Ladner
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 8:53 PM
Subject: Re: M&C Groupread--the last battle sequence
From: Gary W. Sims
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:50 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: DIllon's
Demise
--------------------------------------------
Certain le joie d'amor is not a modern invention
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
From: rxbach
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 5:36 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: DIllon's Demise
From: Dick Elliott
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 6:12 AM
Subject: M&C Groupread--the last battle sequence
30.00 N, 95.42 W
From: Martin Watts
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: DIllon's Demise
50° 45' N 1° 55' W.
The Borough and County of the Town of Poole
From: Ray McPherson
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: An echoing view of Dillon's
From: Jerry Shurman
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: An echoing view of Dillon's
From: Ray McPherson
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 9:58 AM
Subject: Cacafuego
From: Charlezzzz@AOL.COM
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: Cacafuego
From: Paul B.
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: GRP M&C Drinking habits and medicine: WAS What did Jack know and when did he know it?
From: Patrick Tull
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: Cacafuego
From: William Nyden
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: Cacafuego
Bill Nyden, tenderly
a Rose by another name
37° 25' 15" N 122° 04' 57" W
From: Niall Kelly
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:58 AM
Subject: Re: [SeaRoom] on-topic and off-topic
--
Niall Kelly
Copyrighted 2001 by Niall Kelly
From: Gabriel Diaz
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: Cacafuego
From: Susan Wenger
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 5:49 PM
Subject: Re: AW: [POB] Drinking habits and medicine: WAS What did Jack know and when did he know it?
From: Jean A
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: M&C Question, for all love...
From: Barney Simon
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 4:02 AM
Subject: Re: M&C Groupread--the last battle sequence
From: Susan Wenger
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 6:10 AM
Subject: groupread:M&C:setting the series
From: Nathan Varnum
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 3:29 AM
Subject: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
From: Jim McPherson
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 6:53 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
James McPherson
33* 47' 30" N
116* 32' 10" W
675' above sea level
From: Gregg Germain
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
Gregg
Sailing Master, Artillery Capt., Glover's Marblehead Regiment (GMR)
From: Isabelle Hayes
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
From: Nathan Varnum
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
From: Gregg Germain
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 4:02 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
Gregg
Sailing Master, Artillery Capt., Glover's Marblehead Regiment (GMR)
From: Mary Arndt
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 11:47 AM
Subject: Group Read M&C
42º36'53" N
71º20'43" W
From: John Finneran
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 5:30 PM
Subject: GRP: M&C: Not a Typooo...
From: Susan Wenger
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 4:09 PM
Subject: GRP: M&C: Not a Typooo
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: GRP: M&C: Not a Typooo...
From: Ruth A Abrams
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
From: Gary W. Sims
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 10:57 PM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
--------------------------------------------
Pondering impregnable truths
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
From: Nathan Varnum
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 3:43 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
From: Michael R. Ward
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:49 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
From: Marian Van Til
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 6:01 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
From: Ray McPherson
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
From: Susan Wenger
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 11:47 AM
Subject: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
From: Susan L. Collicott
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
From: Gary W. Sims
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
--------------------------------------------
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
From: Susan Wenger
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
From: Mary S
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
35° 58' 11" N
86° 48' 57" W
From: Mary Arndt
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:46 PM
Subject: Group Read:M&C James Dillon
42º36'53" N
71º20'43" W
From: Mary Arndt
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:58 PM
Subject: Group Read M&C: The Crapulous dawn
42º36'53" N
71º20'43" W
From: Mary Arndt
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 6:06 PM
Subject: Group read M&C: Araby left at the post
42º36'53" N
71º20'43" W
From: Kerry Webb
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: Group read M&C: Araby left at the post
Kerry Webb
Canberra, Australia
From: pete almquist
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C
From: Thistle Farm
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:01 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C
From: Mary Arndt
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:47 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C
From: Amanda Dunham
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C: The Crapulous dawn
Amanda Dunham
The List Sin Eater, not the Amanda in the UK ;-)
37* 33' 22.93" N NAD 27
122* 19' 51.46" W Clark 66
+81 ft Mean Sea Level
From: Mary S
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 7:08 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
35° 58' 11" N
86° 48' 57" W
From: Gerry Strey
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 5:24 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
Madiosn, Wisconsin
From: Susan Wenger
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 5:35 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C
From: Gerry Strey
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 5:47 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C
Madison, Wisconsin
From: Marian Van Til
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 12:30 PM
Subject: Jack & Queenie (was: RE: [POB] Group Read M&C)
From: Jim McPherson
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 5:55 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C
James McPherson
33* 47' 30" N
116* 32' 10" W
675' above sea level
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 8:18 AM
Subject: [GRP] M&C: The real Heneage Dundas
From: Ray McPherson
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 11:24 AM
Subject: Re: [GRP] The Hannibal
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: [GRP] The Hannibal
From: Ray McPherson
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C: The Crapulous dawn
From: Rowen84@AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C: The Crapulous dawn
From: Marian Van Til
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C: The Crapulous dawn
From: Mike French
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C: The Crapulous dawn
Friend of the Polychrest
From: Ray McPherson
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C: The Crapulous dawn
From: David Dunn
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: Group Read M&C: The Crapulous dawn
From: Ray McPherson
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
From: Rowen84@AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
From: Ray McPherson
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
From: MMarch5235@AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread M&C: Dillon's Demise
From: Barney Simon
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 7:07 PM
Subject: Group Read M&C: A parting shot from the stern chasers as M&C falls behind
at home in NYC for the weekend.
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: [GRP] M&C: A parting shot from the stern chasers as M&C falls behind
From: Marian Van Til
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2001 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: Group Read: M&C: Writing styles
--------------------------------------------
Pondering impregnable truths
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
confirming Gary's thought: he definitely ought to be wearing a scarlet P
on his chest; but it dooesn't stand for Political.
From: Gary W. Sims
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 12:48 AM
Subject: Groupread: M&C -- As we bid farewell
P. 186: Molly Hart meets Stephen for the first time:
P. 312: Stephen staring at the wake distractedly, his mind on the recent
troubles in Ireland I believe:
P. 318: After Stephen mentions people being torn between loyalties, Jack
insists:
P. 342: Mercedes tries on her reward:
P.348: A final gathering before they sail:
P.387 And finally, though not the last good scene in the book, I love the
scene too lengthy to type in full where boats have put off from Gibraltar
hoping to aid the Hannibal, thinking her in distress. In fact, she already
has been taken by the French, but is flying the British ensign inverted
rather than a French flag.
--------------------------------------------
Well into Post Captain for the umpteenth time
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
From: Rowen84@AOL.COM
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: Groupread: M&C -- As we bid farewell
-----
From: Martin Watts
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread: M&C -- As we bid farewell
50° 44' 57" N
1° 58' 34" W
From: Adam Quinan
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread: M&C -- As we bid farewell
From: Susan Wenger
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread: M&C -- As we bid farewell
From: Gary W. Sims
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: Groupread: M&C -- As we bid farewell
--------------------------------------------
Flinging great arrogants of fire
At or about 34°42' N 118°08' W
From: Pawel Golik
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 3:02 PM
Subject: Reporting back on board (and some thoughts on M&C)
Pawel Golik
http://www.gen.emory.edu/cmm/people/staff/pgolik.html
Currently at 33*48'53"N 84*19'25"W
Home is at 52*12'25"N 21*5'37"E
From: John Finneran
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 8:12 PM
Subject: GRP: M&C: L is 'ell
From: John Finneran
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 8:12 PM
Subject: GRP: M & C: Picking Up Where We Left Off...
From: Charlezzzz@AOL.COM
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 8:26 PM
Subject: GRP: M&C, and John F has solved a great puzzle
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 11:56 PM
Subject: Re: M&C Stephen's sealegs - was Re: Group Read PC: Stephen's blunder
From: Steve Turley
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 10:18:30 -0700
Subject: Re: Group Read PC: Stephen's blunder
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:17 AM
Subject: M&C - coffee vs chocolate
lois@glomas.com
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:19 AM
Subject: M&C - Maturin vs Stephen
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:39 AM
Subject: M&C: instant friendship between JA and SM
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:49 AM
Subject: M&C: Jack's mathematical ability
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 2:03 AM
Subject: M&C - meeting Killick for the first time
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 4:59 AM
Subject: M&C - the chasers - why not 9 pounders?
From: Marian Van Til
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 5:28 AM
Subject: A British captain eating hominy? (was: RE: [POB] M&C - meeting Killick for the first time)
possibly misinformed
From: Gregg Germain
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 5:43 AM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy? (was: RE: [POB] M&C - meeting Killick for the first time)
Gregg
Sailing Master, Artillery Capt., Glover's Marblehead Regiment (GMR)
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 5:51 AM
Subject: A British captain eating hominy? (was: RE: [POB] M&C - meeting Killick for the first time)
From: Gerry Strey
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy? (was: RE: [POB] M&C -meeting Killick for the first time)
Madison, Wisconsin
From: Marian Van Til
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy?
wondering what exactly "up behind Halifax" means
From: Gregg Germain
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy?
Gregg
Sailing Master, Artillery Capt., Glover's Marblehead Regiment (GMR)
From: thekaines
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy?
From: Mary S
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy? (was: RE: [POB] M&C - meeting Kill...
35° 58' 11" N
86° 48' 57" W
From: Jim McPherson
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy?
James McPherson
33* 47' 30" N
116* 32' 10" W
675' above sea level
From: Adam Quinan
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy? (was: RE: [POB] M&C -meetingKillick for the first time)
From: Andrew McNeill
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 5:30 AM
Subject: Re: M&C - the chasers - why not 9 pounders?
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: M&C - the chasers - why not 9 pounders?
41°37'53"N 72°22'51"W
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: M&C - the chasers - why not 9 pounders?
From: TFAJr
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: A British captain eating hominy? (was: RE: [POB] M&C -meetingKillick for the first time)
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 5:37 AM
Subject: M&C - some nautical and non-nautical questions
From: Don Seltzer
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 6:23 AM
Subject: Re: M&C - some nautical and non-nautical questions
From: John Berg
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: M&C - some nautical and non-nautical questions
From: John Germain
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: M&C - some nautical and non-nautical questions
From: David Phillips
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 4:50 AM
Subject: GroupRead:M&C
David Phillips sasdvp@unx.sas.com SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room.
RKBA! DVC 35* 46' 33.024" N 078* 48' 48.161.89" W
From: Rowen 84
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: GroupRead:M&C
From: Rowen 84
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 1:43 PM
Subject: oops Re: [POB] GroupRead:M&C
From: Martin Watts
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: GroupRead:M&C
50° 44' 57" N
1° 58' 34" W
From: Rowen 84
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 2:26 PM
Subject: Re: GroupRead:M&C
From: Rosemary Davis
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 7:38 PM
Subject: regressing to M&C
42º44'8"N
84º32'21"W
From: Lois Anne du Toit
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 11:38 PM
Subject: M&C: Stephen's height
From: Marian Van Til
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 3:58 AM
Subject: Re: M&C: Stephen's height
From: Steve Ross
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:27 AM
Subject: M&C: That gesture of negation and its significance
a complacent pragmatical worldly fellow (HMSS p. 196) . . .
30° 24' 32"N
91° 05' 28"W
From: John Berg
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: M&C: That gesture of negation and its significance
From:
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: M&C: That gesture of negation and its significance
From: Robert Fleisher
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 9:10 AM
Subject: Chocolate in M&C
Houston, TX
Return to Main Page