|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
I'm excited enough about something in Chapter 1 that I can't make myself wait until January.
First some other comments:
Again, thanks to Susan Wenger for pointing out how the animal behaviors comment on -- or foreshadow -- the human story. On page 16, when "an uncommonly large black and white bird lifted from among the trees...the bird, now harried by pair of crows, crossed the valley and vanished over the hill that divided Ashgrove Cottage from the sea," this predicts Jack's flight at the end of the chapter. Later passages like "`How they do talk,' reflected Stephen: this was the first time he had ever seen the slightest possible evidence of a relationship between Sophie and her improbable mother...he watched Sophie and her mother, and their kinship became more apparent...an expression that a French colleague of his...had called `the English look', attributing it to frigidity..." makes clear who the crows are. And ditto for the cow refusing the bull on page 21 and Stephen's later "Jack, with his ardent temperament, must be strangely put out."
Stephen's innumeracy, a running joke in the canon, is present here when he cites the law of averages on page 31.
Jane Austen references abound through the chapter, this time mostly to _Emma_. Mapes and Ashgrove are reminiscent of Maple Grove, the seat of Augusta Elton's brother, Mr. Suckling. (POB wasn't the only one with a knack for names.) Mrs. Williams's gushing about the woods at Mapes on page 27 calls to mind Mrs. Elton talking about Maple Grove. On page 30, Stephen, in "Doctor Pissy" mode, tells Jack, `But I do beg you will not countenance that thoughtless way people have of flinging them [Jack's daughters] up into the air...it is a grievous error to fling them to the ceiling.' In _Emma_, Mr. Woodhouse says, "And then their uncle comes in, and tosses them [his nephews] to the ceiling in a very frightful way!" And sure enough, a ship called the Emma appears near the end of the book (p.327). Do any lissuns know if this is one of the real ships from the Mauritius campaign or an O'Brian invention?
On page 50, when Sophie "...was also sorry for her recent -- shrewishness was far too strong a word -- for now she ran straight on into praise of their visitor. Lady Clonfert was a most elegant, well-bred woman, with remarkably fine eyes..." the words echo Mis Bingley's "And for her eyes, which have sometimes been called so fine...they have a sharp, shrewish look" from _Pride and Prejudice_. And I think that a comment on page 36 about the chimney not drawing when the air is anything south of west echoes a line from _Persuasion_, though I haven't found it yet.
But the more I read Chapter 1 of TMC the more I kept hearing another voice there. It took me a long time to figure it out, but I think this isn't completely crazy.
Some passages from O'Brian:
1. Mrs. Williams to Stephen: "Not on the settle, Doctor Maturin, if you please. You will be more comfortable in Captain Aubrey's chair." (Page 25.)
2. "`A handsome clock it is too,' said Stephen. `A regulator, I believe. Could it not be set a-going?'
`Oh, no, sir,' said Mrs. Williams with a pitying look. `Was it to be set a-going, the works would instantly start to wear." (Page 26.)
3. "She told him loud and clear that they never had coffee except on birthdays...if he liked, she would butter his toast for him. She buttered a great deal of his coat too..." (Page 37.)
4. "They had pale, globular faces, and inthe middle of each face a surprisingly long and pointed nose called the turnip to an impartial observer's mind." (Page 29.)
5. "Bahi is largely inhabited by idiots." (Page 20.)
6. "...Sophie's head emerged. Her distracted look immediately changed to open delight, the sweetest smile...Stephen plucked off his hat, bowed and kissed his hand, though indeed he could perfectly well have reached hers from where he stood." (Page 24.) Later Jack says, of Sophie, "I might as well talk to the cathead." (Page 34.)
7. Bessie the cook, "A character, a character, that's all I want." (Page 23.)
Compare to some passages from a well known book:
1. "`No room! No room!' they cried out when they saw Alice coming. `There's _plenty_ of room!' said Alice indignantly, and she sat down in a large arm-chair at one end of the table.
2. "`What a funny watch!' she remarked. `It tells the day of the month and doesn't tell what o'clock it is!'"
3. "`I told you butter wouldn't suit the works!' he added, looking angrily at the March Hare.
`It was the _best_ butter,' the March Hare meekly replied.
`Yes, but some bread-crumbs must have got in as well,' the Hatter grumbled: `you shouldn't have put it in with the bread-knife.'"
(And note that the Mad Tea-Party takes place on Alice's birthday.)
4. "The baby grunted again, and Alice looked very anxiously into its face to see what was the matter with it. There could be no doubt that it had a _very_ turn-up nose, ..."
5. "`Oh, you ca'n't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here.'"
6. "She was looking about her for some way of escape, and wondering whether she could get away without being seen, when she noticed a curious appearance in the air: it puzzled her very much at first, but after watching it a minute or two she made it out to be a grin, and she said to herself, `It's the Cheshire-Cat: now I shall have somebody to talk to.` ...In another minute the whole head appeared...The Cat seemed to think that there was enough of it now in sight, and no more of it appeared...
`Who _are_ you talking to?' said the King, coming up to Alice and looking at the Cat's head with great curiosity.
`It's a friend of mine--a Cheshire-Cat,' said Alice: "allow me to introduce it.'
`I don't like the look of it at all,' said the King: 'however, it may kiss my hand if it likes.'"
7. "They told me you had been to her,
And mentioned me to him;
She gave me a good character,
But said I could not swim."
Mrs. Williams and cook are very like the Queen and the Duchess, and some of the scenes at Ashgrove cottage are very similar to the "Pig and Pepper" chapter of Alice, a chapter perhaps in turn named with a wink to "Pride and Prejudice."
One of Lewis Carroll's alter ego's in _Alice_ is the Dodo (Dodgson stammered, pronouncing his own name "Do-dodgson"), native to Mauritius, for all love! (Don't we hear the story of its extinction from Stephen later in TMC?) Perhaps when POB was researching this he somehow learned of the dodo in the Oxford University museum, which [says Martin Gardner in _The Annotated Alice_] Carroll often visited with the Liddell children?
So, I believe that O'Brian wrote Chapter 1 of TMC partly with a nod and a wink to _Alice_. Have I sold anyone else on the idea? (Or, is this a tired old idea in the Gunroom from before I got here?)
-Jerry
Jerry Shurman, in his delightful set of comments on literary echoes in the canon, sets a "best butter" comment in Wonderland.
We can look ahead to the last book, BAM, and find "proof" if we need it, that Jerry has indeed spotted an interesting passage.
There's a longish bit where the navigator of an American ship visits Surprise, bringing his faulty chronometer with him. (Remember that the March Hare cdn't fix the watch, even though he used the "best butter.")
Maturin, however, manages to fix the American's chronometer.
When the Americans go back to their ship, they leave a gift: a decanter of Dutch schnapps.
Speaking of their generosity, Jack says: They have won again...How I hope we gave them something, at least."
I did have half a carboy of tincture of hogweed conveyed into their boat, says Maturin in a doubtful voice. It was the best hogweed, he added with even less certainty. (The March Hare's reply was made "meekly.")
Q.E.D.
Charlezzzz
In a message dated 12/9/01 2:51:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, jerry@REED.EDU writes:
a ship called the Emma appears near the end of the book (p.327). Do any lissuns know if this is one of the real ships from the Mauritius campaign or an O'Brian invention?
Emma appears to have been quite genuine. On page 393 of C. Northcote Parkinson's "War In the Eastern Seas", in the discussion of the Mauritius campaign is the statement that Commodore Rowley, the historical figure whose place Jack Aubrey takes in the POB novel, "was chased off by the Venus and the Manche and returned to St. Paul's, quickly sending off the transport Emma to cruise off Rodriguez and warn all friendly shipping of what the position was." David Lyon's "The Sailing Navy List: All the Ships of the Royal Navy - Built, Purchased and Captured - 1688-1860" under the heading of "Hired Ships" lists the Emma as from 1809-1811 being an "Armed ship", although there is a note that the name is from unofficial sources, a common note among these hired ships.
Bruce Trinque
41°37'53"N 72°22'51"W
I forgot to say that Stephen's peripatetic hatful of mushrooms has an offstage history very like the stolen tarts in _Alice_.
And I wonder if Jack Aubrey having a name so similar to "Jane Austen" is just coincidence.
-Jerry, wondering when this sort of speculation crosses the line to "crackpot"
Jerry Shurman
wondering when this sort of speculation crosses
the line to
"crackpot"
It crosses the line when I disagree with it : }
It hasn't crossed the line.
=====
I'm on digest now and not reading through them closely, so apologies if
this duplicates what someone else has already noticed.
The _Alice_ references die down after Chapter 1 of TMC, but there's one
notable exception. Around page 194 in my edition, during a storm, Stephen
falls down several ladders and into a supply of treacle, echoing Alice's
entry into Wonderland and the Dormouse's story about the three sisters who
lived at the bottom of a treacle well. The three sisters drew all sorts of
things that begin with "M," such as much of a muchness, a phrase that
O'Brian uses in TMC.
But most tellingly, soon after Stephen's misadventure with the treacle he
confers with his assistent, one Mr. Carol. How delightful to find the
Rev. Dodgson himself making a cameo in the canon!
-Jerry
Hello can anyone throw any light on this passage?--page 67 in my version of .Mauritius Command. to do with crossing the equator
.for when they reduced sail to let Neptune come aboard, accompanied by an outrageously lewd Amphritrite and Badger-Bag, he(Jack) found no less than 123 souls who had been made free of the equator by being lathered with rancid grease(tar etc -i understand)-------and shaved with a piece of barrel-hoop before being ducked.?
Alec O F
A long time tradition of initiating those who had not crossed the line. It still
goes on.
--
"Why shouldn't truth be stranger than fiction? http://www.maturin.org/
When a ship crosses the equator, the dread King Neptune comes aboard,
accompanied by his court, and those who have not previously made the
crossing, known as pollywogs, undergo a terrible ordeal of initiation, by
which they are reborn as shellbacks
This is a naval tradition- Initiation for anyone crossing the equator for
the first time.
Blatherin' John B
Pollywogs and shellbacks- them war the terms i war alookin' fer !
Blatherin' John B
And don't we know it, too! I still carry my shellback
card,now years since that fateful day. There's nothing
like awaking at dawn, crawling on your hands & knees
through garbage and old food,being urged on by
satan-posessed shipmates with lengths of doubled
fire-hose up and down (KER-WHACK!) the length of the
ship (CVN-65, USS Enterprise is 1,100 #$%^&ing feet
long!)then a bracing jog for a lap or two, then being,
er, well, I shall have the nightmare again if I go on,
then a dunk in a tank of water (incidentally, still
one of the best photos ever taken of yours truly), and
a hosedown by the ship's fire fighting equippment and
finally, at sunset, the mother of all field days to
clean the ship up to fighting conditioning again...and
as a special bonus for us, we had a general quarters
alert 2 hours after I'd turned in to my rack. So 4
hours after that, onto watch.
Now, why do I remember that day so clearly?
Kyle
123 souls who had been made free of the equator by being lathered
with rancid grease(tar etc -i understand)-------and shaved with a piece
of barrel-hoop before being ducked.?
It refers to forced immersion. It is NOT a typo, and I am surprised that
your mind works that way. For shame!
Cheers, Peter
I fid not think it was a typo -Dorsooth
Alec O F
Marshall Rafferty
The thing that most struck me in the last several
books was the gradual disappearance of the crew.
I think that this is, in part, because Jack has risen
higher in command and as a result has less contact
with the lower orders.
Ray Mcp
He's *always* been the captain. Very early on he is in command of
exactly the same ship as which he ends the series. And in TMC, an early
novel, he is a very senior officer indeed.
But there is a difference in connection with a newly-risen captain. Even
he thinks of it in the first book, interpreting looks and silences and
knowing
what they meant. And in TMC, there are several places where he seems to
recognize the duality and the temporary quality of his position -- and
several instances where he finds himself apart from an understanding of
those in his command (particularly of his captains -- ref. Stephen's "do not
blame the bull because the frog has burst", my paraphrase), even almost
deliberately blind in a couple of instances to things he would have been
more concerned about earlier on -- I'm thinking particularly of Corbett.
Jack's
are now the larger issues, where once he would have prioritized a happy
ship and been more worried about rolling shot and whistling in the dark.
As the books progress, he mentions feeling the distance and isolation more
in various references. And it seems to me Ray's onto something. As Jack's
is further away and higher in command, so we too have the stuff of neurotic
gentlemen also-rans, plucking themselves to death for their own sense of
failure. When we see the motley crew below-decks, it is often through
Stephen's eyes, or just over his shoulder.
Which it *was* a hairbrush,
=MacKenna
Can't wait another day, I'll be away tomorrow when TMC opens.
I have a question niggling at me from The Mauritius Command and an
observation.
On page 59, what Jack knew, and what Stephen did not, was that those
forty-seven minutes had made all the difference betweeen salvage and no
salvage. The Intrepid Fox had been taken at forty-six minutes past ten on
Tuesday, and if he had accepted the surrender of the French prize-master
one moment before twenty-four hours had passed, by sea-law the guineaman
would not have been salvage at all.
How did Jack know that? He was at sea and he came upon some enemies and
prizes. The allies aboard wouldn't have been in a position to signal him,
and the French wouldn't have told him the time of capture. He wasn't
there, so how did he know to stall for 46 minutes?
In return, here's something I spotted.
page 34, Stephen and Jack are talking about Sophie, and Stephen says
"Allow me to pour you another glass of this port. It is an innocent wine,
neither sophisticated nor muddy, which is rare in these parts."
He's certainly speaking of Sophie when he describes this wine.
How did Jack know that? He was at sea and he came upon some enemies
and prizes. The allies aboard wouldn't have been in a position to
signal him,
Would not the french ship's log have given the time?
Barney Simon
As I understand P's question, Jack delayed taking the
ship for exactly 47 minutes. He wouldn't have had the
French ship's log until after it was taken, so how did he
know how long he had to stall?
- Susan
I have not looked again, but it seems to me that he had the crew from the
prize before he completed his attack on the Frenchman. They would have
told him when they got captured. so he held off accepting the surrender.
Blatherin' John B
I think he RE-took the french ship's PRIZE not the french ship after the
appropriate minutes.
Barney
I have not looked again, but it seems to me that he had the crew from
the prize before he completed his attack on the Frenchman. They would have
told him when they got captured. so he held off accepting the surrender.
Correct, sir, but the other way around. Aubrey captured the Hebe first when
she ran aground, and must have found out from her crew what time they had
captured the snow, Intrepid Fox, which was then secured after 47 minutes of
'backing and filling' to ensure that she was regarded as salvage.
Sam
P. Richman wrote:
page 34, Stephen and Jack are talking about Sophie, and Stephen says
"Allow me to pour you another glass of this port. It is an innocent wine,
neither sophisticated nor muddy, which is rare in these parts."
He's certainly speaking of Sophie when he describes this wine.
What a great observation! Now we have another set of metaphors to watch
out for when rereading.
Here's another possibility from FOW. The early Diana of PC and HMSS was
"no good, no good at all" - J. Aubrey. After an absence of several books,
POB decided to bring her back, now rehabilitated. At the initial dinner
with Stephen, Diana, and Johnson, it seems that the wine might be bad.
Stephen takes a sip and declares,
"I am no great judge of wine, but I have heard that very occasionally the
mouthful just round the cork may have an ill taste, while the rest of the
bottle is excellent. Perhaps that is the case here".
A couple of random observations:
And [Warning, THD spoiler below]
Madeira was the setting at the end of HMSS when Stephen received the letter
from Diana, informing him that she had left him, to run off to America with
Johnstone/Johnson. And it was also in Madeira that Stephen again received
a heartbreaking letter telling him that Diana had "left him", this time
permanently. I wonder if POB had any personal reasons to associate Madeira
with such unhappiness (Wantage certainly did).
Don Seltzer
Don Seltzer wrote:
A couple of random observations:
In HMSS, particular note is made by Jack and Stephen of the 17th of the
month, when Diana and Canning were expected to arrive in Bombay. And
similarly in FOW, Diana and her new paramour Johnson make a similar
reappearance in the canon, arriving in Boston on the 17th of May.
Perhaps a day of significance in POB's own life?
The 17th that comes immediately to mind is March 17th (St. Patrick's Day),
though I don't know that that has much bearing here.
On the very astute observations about PO'B's wine metaphors: we shouldn't
forget his short story "The Chian Wine", in which the whole story is an
extended wine metaphor, so this is certainly a technique PO'B sometimes
uses.
John Finneran
Well, it's been 200000002 for a day already and I'd just like to say
that the opening of TMC contains the longest sustained humorous piece in
the entire canon, in my humble opinion. Oh, but it had me in stitches
when I first heard it. Lucky Jack Aubrey, the Scourge of the Seven Seas,
brought to a stand by caterpillars and shrews!
Which I have to say that the holiday on the Gold Coast was wonderful,
though too short by half and too hot by far. It's a hot, windy day today
here in Canberra, and I'm dreading the bushfire report in half an hour.
On a day like today a fire can spring up and whip from treetop to
treetop at a frigate's speed.
But here in suburban Campbell we're overhauling the manchester after the
summer sales and the sheets have dried almost as soon as we put them on
the line. Ripped up the carpet in the master bedroom for good measure to
expose the glorious old golden floorboards.
Cheers, Peter
p.102 "Decency required Jack to refresh the flag-lieutenant; decency
required the flag-lieutenant to see his share out with in ten minutes,..."
I love that sentiment and understanding of custom.
Barney Simon
p 52 JA's letter states ..." at dawn on the 17th instant, the Dry
Savages..." how does the use of the work 'instant' signify? It seems
rather inprecise.
p.60 JA signals "happy returns." I assume this is related to the same as
when you buy a train ticket there and back, you buy a "return ticket?"
p 187 in Clonfert's cabin, we have a couple of "pier-glasses" which I
expect to be mirrors, but then I might also expect them to be
"peer-glasses." I can think of piers for boats, piers for bridges, is
there something I am missing?
from p. 215 on we have the use of the term 'howitzer' used for cannons. I
always assumed that Howitzer was a term like "Colt" or "Winchester" what is
its history?
Barney Simon
Pier-glasses are large, high mirrors designed usually to be placed between
windows. In great houses of the era, they were designed to be especially
pretty by candlelight, and to present the ladies in fine aspect (they were
sometimes slightly tinted to beautify the candlelit reflection). They were
expensive at the time and often beautifully-made.
=MacKenna
From www. google.com
The large pier glass
was created by the casting method, and not from blown
cylinder. Furnace technology advanced quickly in the industrial
revolution.
Blatherin' John B
MacKennaC@AOL.COM writes:
They were expensive at the time and often beautifully-made.
Still are, both.
Blatherin' John B
I think of a "pier glass" as a tall, narrow mirror, ornately framed.
In this instance another indication of Clonfert's vanity.
Gerry Strey
Vanity. Or lack of a sense of personal identity. Needing reflected
identity to feel whole.
Lois, thinking of Cooley's discussions of the sense of self, and mirroring
Certainly self-absorption!
-=MacKenna
Barney Simon wrote:
p 52 JA's letter states ..." at dawn on the 17th instant, the Dry
Savages..." how does the use of the work 'instant' signify? It seems
rather inprecise.
Day of the month.
p.60 JA signals "happy returns." I assume this is related to the same
as when you buy a train ticket there and back, you buy a "return ticket?"
Not sure. Trains hadn't been invented yet.
from p. 215 on we have the use of the term 'howitzer' used for cannons.
I always assumed that Howitzer was a term like "Colt" or "Winchester" what
is its history?
My dictionary says: From Dutch houwitser, ultimately from Czech houfnice
ballista, 1695. Encyclopedia Britannica says it is a crew-served weapon
with hollow, powder-filled projectiles.
Larry
The Happy Return by CS Forester, brought tears to my eyes.
As I understand it, when one wishes "many happy returns", it is not a
train voyage one conjures up, but a return to that day in a year's time,
and many more after.
from p. 215 on we have the use of the term 'howitzer' used for cannons.
I always assumed that Howitzer was a term like "Colt" or "Winchester" what
is its history?
It is defined as a short barrelled cannon for firing in a high trajectory ,
capable of hitting 'out of line-of -sight' targets. Apparently derived
from germanic term for catapult.
Blatherin' John B
Barney Simon wrote:
p 52 JA's letter states ..." at dawn on the 17th instant, the Dry
Savages..." how does the use of the work 'instant' signify? It seems rather
inprecise.
Larry Finch answered:
Day of the month.
That is, the current month. E.g. Wednesday of this week could be referred
to as "The 3rd instant" until February, after which it would be the "3rd
Jan.".
I do not pretend to teach you to sail your sloop or poop
or whatever you call the damned machine...[HMSS 76]
Mary S
3rd ult?
3rd ult?
Ooh yes, I'd forgotten that charming piece of period. Thanks!
I believe that in February, it would be called "the 3rd ult." (for ultimo)
and that in December it would have been called "the 3rd prox." (proximo).
I have the honour to be
Kerry
As for "instant," isn't it Latin legalse for "this month"? Can some
lawyer Lissun help here?
No lawyer I, and I don't think it needs one, but "inst." and "instant"
certainly mean "this month" (the current one), as "ult." does "last month";
a now-archaic usage much employed by previous generatons in business
correspondence.
A howitzer fired shells in a high arcing trajectory, like a mortar, and was
almost exclusively for land-based, Army use; its dictionary-given
derivation has been dealt with here, though I have always wondered whether
there was not originally some Polish or East Prussian gentleman by the name
of Howitz or Howicz who invented it.
Regards,
Roger Marsh
While I understand the General breaking his arm patting himself on the back
and taking credit for others' work, this wording (using his name the second
time) struck me as odd.
Barney Simon
Is Clonfert based upon anyone historically specific?
Barney Simon
Well, yes and no. The role that Clonfert plays during the campaign to
conquer Mauritius is closely modeled that of Nesbit Willoughby, who in
reality commanded the vessels assigned in O'Brian's novel to Lord Clonfert
and who in actuality undertook the combat operations attributed in TMC to
Clonfert. However, the personality of Clonfert would appear to be
O'Brian's own invention, with any particular relation to that of Willoughby.
(O'Brian did something similar, of course, in "Master and Commander" where
Jack
Aubrey's service aboard the Sophie is virtually an exact copy of that of
Lord Cochrane aboard the Speedy, yet Jack Aubrey is nonetheless a wholly
originally character in terms of his background and personality.)
I have published on the Internet an article about the actual Mauritius
Campaign which describes the actual Royal Navy officers involved and even
contains a portrait of Willoughby. It can be found at
http://members.aol.com/batrinque/personal2/index.htm
Bruce Trinque
Excellent article- and it contains most of the elements of the POB
novelization.
Blatherin' John B
It was POB's novel, of course, which got me interested in the subject. The
best published source for the campaign is the long out-of-print "War In the
Eastern Seas" by C. Northcote Parkinson, although there is useful
information in James' history of the Royal Navy as well.
Bruce Trinque
Perhaps P o'B used the more negative aspects of Lord Cochranes personality
for Clonfert.
Regards,
I personally do not think that Aubrey and Thomas, Lord Cochrane, are
particuarly similar in very many respects, neither physically nor in
personality.
To be sure, they share some qualities, skills and attitudes, to wit:
courage, seamanship, honour, concern for their men in the Nelsonian mould,
were both more successful afloat than ashore and Aubrey has "adopted" many
of the real Cochrane's experiences, both his trials and his tribulations,
but much of that could be said of quite a few commanders from the age of
sail and otherwise there are great differences (Hornblower nicked some of
his exploits too, though not much of his basic character though that has
been claimed as well, and Maryatt actually served as midshipman under him
in "Imperieuse").
I feel that Clonert fits even less of the Cochrane mould, even his less
desirable traits. See what you all think - read a good biography of
Cochrane, but PLEASE, NOT the latest one by Robert Harvey, definitely the
one to avoid, written by a man who quite evidently knows so little about
the 18thC ships, navies and their organisation, shiphandling, gunnery, etc.
about which he purports to inform us that it is quite embarrassing to read.
Cochrane was justly named by Napoleon "Le Loup des Mers".
Regards,
Roger Marsh
read a good biography of Cochrane, but PLEASE, NOT the latest one by
Robert Harvey, Roger Marsh
Which ones are good? I'm only going to read one, which one should it be?
EB
I would recommend first Ian Grimble's "The Sea Wolf", followed by Donald
Thomas's "Cochrane: Britannia's Last Sea-King". Christopher Lloyd's "Lord
Cochrane: Seaman, Radical, Liberator" is worth reading, but not as detailed
as the others. Cochrane's autobiography ("The Autobiography of a Seaman")
is not exactly unbiased -- and is awfully heavy going when he discusses the
Stock Exchange trial.
Bruce Trinque
Recommended biographies of this greatest of all the frigate captains are:
"Thomas Cochrane, Britannia's Last Sea King" (Donald Thomas - also reprinted
under the title "Cochrane - Britannia's Sea Wolf")
Also, though heavy going in parts:
"Autobiography of a Seaman" - his own autobiography, but only the first
half of his extraordinary career, up to his trial and imprisonment.
The one to avoid, as I said before, is the more recently-published
"Cochrane: The Life and Exploits of a Fighting Captain" by Robert Harvey,
full of "howlers" and inaccuracies (e.g., and this just one example
amongst all-too-many, the author he tells us that the 6th Rate frigate
"Hind" was a 28-gun 9-pdr. armed 2-masted schooner, and even then compounds
this most basic error by going in detail into how a schooner was rigged and
the comparative advantages of fore-and-aft vs. square rig).
Of these I prefer Thomas, but not one of them contains all the elements
of his life, too incredible to write as fiction; even fiction writers can
take only one or two of his exploits at a time to avoid the accusation of
gross exaggeration - and many have; you will find actions which O'Brian's
Aubrey and Forester's Hornblower "fought", as well as those in Captain
Marryatt's fiction; Maryatt had the stories at first hand, having served
as midshipman under him in "Impérieuse". Lady Cochrane, née Kitty Barnes,
was also a quite formidable person, as well as beautiful.
Cochrane's whole story contains all the elements needed for a great film
or TV series, if properly handled - and the story is for free, no royalties!
Anyone interested, O beautiful people of Hollywood? Or Pinewood, or New
Zealand? (I suppose it would end up having Hollywood money in it anyway). I
give you, "Cochrane – Wolf of the Seas" – raise your glasses,
please, Sirs and Ma’ams – no, no, you may stay seated, if we may
sit for His Majesty, then we may for Lord Cochrane too.
Regards,
Roger Marsh
One fault that I found among several of the above books is that they relied
too heavily upon Cochrane's own autobiography, often accepting without
question his version of events. "Autobiography of a Seaman" was written
half a century after the period it describes. To some extent, it was an
effort by Cochrane to restore his public image, now that most of his
enemies were dead, and unable to contradict his book. Not surprisingly,
his account is less than candid, leaving out some of the less flattering
details. Later biographers could have done a better job of researching
other sources, and challenging Cochrane's version.
Cochrane wrote very little about his family, and none of his biographers as
far as I know covered that subject as well as they might. There are only
the briefest mentions of uncle Sir Alexander Cochrane and his numerous
naval cousins. There is, however, a book written by a member of the
Cochrane clan, titled "The Fighting Cochranes". It traces the family tree
through all of the Cochranes who served in the military. I was surprised
to learn of the extensive role that Alexander Cochrane played as the
patriarch of the naval Cochranes, promoting the careers of a "cousinhood"
of six sons and nephews, including "our" Thomas Cochrane.
Don Seltzer
Clonfert is in Galway, 13 miles southeast of Ballinasloe, which, if I
remember, Stephen Maturin mentions a couple of times in the canon.
To quote my Bord Failte guide (Irish Tourist board), the church there was
founded by St. Brendan the Navigator ( author of the famous Navigatio) in
563.
Jean A.
POB always uses the word for the instrument that SM plays as the " 'cello."
What was the full word and when was it abbreviated officially?
Barney Simon
Violincello.
not sure when it was abbreviated.
Something like the instrument called a "piano" -- really a "pianoforte."
(as I understand it, anyway)...
bs
Cello is short for violoncello. My copy of the Oxford English Dictionary
indicates its first use in English as dating from 1881. I don't know
whether its use on the Continent may have preceded its introduction into
written
English, and I have seen the OED proven wrong from time to time.
Bruce Trinque
Bruce says:
But that ain't all. The present cello has a "spike" on its lower end, wch
lets the player keep it rested on the floor (and perhaps wd ruin your
parquet if you invited a cellist for dinner.)
But what wd have Maturin played? The viola da gamba is (I think) a sort of
cello wch is held off the floor between the legs. Was it the form of cello
used in those days? Was it a cello at all? Was it what Maturin might have
played?
I dunno, but I know there are lissuns who do know. About four years ago,
Steve Zimmerman, whose sister was giving a concert in Doylestown (!) on
that very instrument, and a group of other Lissuns [the guilty know who they
are, and some are active here and now] gathered at my house before that
concert
for a Lissunmoot of no mean proportions.
And there was one huge coincidence. I was wallowing in my sorrow that the
homebrew India Pale Ale wch I was creating in my cellar wd not be ready in
time. Up comes Zimmerman with the news that he was not only brother to a
sister who played the viola da gamba...but he created his own India Pale
Ale, and he brought a huge case of it with him.
And so we had a glorious Lissunmoot.
Charlezzzz, ready for another case of the stuff
I'm on digest, so these questions may have been answered already, but just
in case: "'cello" is short for "violoncello" (not "violincello").
The instruments of the violin family have their sizes described by the
Italian suffixes of their name: "ino" itself means "small," a bass is a
"violone," or "big violin." "Elo" or "ello" is an Italian diminutive and
"c" a linking consonant, as in vermicelli spaghetti, and thus
"violoncello" literally means "small big violin." ("Violoncino" was
another early variant.)
As for "instant," isn't it Latin legalse for "this month"? Can some
lawyer Lissun help here?
Jerry, immobile alone for four weeks after knee surgery and going steadily
buggier
The 'cello is not a descendent of the viola da gamba, the two instruments
coming from different families, the violins and the viols. But Stephen's
'cello may indeed have lacked an endpin.
Viols descend from lutes. "Viola da gamba" is an Italianization of
"Vihuela de kabus" or "vihuela de ganbus," with the additional happy
circumstance of "gamba" meaning leg, as in That viola da gamba player sure
has nice gams.
In these reenactment-fetish times, viols are being revived.
Jerry
Charlezzzz@AOL.COM writes:
But that ain't all. The present cello has a "spike" on its lower end,
wch lets the player keep it rested on the floor (and perhaps wd ruin your
parquet if you invited a cellist for dinner.)
But what wd have Maturin played? The viola da gamba is (I think) a sort of
cello wch is held off the floor between the legs. Was it the form of cello
used in those days? Was it a cello at all? Was it what Maturin might have
played?
Charlezzzz, I'm not an expert, and could be wrong about some of the
following, but the viola da gamba is quite a different instrument, a member
of the viol family rather than the violin family, and I feel sure that
O'Brian intends that Stephen is playing a violincello. For one thing, I
suspect it was an oblique nod to the _Catalan_ cellist, Pablo Cassals.
The shape of the viola da gamba (and of all the viols) is somewhat
different; the fingerboard is fretted (like a guitar) where violin-family
members (violin, viola, cello, double-bass) have smooth fingerboards; and
most importantly they have six strings tuned mainly in fourths, (which
makes chord playing easier) where the violincello has only four strings,
tuned
mainly in fifths. This means that the fingering is different between the
gamba and the violin whereas the fingering is the same between a violin and
a cello. I've been told that the viol instruments are easier to play, but
also don't allow as much fancy technique as the modern violin/viola/cello.
All members of the viol family, even the higher pitched smaller treble,
tenor and alto instruments, were held downward to be played - similar to
the way a violincello is played rather than the way a violin is played. The
bow
is curved differently (shaped like a D instead of like a K, where the left
hand stroke is the hair and the right hand stroke is the wood) and held
differently (more like the way a German double-bass bow is held, I think,
rather than the way a cello or French double-bass bow is held. In other
words, to a casual observer they look a lot alike, (like Stephen thinking
all
vessels are 'ships' rather than brigs, polacres, etc.etc.) and sound
similar, but are actually very different.
I think by 1800 the cello was the much more common instrument - I'm not
sure that the viola da gamba was in common use much past the middle of the
18th
century, or "Old Bach", although it has survived as a 'specialty'
instrument for period music today.
Rowen
violincello
Oops - as Jerry pointed out, it is spelled with an 'o': violoncello.
Rowen
Rowen says:
My ignorance is vast, but I am not humbled. Am I not a member of the
Gunroom, wch is the repository of all knowledge? Thankee, Rowen, because now
I know
more than I used to know, more than I will remember, indeed.
A glass of India Pale Ale with you
Charlezzzz
Charlezzzz@AOL.COM writes:
But what wd have Maturin played? The viola da gamba is (I think) a sort
of cello wch is held off the floor between the legs
I don't know why these notes dredge up humorous images- but this statement
immediately brought to mind an old John Astin movie, where he is a
notorious
gunman in love with a Boston socialite. He goes to visit her during a
chamber music concert, walks up to the cello player, pulls his peacemaker
and tells the man to "put that fiddle up under yer chin like a regular man.
You ain't one o' them "funny fellers, is yer ?"
Blatherin' John B
Adding my two cents to the cello and viola de gamba discussion:
One reason some wish to revive the viola de gamba is that some of the ways
it differs structurally from the cello are better for the musician. A
friend of mine was a cellist and has become a--what? a violist? no. anyway
he's found that the structure of the older instrument doesn't aggravate
his repetitive stress injury in the way the cello did, so he can make
music again.
Did you ever wonder how Stephen regained the ability to play after his
fingers were damaged by torture? Made me think of Jango Reinhart, the
famous jazz guitarist, who lost fingers and played anyway.
ruth A.
I've been reading JA's speak so long... on p.324, did he actually get two
correct?
"we must make hay while the sun shone" and "we must strike while the iron
is hot"
Barney Simon
"we must make hay while the sun shone"
Well, if that's verbatim, the grammar leaves something to be desired, as
verb agreement is all over the place -- but in that era, with Jack, the
improper may reek of period and certainly has considerable charm.
If I'm remembering that passage as well, isn't that the one where he uses
several metaphors in a row? If so, I think it again points up his frequent
use of cliches.
Regretting her character map ain't working,
-=MacKenna
In this month's read, TMC, we see several numbers of guns used for
saluting:
p.86... 9 to a Captain
Is there a chart or reference to the code of honor when firing guns on
salute? I assume that 21 guns is at the top of the list as that is the big
send off at funerals.
Barney Simon
that 21 guns is at the top of the list
also saluting heads of state
Blatherin' John B
No one in the book seems too worried, but what would JA's responsibility
before a Court Marshal or otherwise, have been for the "appalling disaster
at the Ile de la Passe"?
Barney Simon
My recollection is that Jack Aubrey's real-life counterpart, Commodore
Josias Rowley, was not court-martialed for the Ile de la Passe disaster. He
was
not present at the battle of course, and his subsequent quick action in
regaining the initiative and in combatting the French vessels at sea
probably did not
hurt either.
Bruce Trinque
The other day some dear lissun reminded me of the humorous opening pages of
TMC. On page 16 of the harper Collins Edn (2nd page of writing) we find
the bit where Stephen is collecting mushrooms to take to Jack.
"On his saddle bow lay a net, filled with a variety of mushrooms - bolets
of all kinds, blewits, chanterelles, jews ears - and now, seeing a fine
flush
of St Bruno' collops, he sprang from his horse...."
Now bolets, chanterelles, even jew's ears and blewitts are all common
enough English mushrooms, but I had never before heard of St Bruno's
collops.
Neither of my (admittedly smallish) field guides to British fungi
mentioned them at all; so I tried the web. Just about the only search which
returned
anything about St Bruno and collops (collops being a Scottish/Irish
corruption of escalope, by the way) was
http://indigo.ie/~kfinlay/jbarrington/jonahindex.htm
This site happens to be part of a larger site called Chapters of Dublin
History, and the reference in question appears in Chapter 5 "Irish
Dissipation" of a book entitled "Personal sketches of Jonah Barrington".
The story involves various 18th Century? merry japes on St. Stephen's Day,
and the collops in question were cut from a cow.
So it looks to me as if POB was practising upon us with his St Bruno's
collops; as he has practised upon us before by using his extensive reading
of obscure texts.
Of course, this may just be speculation - but I wouldn't put it past the
old feller -
Would you?
Cheers!
55:044.17 North
As The Mauritius Command opens, I was struck again how POB accentuates
Jack's and Stephen's different milieus: Jack isn't just keenly attuned to
the winds, clouds, airs, breezes, but is now observing the heavens with his
hand-ground telescope from his own little observatory. And Stephen is found
riding in a deep muddy lane and so "earthy" that he has gathered the most
elemental products, mushrooms, as a treat for the household at Ashgrove
cottage.
It was wonderful to read the passage where the seabird is flushed
by crows, and be alerted to the deeper meaning that one Lissun
discovered. (To my everlasting shame, I can't remember who spied that,
forgive me.)
I read the domestic descriptions with keen attention to their
reference to Alice in Wonderland, thanks to Jerry Shurman, but would never
in a million years have smoked them without his insight. I might add that
perhaps Stephen's mushroom gathering is a reference to Alice's encounter
with a caterpillar:
"She stretched herself up on tiptoe, and peeped over the edge of the
mushroom, and her eyes immediately met those of a large blue caterpillar,
that was sitting on the top with its arms folded, quietly smoking a long
hookah, and taking not the smallest notice of her or of anything else. "
Jack is so proud of his cabbages, complains that he gets precious
little encouragement when he cuts one: "Always this silly cry of
caterpillars. Lord, if they had ate a tenth part of what we have ate in the
way of weevils and bargemen in our biscuit....they would thank Heaven
fasting for an honest green caterpillar." Then Stephen notices his mushroom
offerings flung onto the dunghill.
The "incongruous great objects never designed for a cottage" which Sophie's
mother had brought with her from Mapes Court reflect the episode in Alice
when she drinks from the little magic bottle, becoming tiny in relation to
the huge furniture.
I still can't believe how Jerry discovered this correlation with
Alice. I bet POB was hugging himself when he thought of this, and perhaps
he waited til death for someone to smoke it, in vain, until now.
I looked "Alice" up on the Web and found a beautiful site:
http://the-office.com/bedtime-story/alice-background.htm
with all the most popular historical and modern illustrations for the
book.
This is a great site of bedtime stories for parents and grandparents.
~~ Linnea Angermuller
MacKennaC@AOL.COM writes:
"The moon is gone,
Not long ago on some wildlife program or other, Mauritius Island and it's
efforts to save some very endangered species was featured. (Islands are
always problematic when new species are introduced, e.g. cats and rats.)
Mauritius it seems has evolved into a rather trendy resort:
http://www.maurinet.com/mauritius.html
Is it still in the South Atlantic waters off the coast of Africa? Not
nearer due to tectonic plate shifts or something?
The story of the Mauritian Wildlife Foundation and their efforts to save
several bird species can be found at
http://www.maurinet.com/wildlife.html
Alice
Way Way way off the coast, Alice.
Er, the other side of Africa, in the Indian Ocean.
Bill Nyden
Oh yes, Indian ocean, not Atlantic.
The Indian Ocean, surely -- unless those tectonic plates have been
shuffling themselves.
Bruce Trinque
Here I thought it was in the Indian Ocean, at appoximately 57E 20s.
Micheal Bloomberg, G.G.
Never argue with an idiot,
they drag you down to their level
and then beat you with experience.
Earlier today I wrote:
Is it still in the South Atlantic waters off the coast of Africa? Not
nearer due to tectonic plate shifts or something?
To which several people echoed Bill Nyden's reply:
Er, the other side of Africa, in the Indian Ocean.
Ah! Good. It *has* moved.
Alice, relieved
Lot of odd islands in the South Indian Ocean. Jutland, for instance:
Examine the battle of Jutland.
What conclusions can be drawn?
Jutland is a small island in the South Indian Ocean where, in the autumn
of 1932, one of the most significant modern battlefleet actions was
fought between the fleets of Italy and Japan.
Jutland, so named for its central peak which is oddly (almost obscenely)
shaped, was settled by the French late in the nineteenth century, at a
time when Greece and other minor European powers were snapping up the
last few colonial tidbits. The population is remarkably chauvinistic and
contributed an annual brigade to the French cause during the First World
War. The island, at the time of the battle, was beginning to recover
from a severe manpower shortage and was a popular stop for cruise
liners.
At the time of the Vienna Crisis, it became necessary for the
contributing nations to make a show of extending their various spheres
of influence in order to strengthen their hands at the later conference
and hopefully derive a position of power from the treaty to be signed
thereafter.
Accordingly Italy sent forth a "flag-showing" squadron of four modern
battleships and an aircraft-carrier to visit far-flung European
colonies, in blatant imitation of the earlier United States' "Great
White Fleet" of several years before. As they approached Jutland, where
a ball and open day were scheduled, lookouts reported a number of ships
approaching from the east.
This was the Japanese Fifth Battle Squadron, consisting of two
battleships, an escorting destroyer or two and a number of support
vessels. The Japanese, busily scouting out anchorages, facilities and
targets for the "Greater Co-Prosperity Sphere", had selected Jutland as
a recreation port to mark the end of a week of exercise.
As the two fleets identified each other, there was a flurry of activity
on the bridges of the Japanese and Italian flagships.
The two nations, nominal allies at the end of the First World War, were
now nominal enemies through the interplay of shifting alliances and the
League of Nations stance on the Ethiopian Intervention. Normally this
state of affairs was of little consequence, as the two countries had no
direct contact. What little trade there was continued through
intermediaries, if the paper conflict was observed at all. However, the
encounter of two well-armed fleets could not be shrugged aside.
Long-range radio communication with superiors being unavailable at that
time, the two admirals fell back on their standing orders, which
dictated the speedy engagement of hostile forces.
The Japanese Admiral Harpoon, quickly taking note of the disparity in
force, decided not to anchor and instead altered course to pass behind
the island, hoping to escape once out of sight of the Italian fleet.
However, while the speedy modern warships were able to interpose the
bulk of Jutland, the oilers and support vessels trailed behind and
attracted the attention of the Italians.
The Italian flagship, Spatlaese, led the Grappa, Crouchen, and Eagle in
line-ahead pursuit around the curve of the island, with their minor
vessels following.
Jutland, being but a small island, was not ideally suited to the
intended Japanese plan, and as the two fleets circled the central peak,
the respective flagships almost simultaneously sighted the slowest of
the enemy ships, bringing up the rear of the battle-lines. A strange
situation now ensued, with, in each case, a fast modern battleship out
of sight of all opposition except for a slow, unarmoured, and
essentially unarmed fleet auxiliary.
The first shots of the battle of Jutland were fired in defiance by the
Italian oiler Chianti Napoli . At the extreme range of the 5-inch stern
gun, the Italians opened fire on the huge grey super-dreadnought bearing
down on them. There was no no doubt as to the outcome, once the Kirin
returned fire with a salvo of ten 13.5 inch armour-piercing shells. The
sound of heavy naval gunfire boomed across the water, sounding the
death-knell of the tanker, which veered out of line and slowed to lie
dead in the water, a helpless target for the succeeding Japanese
battleships.
On the other side of the island, the Italian van then opened fire on the
elderly Japanese freighter Saki Maru, which promptly burst into flames
and exploded.
Over the next two hours the two fleets circled the island at their best
speeds, chewing up their slower and crippled opponents as they fell
behind. The tankers and storeships were the first to go, followed in
good time by the slower and older battleships. The ex-RN light carrier
Eagle, attempting to cut a corner, ran straight up onto a reef and was
pounded by the Japanese each time they passed. To this day the shoal is
known as Eagle Rock and the rusting remains shelter rich reserves of
lobsters.
A brave attempt by the Japanese destroyer Konga to overtake the Italians
failed when the enemy cruiser Crouchen , lagging behind with a ruptured
boiler, demolished the lighter ship with two torpedoes, only to be
picked off in her turn by the oncoming Akaga .
Eventually, as ship after ship fell out of line, the contest become a
test of speed between the modern battleships, each striving to outpace
the others. By 1734 the only ships remaining battleworthy were the two
flagships, Kirin and Spatlaese , each of which had vanquished a
succession of unequal opponents.
With all but the opposing flagships out of action, the result of the
battle hinged upon the skill of the gunnery teams. As the Kirin and
Spatlaese settled down to a one-to one gunnery duel, the importance of
quick teamwork and accurate spotting became critical. On the Italian
ship, the Fire Observation Officer (FOO), from his post high on the
foremast, observed the fall of shot and passed control orders to his
spotting-top crew, who calculated individual turret bearings and
elevations. The Italian FOO, Commander Pico, was about to acheive his
destiny in an act which would make him the object of naval comment
throughout the world.
Pico, hitherto a man of indifferent skills, gave the order for rapid
salvo fire on the Japanese ship. Observing the first salvo to fall
short, he increased the gun range, seeking a "straddle", a combination
of under and over shots guaranteed to cause a high percentage of target
hits. As the officer with the best observation, Pico was also tasked
with the job of reporting enemy fire and estimating point of impact so
that appropriate avoiding action could be taken if possible. As the
splashes of the Italian salvo subsided, the Japanese guns blinked once
as they sent ten heavy shells flying towards the Spatlaese .
Commander Pico, catching sight of the shells of the salvo as they
reached the apex of their trajectory, calculated that they would land
directly on his position on the Spatlaese , and promptly voided himself.
A second or so later most of the shells passed through the ship's masts
and exploded harmlessly in the sea beyond. One shell impacted the
spotting-top mainstay and exploded after the armour-piercing fuze's
sixth-second delay. Luckily the shrapnel caused only minor casualties,
but the blast from the mid-air explosion stripped away cloth and other
loose objects from exposed positions around the upperworks. The huge
battle ensign, the Admiral's last signal hoist, and the spotting team's
uniforms were shredded by the shock. The FOO's faeces rained down upon
the bridge, speckling the immaculate Italian uniforms of the officers.
Admiral Martini, his navigating officer and their aides and assistants
promptly hurried below to change their uniforms and renew the battle in
clean linen. Though these officers were largely killed when a 13.5 inch
shell from the next salvo exploded in the wardroom, the dazed but
vengeful Commander Pico maintained his post and directed the flagship's
fire with almost inspired brilliance. Salvo after salvo rained down upon
the hapless Japanese Kirin, silencing the remaining gun turrets and
starting a fire in the superstructure.
Admiral Harpoon wisely ordered his flag captain to break off the action
on receiving damage control reports. As Jutland sank below the horizon
in the gathering darkness, he set a course for the neutral port of
Honolulu in the Pacific, where he, his ship and his crew were interned
for the duration of the conflict.
Though the Italian fleet had been severely mauled, indeed decimated,
they retained possession of the battlefield and the resultant newspaper
reports enabled the Italian government to press for reduced ceramic
imposts at the conference. Though the trade treaty was set aside during
the Second World War and remains in abeyance to this day, the episode
was seen as a diplomatic coup throughout Europe.
The most significant lessons learnt from the battle of Jutland were
important in the great clash of arms only seven years later, though
thankfully for the security of the Free World, neither Japan nor Italy
followed up these conclusions, preferring to follow more orthodox and
conservative methods of warfare. Oddly enough, this is a common
characteristic of latter-day conflict, where the veterans of past wars,
usually risen to command ranks such as Admiral or General, will
endeavour to refight their previous battles, ignoring the vital lessons
of the opening actions. Here is a case where the more flexible doctrine
will often prevail at the expense of superior force or moral
superiority.
One of the most important conclusions, therefore, is that senior
officers may be safely ignored unless they possess recent battle
experience. In fact, there is a good case for the policy of eliminating
all officers over the age of forty on the declaration of war and
immediately (so as to gain from maximisation of training time) "bumping
up" all junior officers two notches in the rank structure.
Less vital conclusions are threefold:
Selection of leave ports may affect the destiny of nations.
Peter--
An important and solemn reminder! And I thought you were going to mention
Pico's counterpart on the Kirin, the Ballistic Artillery Reporter...
Charles
Truly, Peter, your command of naval history is daunting. Uh, just how many
bottles of chianti did you dispose of before beginning this essay?
Bruce Trinque
Many a tale came in by mail
Peter, you are dangerous, and while my admiration for you is
profound, I hope never to come within a hundred miles of you. Our
baseball date at Miller Park, that wonder of the Midwest, is off.
Gerry Strey (Prudent in Madison, Wisconsin)
peter.mackay@BIGPOND.COM writes:
3rd ult?
And Mary S
Ooh yes, I'd forgotten that charming piece of period. Thanks!
Not really so 'period'.
That terminology was in common ugage in formal business letters written
here(Ireland) up to the early 1980's. I hate to admit that I used it
myself!
alec
On pages 26-27 Norton paperback, Mrs Williams discussing
the mushrooms Stephen brought:
"Only this morning, only this very morning," she said, "I
caught the cook fingering a heap of toadstools. Can you
imagine such wickedness, Dr Maturin? To finger toadstools
and then to touch my grandchildren's food with her nasty
hands! There's a Welshwoman for you!"
As we know now, O'Brian's first unsuccessful marriage was
to a Welshwoman. Is he repeating the hostility of his
own family against his first wife, or is he playing on a
general stereotype of Welswomen as evil beings, or is POB
himself of the belief that his wife was wicked, or . . .?
I just put it down to that bigoted woman's continual ignorance ,stupidity
and bigotry. Using her to make the statement does not(to me) reflect on POB'
feelings
about the Welsh.
Blatherin' John B
Given that everything Mrs Williams says is offensive and malicious
I would say that it says more against the attitudes of some English
people than against the Welsh.
Martin @ home:
I don't have the books at hand with their pubdates, but I
imagine he created Bronwen when he was married to a wild
Welsh lass, and he put some words about Welsh women into
Mrs Williams' mouth after it became a no-go ?
Testimonies was first published as Three Bear Witness in April 1952.
Although I don't know when he actually wrote it seven years earlier in 1945
he was divorced in June, married Mary in July, and changed his name in
August; after which POB and Mary lived in Wales, in Cwm Croesor,
experiencing
the background for the novel. It seems reasonable to assume it was not
created while he was married to Elizabeth.
Rowen
Testimonies was first published as Three Bear Witness in April 1952.
Oooh! A link to Astrid!
Given that the surname "Williams" is not noted as being from East of the
Severn, I would venture to suggest that this is POB setting the cocked
hat on Mrs. Williams's inveterate stupidity and spite. She will cut off
the nose of her own ancestry to win a silly point. Try reading that passage
in a Welsh accent,and you will see it could be straight out of a Dylan
Thomas.
Mike French
Mrs. Williams's inveterate stupidity and spite. She will cut off
the nose of her own ancestry to win a silly point.
Her husband's.
savage, explosive, obstinate and cantankerous [HMSS 78]
Mary S
subject line should really read "toadstools."
Isn't the slam against the cook for the "toadstools" some kind of irony?
Maturin brought those wild mushrooms for the family and he watches without
saying anything as the cook gets sacked for having them in the kitchen. I
don't think the Welsh thing was POB's indictment of people from Wales, but
perhaps I am wrong?
I love mushrooms, but the love of my life can't bear them. Some
mycological friends promised to take me mushroom hunting in the spring.
Indeed, one is my friend who most reminds me of Maturin. The hobbit love
of mushrooms is one of the many things that continues to endear LOTR to
me...
Ruth A.
Which I think we shouldn't read any Alice or LOTR references into TMC for
the mushrooms--might as well start looking for biblical references any
time they eat fish...
I don't think that Mrs. Williams' fling against Welshwomen reflected POB's
views, but I do think that Susan Wenger might be on to something in
connecting the dismissed cook with his first wife, Elizabeth Jones. In
another passage from TMC p. 23, POB had a little fun in his choice of name,
The back door opened, to display a square, red-faced woman, the spit of
Mrs. Williams but for a cast in her left eye and, when she spoke, a shrill
Welsh voice. She had her box on her shoulder.
'Why, Bessie,' cried Jack. 'Where are you going? What are you about'.
Don Seltzer
Reading now that Jack's heart lifts when he see the "Africaine," coming to
help him pound the French under the RN captain, Corbett--"...and the actual
sight of her raised Jack's heart still higher: she was a thirty-six-gun
eighteen-pounder frigate, French-built of course, and one of the finest
sailers in the Royal Navy, particularly on a wind."
But I wonder what it is that makes the ships so good: the design? the
craftsmen? the shipyards? All of the above? On other counts, the British
seem to disparage the French in the books. It is surprising to learn that
the English, with their mastery of the sea, admired these French-built
ships. Why didn't they copy them and build even better ones?
~~ Linnea, a lubber through and through
One wonders. I suspect that the English shipyards weren't quite the
thing.
The main reason that the French kept losing ships to the British was
because they didn't get as much practice, being largely cooped up in
port by blockade. So in an even action the British would be able to
outsail and outfight the French.
The Frogs could make up for this to a certain degree by having better
weapon systems (read ships), but as I recently pointed out a better
weapon system needs to be employed to its full extent to gain an
advantage, and if the French weren't as practised as the British, well
all they were doing was giving ships away.
Imagine (most of you, Susan C excepted) if you met up with a Formula 1
driver and agreed to a race around a F1 circuit - you in his car, he in
your family sedan. Who would win?
You'd have the faster car, to be sure, but driving it to its full extent
would be way beyond you, and you'd come to grief at the first corner if
you went at anything like full speed. Whereas the professional racing
driver would hop in to the sedan, plant his foot and whiz around the
corners at a far greater speed than you would dare to try.
You'd almost certainly lose the race on the first lap. But if you had a
while to practice in the racing car, you would be able to do a lot
better.
The French didn't often get that chance to practise. Their ships of the
line stayed in port and rarely got any sort of a chance to exercise
together, whereas the British were always at sea, performing fleet
manouvres on a daily basis and attaining amazingly high standards.
Aha! That puts a new perspective on it for me. Thank you, Peter. I thought
the racing car vs. family sedan was a great analogy.
~~ Linnea (feeling left out, never having read LOTR--eek, such an
admission) (But I have read most of the other books mentioned. Should like
to re-read War and Peace someday.)
There was a discussion on this topic on the Norton POB Forum a while back,
the consensus was that the British ships were probably sturdier because
they had to be at sea on blockade duty in all North Atlantic weathers and
were
also expected to sail to the Far Side of the World, fully laden with
supplies. The French ships hung around in port and only dashed out to try
and invade Ireland or snap up a prize, so they were built more for speed
and less for carrying capacity and sea kindliness in a storm.
Adam Quinan
'Grab a chance and you won't be sorry for a might-have-been'
IIRC, another factor was that France had access to better
wood, cordage, supplies.
=====
Why would that necessarily be the case- except for british navy
miserliness. they had the merchant navy and the money to buy supplies from
all over
the world- Except for wood which would be bulky to transport,, they should
have
been able to compete. and they did seem to have enough wood to build
their SOL.
Blatherin' John B
Apparently, the French hull design was better and made for a faster ship.
Their guns and gunners were possibly better. The British knew this and
tried to copy French ship design, but not always with success.
The British definitely had more practice. Their ships lived at sea, but
this was a two edged sword. Ships at sea take a beating, and need repairs,
so the French ships, sitting in port were frequently in better repair.
The French didn't help their cause when during the French revolution, they
killed many of their own officers.
The Americans observing all of this are said to have built a navy with
French bottoms (designs) American wood (this was a significant advantage
over a de-forested Britain) and British trained sailors.
Randy Hees
Linnea writes:
It is surprising to learn that the English, with their mastery of the sea,
admired these French-built ships. Why didn't they copy them and build even better
ones?
Well, actually the British DID copy quite a number of those French-built
ships -- and sometimes Spanish ones and those of other navies. Although
the notion of the superiority of French-built frigates seems quite popular
in
nautical fiction, from my reading it appears to me that this sentiment was
far from universal. To a considerable extent the Royal Navy recognized
that these French frigates were usually rather lightly built to stand up to
the
kind of duty necessitated by blockade duty and that often they lacked the
hull storage capacity required for very long voyages. The reality is that
French frigates were designed for a different role than that of a Royal
Navy frigate, staying closer to home with less exposure to the elements.
Bruce Trinque
One of our knowledgeable lissums explained that philosophies were totally
different- french went for Frigates and quick sorties- british built for
long voyage and blockades the British Frigate captains appreciated the
French
ships, but the LOA disdained them in the grand scheme.
I mentioned once that Aubrey said the French built better ships and the
americans were better overall navy men- so why was the RN so exalted ?-
Blatherin' John B
The Royal Navy men and ships were exalted because, in the long run, they
beat everyone else and controlled the seas. Individually there were some
occasions when their ships were beaten by another Navy's ships but not very
often and to no lasting effect. Whether it was by skill, numbers or
persistence the RN performed its function admirably.
Adam Quinan
Linnea
It occurs to me that all through the books, there is note taken of
how well the French build their ships and how some French captains and crews
are very good sailors.
Well, that's a complex question not susceptible to a simple answer; they
were indeed copied by the British and used for derivitives when
appropriate, but usually adapted to British tactical and strategic needs
which were different from the French priorities; it depends too on what
type of ship we are considering - First rates? Frigates? Cutters?
French vessels were not necessarily better than British, they emphasised
different qualities in the design compromise which is always present in
shipbuilding; you can improve one quality, but always at the cost of
another, and French frigate designers, for example (since the canon is
centred around a small French frigate), chose to be superior in speed in
lighter conditions OFF the wind rather than good seakeepers which would
make well and fast to windward on heavy conditions, in which weather the
British frigate might well catch its French counterpart and then be both a
better gun platform and more manoeverable. Again, the British frigate
captains and the Admiralty had different agenda; French frigate prizes were
popular amongst British captains because of their reputation for speed
which may equate to their winning prize money, but less so with the
Admiralty since they were lighter-built and hence expensive to maintain,
were worse sea-boats in all weathers for the months and years at a stretch
required for them to stay at sea on blockade, and could stow less stores,
limiting their range and endurance.
But this is just scratching the surface of the subject.
Regards,
Roger Marsh
Bruce Trinque wrote:
To a considerable extent the Royal Navy
recognized that these French frigates were usually rather lightly built to
stand up to the kind of duty necessitated by blockade duty and that often
they lacked the hull storage capacity required for very long voyages. The
reality is that French frigates were designed for a different role than
that
of a Royal Navy frigate, staying closer to home with less exposure to the
elements.
Echoed a century later in the design of dreadnoughts. The British had a
global empire to defend and their battleships had to accommodate large
crews for long voyages in a variety of climates. The German ships had
crews who usually lived ashore in barracks and were specifically
designed for relatively short cruises in the Continental littoral. Hence
they were better able to fight a sea battle, not having to carry so much
extra.
Having said that, and there is no doubt that the German ships were
better fighting vessels, especially after catering for the defects
exposed at Dogger Bank and elsewhere, they still lost most encounters.
Jutland might have been a tactical win for the High Seas Fleet,
especially considering the disparity in numbers, but it was a strategic
defeat.
This time it wasn't the superiority in experience and skill, for both
sides were fairly even in that regard, but the fact that the Germans
couldn't afford to lose too many ships otherwise the disparity would be
too great to even consider battle except in a carefully planned ambush.
Jutland might have been a tactical win for the High Seas Fleet,
especially considering the disparity in numbers, but it was a strategic
defeat.
which side had most? The Japanese or the Italians?
Blatherin' John B
As I recall from some of the background books I have read, the french
ships were a bit faster, but the british ships could turn quicker and were
better in a rough sea. However the quality of british ships varied greatly
according to who and how they were built and how long since they had a
full refit.
The british had more practice in sailing than the french, and that was the
probably the biggest factor.
Greg Edwards
Robert Gardiner, in his "Frigates of the Napoleonic Wars", discusses in
several places the influence of French designs and also comparisons of the
relative quality of French ships versus English designs. Emulation of
French hulls was more a phenomenon of the French Revolutionary Wars rather
than
the Napoleonic. Gardiner comments: "In the field of frigate design, by the
time war was renewed in 1803 none of Britain's enemies had anything radical
to
offer ... It is very noticeable that none of the many french prizes in
Royal Navy service turned in exceptional performances, and from surviving
Sailing
Quality reports it appears that despite the acknowledged British skill in
'ship tunint', many ex-French frigates were not quite the equal of the best
British-built performers. French ships were widely believed to be
excellent
sailors downwind, but vulnerable because less weatherly than their pursuers.
Furthermore, close-hauled they do not seem to have sailed particularly
fast: 9-9 1/2 knots is the best to be found in surviving reports. They also
carried their batteries slightly lower than British frigates and tended to
be more lively in a seaway, so were poorer fighting machines in consequence.
On the other hand, as British ships had become longer, they had lost their
traditional superiortiy in handiness, any advantage in manoevering now
largely depending on the relative skill of the crews. Although the British
had removed riders from their ships and experimented with novel forms of
fastening during these years, French ships were still regarded as too
lightly built; and they consistently failed to live up to British stowage
requirements for long cruises. It is difficult to escape the conclusion
that while British frigate design had improved immeasurably in two decades,
France in 1815 had not moved on much since 1815."
Bruce Trinque
There will be probably many more learned answers to this, but let me point
out just a few things. First: the British had a very serious problem with
wood for their ships - England being already deforested. That's why ships
built in India and other colonies had a great reputation, which I believe
is also mentioned by POB a few times.
The French excelled in lighter, faster ships, like frigates, the advantage
in the ships of the line was not that obvious.
The French Navy suffered a lot in the political turmoil of the
Revolution. Many officers were of course of aristocratic birth, and lots
of them lost their heads. The chaos following the fall of monarchy and the
period of revolutionary terror did lots of damage to the navy, human
expertise cannot be rebuilt as easily and as quickly as the ships
themselves. RN crews generally excelled at gunnery, and as Jack well knew,
it was a decisive factor in naval warfare.
Interestingly, French privateers had excellent crews and were often more
formidable opponents than the regular French navy ships of comparable
size.
Pawel
http://www.gen.emory.edu/cmm/people/staff/pgolik.html
Linnea wrote, quoting The Canon:
"Reading now that Jack's heart lifts when he see the "Africaine," coming
to help him pound the French under the RN captain, Corbett--"...and the
actual sight of her raised Jack's heart still higher: she was a
thirty-six-gun
eighteen-pounder frigate, French-built of course, and one of the finest
sailers in the Royal Navy, particularly on a wind."
Actually, "Jack" is wrong here to some degree; "Africaine" was rated 38/40
in British service (some conflict of information here), was fast off the
wind like many French-designed and built frigates but comparatively
leewardly and not particularly fast "on a wind." The average
British-concept larger frigate such as one of the "Ledas" or "Livelys"
would have both fore-reached on her and sailed faster to windward,
particularly as the wind got up, so could probably have outsailed her on a
wind in medium to rough conditions - other things being equal, state of
rigging, quality of command and crew, cleanness of bottom/degree of fouling
and drag, &c., which are always other considerations to take into account.
"Africaine" was, however, more suited than most French frigates to British
operational requirements, having a fuller midships section than typical (as
per Gardiner) so enabling her to store 6 months provisions; her length to
breadth and to depth ratios were however nevertheless fairly typically
French, longer and shallower than the British approach, giving her the
typical speed/leewardliness/manoeuvrability/speed of turning, tacking and
wearing characteristiscs of a French frigate design as compared to a
British one.
Regards,
Roger Marsh
Going through TMC, I was delighted to see that Maturin's fit of anger at
the way secrets cd not be kept includes the words, "All, all of a piece
throughout."
Because in PC, you'll remember that he tells Diana, when they discuss her
chances of hunting down a husband, "Your chase has a beast in view."
In both books, Maturin was quoting, of course, Dryden's Secular Masque:
All, all of a piece throughout
That new "age" by the way, was to come in with the year 1700. The poem is
fun to read in the context of the century just past.
===================
In another context, it's pleasant to see Jack quoting Shakespeare,
correctly for once, when he says, early in that same visit from Stephen,
talking of
lunatics: "they squeak and gibber in the market place." Just why POB gives
this quotation, I dunno. It leads to nothing that I can see. You remember:
speaking of the supernatural warnings of the death of Caesar: The graves
stood tenantless/and the sheeted dead did squeak and gibber in the Roman
streets." Squeak and gibber--one of my favorite phrases that I trot out
from time to time; it's pleasant to think that maybe POB did the same, and
just
threw the words to Jack as a favor. (Or is this a faint, a vy faint, look
ahead at little Brigit's early days?)
====================
Jack finds out early on about Sophie's disinclination for two-back-beasting
it. A year or so ago, the Gunroom had a discussion of the bull as a
stand-in for Jack in that same scene: Jack, staring at the cow, says, "the
fact of
the matter is that she refuses the bull." Elsewhere in the canon, Jack is
referred to as "Yardo, the parish bull."
I disremember, however, if we saw that Jack's stand-in not only by the
animal kingdom, but among the plants as well. Consider Sophie again, that
rosy
darling. "Here is Sophie's garden," Jack tells Maturin. "It will be full of
roses, come next June. Do you think they look a trifle spindly, Stephen...
I don't have much luck with ornamental plants: that was supposed to be a
lavender hedge, do you see? [And then the sentence that clinches all.] The
roots come from Mapes."
It's only a little later that he tells Maturin that there is no chance of
another child coming along, ever.
Charlezzzz
More, more!
Susan, cheerful after reading this fine post.
Maturin was quoting, of course,
Dryden's Secular Masque:
In another context, it's pleasant to see Jack
quoting Shakespeare, correctly
for once,
Maybe POB likes to display his knowledge thereof.
Ray McP
Slight spoiler for HMS Surprise below:
And in HMSS Stephen quotes almost exactly the passage you mention, just
after they have buried Mr. Stanhope on Pulo Batak:
"Jack looked out of the stern window at the distant, receding land, dull
purple now, with a rainstorm beating down on it. He said 'We came on a
fool's errand.'
Stephen said, as though in reply,
All all of a piece...etc." (p. 273, Norton)
At the end of the scene Jack, with his mind on getting home before Sophie
can marry the parson, says "You should not have said that about lovers,
Stephen."
It must have been an important piece for O'Brian, for him to quote it in
three different books!
Kathryn Guare
Ray McPherson
Maybe POB likes to display his knowledge thereof.
It's fun. A lesser writer would have drawn arrows for
the reader, with something like "as Shakespeare said . .. "
Sometimes I think POB wrote for the sheer joy of the
writing, and didn't give a fig whether the reader smoked
his allusions. That's why it's such a joy when we do.
- Susan
Spoilers follow, of course.
Chapter 1 of TMC has Jack talking to Maturin about the married state, and
though he won't come out with any statement downing Sophie, it's clear,
both from what little he does say, and from other hints that POB gives us,
that
she is like that cow who has nothing to say to the bull. No more children
to come--ever.
In yet-to-come books we make a few discoveries: that Philip was engendered
on the night of Jack's departure, and we learn that Diana and Clarissa
eventually give Sophie some advice on how to improve matters. "I thought I
just had to lie there and let it happen," says Sophie, or words to that
effect.
It's interesting to look back into Post Captain and see that Jack and Diana
have indeed been at it (that unfortunate gift of perfume from Maturin!)
So now here are a couple of quotations from further on in the canon. The
first is from Desolation Island: Sophie, talking to Jack in Chapter 1,
speaking of Diana, says "After all, she had shown herself to be -- well, to
be, what shall I say? -- a light woman."
Jack tries to justify Diana (and himself) a little. "the older I grow, the
less I think of capers of that kind," and, of course, gets himself on
dangerous ground. Almost immediately, a POB animal appears. Though it
merely carries the hairdresser for Mrs. Willams, it is "a terrible
animal...a
dull-blue creature that might have been a pony if it had any ears." Its
appearance seems to save Jack from bumbling himself into more terrible
dull-blue trouble.
And yet it seems that the "light woman" reference sticks in Jack's craw.
Because, a full book later, in Fortune of War, when he catches Diana as she
jumps into the small boat as they escape from Boston, he says, "Nobody
could call you a light woman, Diana." On my first few readings of FOW, I
took
that merely to be a betise on Jack's part, the kind of damn fool thing a man
might say to a former lover who really *is* a light woman...but when we
remember
Sophie's use to those same words, I think we might read Jack's inner
meaning:
"Diana, dear promiscuous gentlemanly lady, my wife doesn't understand you.
Or me either, for that matter."
Charlezzzz
Charlezzzz@AOL.COM wrote:
In yet-to-come books we make a few discoveries: that
Philip was engendered on
the night of Jack's departure,
George.
Maybe Philip also : } but definitely George.
I blush to correct as estimable a gentleman as Charlezzzz, but surely you
mean it was George, not Philip, who was
(tiny TMC spoiler)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
begotten on the night of Jack's departure for the Mauritius command. And
this all goes back to POB's masterful use of understatement. When we last
see Jack and Sophie together in TMC, they have been arguing, and he
resolves to leave that evening, whereupon:
"Sophie then returned to arguments against Jack's leaving quite so soon:
tomorrow morning would be far, far better in every way; they could not
possibly have his clothes ready before then...(Stephen slips out to avoid a
scene)...when he came back he found Jack at the door, staring up at the
scudding clouds, with Sophie, looking exceptionally beautiful in her
anxiety and emotion, beside him. 'The glass is rising,' said Jack
thoughtfully,
'but the wind is still due south...and when you consider where she lays,
right up the harbour, there is not a hope of getting her out on this
tide.'"
A lesser writer would have made the scene more explicit, but POB leaves
it at that...Consider where she lays... Then at the end of the book,
Pullings
congratulates Jack on his son.
-RD
Rosemary Davis
When we last see Jack and Sophie together in TMC, they have been
arguing, and he resolves to leave that evening, whereupon:
"Sophie then returned to arguments against Jack's
leaving quite so soon:
[snip]
'The glass is rising,' said
Jack thoughtfully,
Well, that's one way to put it
Rosemary Davis says,
I blush to correct as estimable a gentleman as
Charlezzzz, but surely you
mean it was George, not Philip, who was
(tiny TMC spoiler)
Just so.
Rosemary (and a dozen other Lissuns are correct.) I have programmed my dear
little Mac to write one thousand times, "It was George engendered there,
Philip elsewhere," and I trust it will no longer conflate the two.
Charlezzzz, unbowed
What did it mean when Stephen said, "You cannot blame the bull because the
frog burst: the bull has no comprehension of the affair? "
I am sure it is a reference to the fable, by Aesop?, of the frog who thinks
that he is the biggest and best in the pond. Then a bull comes down to
drink and the frog attempts to puff himself up to match or exceed the size
of the
bull. Unfortunately he bursts and dies in the attempt. The bull is the
innocent cause of the frog's demise merely by being there.
Adam Quinan
The reference is probably to a fable by La Fontaine, per Aesop, about a
Frog and a Bull. The frog decides he wants to be as big as the bull, kind
of
inflates himself in the effort, and bursts in the attempt. Morale, more or
less, accept your fate, stay as you were meant to be. And the frog's fate
isn't the fault of the bull.
Lois
It comes from a La Fontaine fable. Here's a sort of description
http://www.uqtr.uquebec.ca/~bougaief/Elderhostel/Fable/frog-grief.html
Kerry
Kerry Webb
The attributions of this fable to Aesop and La Fontaine remind me
of
one of Suzannes most prized possessions - a CDROM telling the story
of the Tortoise and the Hare. It comes in three languages:
1. English: "Aesop's Fable The Tortoise and the Hare"
2. German: "Aesops Fabel Die Schildkrote und der Hase"
3. French: "D'apres la fable de Jean de La Fontaine Le Lievre et la
Tortue"
It would be unworthy to cast any aspersions about national
character
from this - so I shall just leave them hanging in the air for whoever
wishes to take them up...
Suzanne particularly loves this story as it contains her all-time
favourite joke. "Why did the chicken cross the road?" She tells this
joke to everybody she meets, to universal confusion.
Martin @ home:
Having finally returned from my holiday trip abroad, I am now back on
"MAIL" and trying to catch up with discussions that took place in the
interim through use of the archives. I hope everyone had a rousing
holiday and a good LOTR day! (resolutely avoiding becoming involved in
any Tolkien threads; there are listservs for that sort of thing . . .)
Frustratingly, I find that neither the Groupread nor the regular
discussion archive yet contains much record of whatever chat has been
taking place surrounding TMC; I assume there was some pent-up verbosity
on this subject since we did hold off on opening it! From my own
post-it notes, a few fairly trivial questions if I may (apologies if any
of this has already been dealt with):
1.) p. 18 of TMC: Jack says "I had news of him [i.e. Killick] from
Collard of Ajax; he sent a sharks' backbone walking-stick for the
twins." Whazzat? To the best of my knowledge, there is no such thing
as a "shark's backbone" (any naturalists on the list able to back me up
on this?). I wonder whether this makes reference to some object that
was in those days known as a shark's backbone, in the same way that
people called narwhal's tusks unicorn horns. Any enlightenment?
2.) As always, I find POB's dry humor in delightful full swing here
(and a thank-you to Jerry Shulman for his preemptive post, some time
ago, concerning Lewis Carrolisms in TMC . . .). One example: pp.
100-101, where Jack is in a joyful daze at the news of his pendant:
"Jack looked decently solemn, but his mind was swimming in happiness, a
happiness made all the more wholly concrete, real and tangible when the
flag-lieutenant's recollections of an occasion upon which he too had
eaten something came to an end and Jack could cut the tape and see that
his orders were addressed to Commodore Aubrey." (It's that "an occasion
upon which he too had eaten something" that delights me!)
3.) One final curiosity, then I will spare you any more musings for the
time being: On p. 141 Stephen and his colleague McAdam take a stroll
through the island's "tortoise-park, where the disconsolate French
superintendent stood thigh-deep among some hundreds of his charges."
What is this tortoise-park, some sort of farm or game preserve? Is it
like the "Turtle Farm" that I once visited on the Grand Cayman, where
thousands of sea turtles are lovingly raised from hatchlings to
maturity, and then sold off to the market?
That's enough for now, I think! Take care all.
A complacent pragmatical worldly fellow (HMSS p. 196) . . .
Steve Ross
a sharks' backbone walking-stick for the twins." Whazzat? To the best of
my knowledge, there is no such thing as a "shark's backbone"
A shark, being a vertebrate animal, does indeed possess a backbone,
probably cartilaginous, like the rest of its skeleton. A Google image
search yielded one picture of a fossilized shark spine (at a URL so long it
wrapped TWICE, so I do not copy it here). It is oddly smooth, for a
backbone, but clearly segmented; one wonders how it could be transformed
into a walking stick.
Matt Cranor
3.) One final curiosity, then I will spare you any more musings for the
time being: On p. 141 Stephen and his colleague McAdam take a stroll
through the island's "tortoise-park, where the disconsolate French
superintendent stood thigh-deep among some hundreds of his charges."
What is this tortoise-park, some sort of farm or game preserve? Is it
like the "Turtle Farm" that I once visited on the Grand Cayman, where
thousands of sea turtles are lovingly raised from hatchlings to
maturity, and then sold off to the market?
Grand funny bits, indeed! I'll speak only to the last bit though -- I
would
guess that the tortoise-park would be a place where tortoises are kept
pending sale to ships as food. Sort of a corral. I think the concept of
"game preserve" didn't exist yet.
Astrid Bear
Game preserves had existed for several hundred years as a form of
preserving
game for the nobility to slaughter at will. They were preserved from us
commoners who would have gladly slaughtered at will for food. Hence the New
Forest and Royal Parks plus the various Highlands that were enclosed for
the
shooting of Grouse and Red Deer.
Stephen Chambers
What is this tortoise-park, some sort of farm or game
preserve? Is it like the "Turtle Farm" that I once visited
on the Grand Cayman, where thousands of sea turtles are
lovingly raised from hatchlings to maturity, and then sold
off to the market?
No, it is a place to park tortoises prior to them being consumed. The
map of the town shows the actual site(s) as "Parc des Tortues", which
puzzled me mightily until I read TMC, when it all clicked into place.
The sense is like an artillery camp or a car park, rather than any sort
of garden.
Gerry Strey wrote:
My own guess is that POB omitted much reference to Nelson because
introducing a real-life character who is famous even to the
non-nautical might have overshadowed Jack and Stephen.
I think this is quite right; besides, POB seems to me to have preferred
basing his tales only loosely, if at all, on "real" historical incidents.
Therefore a battle as well-known as Trafalgar wouldn't have suited his
purposes too well, would it?
Sometimes, as in TMC, we do find quite a close mirroring of actual
historical incidents; but it has seemed to me that others share my feeling
that this book is not quite up to the standard of some of the others.
Certainly, to me it is a bit "thinner" than any of the other First Five
(The Aubrey-Maturin Pentateuch)! Is this because the use of the "plot" of
the Mauritius Campaign gives it a paint-by-numbers feel?
Having said that, I suppose I should examine my own feelings more
carefully. Would I feel the same way about this book if I had not known
about the historical basis behind it?
Steve Ross
So, what is the collective judgment of the group on Lord Clonfert? Is he,
as the Norton blurb would have it, merely a "pleasure-seeking dilettante?"
Is he just vain and silly, and therefore inconsequential? Or is he
something a little deeper, maybe even a little tragic, and someone whose
deeds (or attempted deeds) call for our admiration, despite what we may
think of their motivation? What exactly IS that motivation, anyway? In
sum, does Clonfert have, in any measure, what one of our characters might
call "bottom"?
If these subjects have already been "done," as I imagine may be the case, I
would appreciate some precis of earlier gunroom discussions and/or pointers
to places where they may be found in the archives! Thanks.
----------------------
"These are mere whimsies, my dear, vapours, megrims!" -- DI, p. 67
Steve Ross
Clonfert has always seemed to me to be the core of TMC, even more than
the campaign itself. His self-imposed rivalry with Jack, his endless
self-doubts, the fascination his emotional and mental processes have
for Stephen, the effects his actions have on the plot--take him away
and what would the story be like?
Gerry Strey
Dull Dull Dull, is the answer to that Gerr
To learn about "The Port-Wine Sea," my parody of Patrick O'Brian's wonderful Aubrey-Maturin series, please see
http://www.ericahouse.com/browsebuy/fiction/wenger/index.html
OR http://www.sea-room.com
From: Jerry Shurman
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 9:43 AM
Subject: Groupread:TMC:More Lewis Carroll
From: Alec O'Flaherty
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 5:36 PM
Subject: what is this about? Mautitius Command-possible spoiler
'It's the heaviest hurley that ever yet was cut from the deadly upas-tree.'
From: William Nyden
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: what is this about? Mautitius Command-possible spoiler
Bill Nyden
a Rose by another name
37° 25' 15" N 122° 04' 57" W
======================================================
William Nyden | CAD Systems Engineer
Space Systems/Loral | nyden@ssd.loral.com
3825 Fabian Way, Z-02 | ph (650) 852-4333
Palo Alto, CA 94303 USA | fax (650) 852-5207
Fiction after all, has to make sense."
- Mark Twain
http://www.Calif-Sport-Divers.org/
http://www.HMSSurprise.org/
From: Edmund Burton
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: what is this about? Mautitius Command-possible spoiler
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: what is this about? Mautitius Command-possible spoiler
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: what is this about? Mautitius Command-possible spoiler
From: Kyle Lerfald
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: what is this about? Mautitius Command-possible spoiler
From: Peter Mackay
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: what is this about? Mautitius Command-possible spoiler
--
From: Alec O'Flaherty
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 1:54 AM
Subject: Re: what is this about? Mautitius Command-possible spoiler
'It's the heaviest hurley that ever yet was cut from the deadly
upas-tree.'
From: Ray McPherson (raymcp999@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Mon Dec 17 2001 - 23:38:29 EST
Subject: SPOILER! [POB] The Yellow Admiral
From: Peter Mackay (peter.mackay@BIGPOND.COM)
Date: Mon Dec 17 2001 - 23:52:16 EST
Subject: SPOILER! [POB] The Yellow Admiral
From: MacKenna Charleson
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 00:07:46 EST
Subject: Re: SPOILERS TYA and TMC
From: "P. Richman"
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 16:45:44 +0000
Subject: GroupRead: TMC: question and observation
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 11:17:00 -0500
Subject: GroupRead: TMC: question and observation
NYC
From: Susan Wenger
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 12:34:40 -0800
Subject: Re: GroupRead: TMC: question and observation
=====
To learn about "The Port-Wine Sea," my parody of Patrick O'Brian's
wonderful Aubrey-Maturin series, please see
http://www.ericahouse.com/browsebuy/fiction/wenger/index.html
OR
http://www.sea-room.com
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 15:41:32 EST
Subject: Re: GroupRead: TMC: question and observation
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:56:00 -0500
Subject: Re: GroupRead: TMC: question and observation
From: Samuel Bostock
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:43:25 -0000
Subject: Re: GroupRead: TMC: question and observation
From: Don Seltzer
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 14:44:52 -0500
Subject: GRP: TMC: Wine and Women, was question and observation
In HMSS, particular note is made by Jack and Stephen of the 17th of the
month, when Diana and Canning were expected to arrive in Bombay. And
similarly in FOW, Diana and her new paramour Johnson make a similar
reappearance in the canon, arriving in Boston on the 17th of May. Perhaps
a day of significance in POB's own life?
From: John Finneran
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 23:32:48 -0800
Subject: Re: GRP: TMC: Wine and Women, was question and observation
From: Peter Mackay
Subject: Re: GroupRead:TMC:Opening (and sun dry observations on the
weather)
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 16:35:45 +1100
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 17:14:00 -0500
Subject: Groupread: TMC One of my favorite concepts in the book
NYC
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 17:22:00 -0500
Subject: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage
NYC
From: MacKenna Charleson
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:14:41 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage (Pier glasses)
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:27:57 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage(pier glass)
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:44:20 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage (Pier glasses)
From: Gerry Strey
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 08:14:38 -0600
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage(pier glass)
Madison. Wisconsin
From: losmp
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 09:40:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage(pier glass)
From: MacKenna Charleson
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 09:58:32 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage(pier glass)
From: Larry & Wanda Finch
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:37:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage
From: Peter Mackay
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 16:03:58 +1100
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:40:15 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage(howitzer)
From: Mary S
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 22:32:25 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage
35° 58' 11" N
86° 48' 57" W
From: Peter Mackay
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 16:33:28 +1100
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage
From: Mary S
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 14:46:09 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage
From: Kerry webb
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:13:33 -0800
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage
your most obedient savant
From: Roger Marsh
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 08:30:02 +0100
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage(howitzer)
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 17:47:00 -0500
Subject: Groupread: TMC Gen Abercrombie's written remarks
Okay, I might be a little off in my reading but, on p346, at the bottom, it
starts:
"...General Abercrombie was struggling to his feet, with a sheaf of notes in
his hand." then he reads and then he fumbles the pages, then we are told that
"It took some time to get the General back to his eulogy of Abercrombie and
all present,..."
NYC
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 17:31:00 -0500
Subject: Groupread: TMC The character of Clonfert
NYC
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:11:38 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC The character of Clonfert
41°37'53"N
72°22'51"W
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 21:19:49 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC The character of Clonfert
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 22:39:51 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC The character of Clonfert
41°37'53"N
72°22'51"W
From: info
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 13:39:26 -0000
Subject: Groupread: TMC The character of Clonfert
He certainly used the more positive side of him as a model for Jack, and
indeed most of M&C is drawn from Cochrane's exploits in the "Speedy".
He refers to Cochrane several times in the books with some disdain for the
"showy" side of his character.
Jack Aubrey Meyn.
From: Roger Marsh
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:55:44 +0100
Subject: Re: Groupread TMC - The Character of Clonfert (and Aubrey and
Cochrane)
From: Edmund Burton
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 15:16:25 -0600
Subject: Re: Groupread TMC - The Character of Clonfert (and Aubrey and
Cochrane)
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:41:09 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread TMC - The Character of Clonfert (and Aubrey and
Cochrane)
41°37'53"N
72°22'51"W
From: Roger Marsh (frigates@MARLINTER.FSNET.CO.UK)
Date: Thu Jan 03 2002 - 03:39:30 EST
Cochrane the Movie, Biography &c. (was The Character of Clonfert &c.)
"The Sea Wolf" (Ian Grimble)
"Lord Cochrane" (Christopher Lloyd)
"Cochrane" (Warren Tute)
From: Don Seltzer
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 09:44:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Cochrane the Movie, Biography &c.
From: Jean A
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 21:30:24 EST
Subject: Groupread: TMC: Clonfert
"The doorway of the present church is an outstanding example of
Hiberno-Romanesque decoration, featuring an amazing variety of motifs,
foliage, animal heads and human eads."
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 17:12:00 -0500
Subject: Groupread: TMC About the word 'cello
NYC
From: Robert Saldeen
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 18:16:20 -0600
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC About the word 'cello
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:18:17 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC About the word 'cello
41°37'53"N
72°22'51"W
From: Charlezzzz@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 21:54:15 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC about the word cello
"Cello is short for violoncello. My copy of the Oxford
English
Dictionary
indicates its first use in English as dating from 1881."
From: Jerry Shurman
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:21:09 -0800
Subject: Re: GUNROOM Digest - 1 Jan 2002 - Special issue (#2002-3)
From: Jerry Shurman
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:39:56 -0800
Subject: Re: GUNROOM Digest - 1 Jan 2002 - Special issue (#2002-4)
From: Rowen 84
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 22:46:57 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC about the word cello
From: Rowen 84
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 22:57:42 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC about the word cello-Correction
From: Charlezzzz@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 23:31:15 EST
Subject: Cellos and stuff
"viola da gamba is quite a different instrument, a member of the viol family
rather than the violin family"
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 22:57:35 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC about the word cello
From: Ruth A Abrams
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 15:42:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC about the word cello
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 17:33:00 -0500
Subject: Groupread: TMC Did it actually happen?
NYC
too confused to know what the right cliches are most of the time
From: MacKenna Charleson
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:25:46 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC Did it actually happen?
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 17:02:00 -0500
Subject: Groupread: TMC Number of guns in a salute
p.104... 13 to a Commodore
p.86... 17 to the Admiral
NYC
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:42:56 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC Number of guns in a salute
From: Barney Simon
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 17:41:00 -0500
Subject: Groupread: TMC JA's responsibility at Ile de la Passe
NYC
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:14:50 EST
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC JA's responsibility at Ile de la Passe
41°37'53"N
72°22'51"W
From: Ray Martin
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 19:47:23 -0000
Subject: The mauritius command - POB a practising?
Ray@TheBay
1:48.90 West
From: Linnea
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 16:48:47 -0500
Subject: Group Read: The Mauritius Command
From: Ladyshrike@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:17:28 EST
Subject: Speaking of Mauritius...
The sun is riz,
I wonder where
Mauritius is?"
From: Thistle Farm
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:28:45 EST
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
From: Bill Nyden
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 07:33:39 -0800
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
a Rose by another name at Home
37° 23' 28" N 122° 04' 09" W
From: Thistle Farm
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:32:39 EST
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:28:26 EST
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
41°37'53"N 72°22'51"W
From: Micheal Bloomberg
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 16:40:14 -0600
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
45:03:13 N
93:15:17 W
From: Ladyshrike@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:33:36 EST
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
From: Peter Mackay
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 13:10:19 +1100
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
A stern chase is not necessarily the longest chase.
When the FOO shits, wear it.
From: Charles Miller
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 16:45:53 -1000
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:45:38 EST
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
41°37'53"N 72°22'51"W
From: Edmund Burton
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:11:34 -0600
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
That dark and stormy day,
But the shaggiest dog in the gunroom log
Was writ by Peter Mackay.
From: Gerry Strey
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 08:19:46 -0600
Subject: Re: Speaking of Mauritius...
From: Alec O'Flaherty
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:24:47 +0000
Subject: Re: Groupread: TMC more q's on word usage
I'm a mere child of 42.
I believe it is still used to this day in legal letters-although thankfully
it been a while since I received one.
From: Susan Wenger
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:25:24 -0800
Subject: groupread:TMC:Welshwoman
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 22:42:03 EST
Subject: Re: groupread:TMC:Welshwoman
From: Martin
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:27:19 -0000
Subject: Re: groupread:TMC:Welshwoman
Remember that the same O'Brian created the character of Bronwen in
Testimonies.
50° 44' 58" N
From: Susan Wenger
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:29:19 -0800
Subject: Re: groupread:TMC:Welshwoman
From: Rowen 84
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 00:35:24 EST
Subject: Re: groupread:TMC:Welshwoman
From: Peter Mackay
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 22:22:06 +1100
Subject: Re: groupread:TMC:Welshwoman
From: Mike French
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:09:25 -0000
Subject: Fw: [POB] groupread:TMC:Welshwoman
Friend of the Polychrest
From: Mary S
35° 58' 11" N
86° 48' 57" W
From: Ruth A Abrams
Subject: groupread:TMC:Welshwoman
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 01:10:21 -0500
From: Don Seltzer
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 19:45:58 -0500
Subject: Re: GRP TMC:Welshwoman
From: Linnea
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 21:45:25 -0500
Subject: Group Read TMC: French ships
French, but a prize and now sailed by the RN, of course.
It occurs to me that all through the books, there is note taken of
how well the French build their ships and how some French captains and crews
are very good sailors.
From: Peter Mackay
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 13:46:30 +1100
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
From: Linnea
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 22:10:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
From: Adam Quinan
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 22:08:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
Commander Ted Walker R.N.
Somewhere around 43° 46' 21"N, 79° 22' 51"W
For some of my family history see
http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/quin.htm
From: Susan Wenger
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:13:12 -0800
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
To learn about "The Port-Wine Sea," my parody of Patrick O'Brian's wonderful
Aubrey-Maturin series, please visit http://www.sea-room.com
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 23:34:00 EST
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
From: Randy Hees
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:30:33 -0800
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
37:34:15.197N 122:17:55.090W
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 23:01:47 EST
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
41°37'53"N 72°22'51"W
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 23:15:35 EST
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
From: Adam Quinan
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 23:57:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
From: Roger Marsh
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:51:39 +0100
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
But I wonder what it is that makes the ships so good: the design? the
craftsmen? the shipyards? All of the above? On other counts, the British
seem to disparage the French in the books. It is surprising to learn that
the English, with their mastery of the sea, admired these French-built
ships. Why didn't they copy them and build even better ones?
From: Peter Mackay
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 21:56:05 +1100
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
From: Jebvbva@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 17:28:22 EST
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
:-)
From: Gregory Edwards
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 06:53:57 -0800
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
From: Batrinque@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 20:12:11 EST
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
41°37'53"N 72°22'51"W
From: Pawel Golik
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 19:46:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
Currently at 33°48'53"N 84°19'25"W
Home is at 52°12'25"N 21°5'37"E
From: Roger Marsh
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 01:10:18 +0100
Subject: Re: Group Read TMC: French ships
From: Charlezzzz@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 01:06:00 EST
Subject: GROUPREAD TMC; a few POB literary tricks
Thy chase had a beast in view
Thy wars brought nothing about
Thy lovers were all untrue
'Tis well an old age is out
And time to begin a new.
From: Susan Wenger
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 07:11:15 -0800
Subject: Re: GROUPREAD TMC; a few POB literary tricks
From: Ray McPherson
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:04:13 -0800
Subject: Re: GROUPREAD TMC; a few POB literary tricks
From: Kathryn Guare
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 09:15:10 -0800
Subject: Re: GROUPREAD TMC; a few POB literary tricks
From: Susan Wenger
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 10:45:42 -0800
Subject: Re: GROUPREAD TMC; a few POB literary tricks
From: Charlezzzz@AOL.COM
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 18:45:04 EST
Subject: GROUP READING, TMC: Jack and Sophie and Diana too
From: Susan Wenger
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 16:31:11 -0800
Subject: Re: GROUP READING, TMC: Jack and Sophie and Diana too
From: Rosemary Davis
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 19:27:25 -0500
Subject: Groupread TMC - engendering
From: Susan Wenger
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 16:34:06 -0800
Subject: Re: Groupread TMC - engendering
: }
From: Charlezzzz@AOL.COM
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 11:09:58 EST
Subject: Groupread MC - engendering (tiny spoiler)
begotten
From:"P. Richman"
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 02:35:10 +0000
Subject: groupread:TMC:bull and frog
From: Adam Quinan
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 21:42:57 -0500
Subject: Re: groupread:TMC:bull and frog
'Grab a chance and you won't be sorry for a might-have-been'
Commander Ted Walker R.N.
Somewhere around 43° 46' 21"N, 79° 22' 51"W
For some of my family history see
http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/quin.htm
From: losmp
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 23:37:01 -0500
Subject: Re: groupread:TMC:bull and frog
From: Kerry Webb
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 08:04:08 +1100
Subject: Re: groupread:TMC:bull and frog
Canberra, Australia http://www.alia.org.au/~kwebb/
From: Martin
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 21:21:26 -0000
Subject: Fables of La Fontaine: Was bull and frog
50° 44' 58" N
1° 58' 35" W
From: Steve Ross
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 11:39:26 -0600
Subject: Back from the Far Side of the World; some TMC questions
But my question pertains to an earlier humorous passage, where Stephen
has given Jack the news of his command, but requires him to keep it
quiet for the time being (p. 43):
" 'A ship!' cried Jack, springing heavily into the air. There were
tears in his eyes, and Stephen saw that he might wish to shake hands at
any minute. He disliked all effusion, privately thinking the English
far too much given to weeping and the flow of soul; he pursed his lips
with a sour expression, and put his hands behind his back."
Does anyone besides me see irony in this? (specifically, in the fact
that the Irishman--from a nation often characterized as deeply
emotional, not to say lugubrious--disdains the "reserved,
stiff-upper-lip" English as too _effusive_?)
30° 24' 32"N
91° 05' 28"W
From: Matt Cranor
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 11:23:19 -0800
Subject: Re: Back from the Far Side of the World; some TMC questions
From: Astrid Bear
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 11:50:55 -0800
Subject: Re: Back from the Far Side of the World; some TMC questions
"and there aren't any moa any moa"
From: Stephen Chambers
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 22:01:29 -0000
Subject: Re: Back from the Far Side of the World; some TMC questions
50° 48' 38" N 01° 09' 15" W
Approx. 180 inches above sea level
When the pin is pulled Mr Grenade is no longer our friend.
From: Peter Mackay
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 07:23:21 +1100
Subject: GROUPREAD: Back from the Far Side of the World; some TMC questions
From: Steven K Ross
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:06:15 -0600
Subject: GroupRead TMC: the use of history [was: Re: [POB] Silence about
Nelson]
From: Steven K Ross
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 16:03:48 -0600
Subject: GROUPREAD TMC: Clonfert
Baton Rouge
From: Gerry Strey
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 16:11:12 -0600
Subject: Re: GROUPREAD TMC: Clonfert
Madison, Wisconsin
From: Thistle Farm
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:44:11 EST
Subject: Re: GROUPREAD TMC: Clonfert