|
You're in for a Gi-nourmous treat. These are, imho, arguably the best novels of historical fiction ever written (I insert the "arguably" only because of Mary Renault's works). One word of warning: I took me two or three "tries" -- in the sense of complete read-throughs -- to really get synced into and fully enjoy the series. He uses so many period nautical and medical words that reading these books is almost like learning a new language -- extremely rewarding once you've done it, but a great deal of work in the meanwhile. I agree completely with the "immersion program" approach -- don't worry too much about understanding, just "bleep" over the parts you don't know and keep reading, and eventually you'll get the gestalt. Sea of Words is useful, especially because some of the words O'Brian used were so rare that they aren't going to be in any standard dictionary -- sometimes, not even in the OED -- but not strictly *necessary* as long as you're willing to just roll with not understanding everything for a while. As an example, quote:An interview with Patrick O'Brian published in The Patrick O'Brian Newsletter (volume 3, issue 1, March 1994) contains this Q & A: You can get the complete boxed set of all the Aubrey/Maturin novels, including the unfinished "21", here: http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Aubrey-Maturin-Novels/dp/039306011X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1298920452&sr=1-1 It's worth it, though the paper's a little thin and the text a little smaller than in the standard paperbacks, so sometimes you need to make sure you have good light to read them in. For everyone who isn't sold already -- To add a little to the OP's description of the books, the basic "engine" that drives the series is the relationship between Captain Jack Aubrey (loosely based on the real-life Lord Cochrane) and Dr. Stephen Maturin, his friend and ship's doctor. Aubrey is a genius of a combat ship's captain, but an absolute shambles ashore, inept at politics and finance and all the other ways good people can get themselves in trouble; Maturin is a genius doctor but helpless at sea. Really can't be recommended strongly enough. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Feb 28, 2011 |
#
¿
Feb 28, 2011 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 03:22 |
|
|
Campbell posted:
Yeah, good point, apologies; I wasn't thinking about that as a spoiler because it comes to light so early on in the series, but I guess it is a bit of a surprise in the first book.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2011 21:17
|
|
|
master mystifier posted:I tried looking for Locatelli's quartet in C major, as described in the opening pages, only to find out that although Pietro Locatelli was an actual composer, he never wrote a single quartet, let alone one in C major. Is this an intentional joke on O'Brian's part? His research is so stellar that I can see that as the only conclusion. Oh, nice catch! I'd guess that it's not a joke so much as an implication that they're listening to a now-lost / otherwise unknown work.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2011 21:26
|
|
|
I read the Hornblower books first and didn't like them regardless; Hornblower's a much less sympathetic character and more easily disliked. The only other historical fiction I know of that compares in quality to the Aubrey/Maturin books is/are Mary Renault's novels of ancient greece, but that's a different enough setting to almost be a different genre.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 13:35
|
|
|
Molybdenum posted:I'm in book 4 of this series. I started watching after I netflixed the movie. I'm really digging it, which says something as usually the only fiction I read of any kind is comic books. I'm juggling a book at a time in the series with Lords of Finance and The Mechanics of Web Handling. There's actually a "gastronomic companion" cookbook to these, titled Lobscouse and Spotted Dog. http://www.wwnorton.com/pob/spottedd/welcome.htm http://www.amazon.com/Lobscouse-Spotted-Dog-Gastronomic-Companion/dp/0393045595
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 21:41
|
|
.
|
Faude Carfilhiot posted:I have a question for those of you who have read these books before. Yesterday, I was lucky enough to find a used copy of "The Far Side of the World" and since I've read and liked "Master and Commander", I picked it up. However, I later learned that this is actually the 10th book in the series, something that wasn't indicated on the back of the cover. My question is this: Is it necessary that I read the previous books in the series in order to understand the plot of this one, or can I jump right into it? You *could* jump right into it, but the later books in the series have many multi-book plot arcs. That one's relatively self-contained for the later series, but I'd still strongly advise reading the books in order. If you liked Master and Commander, it's definitely worth just taking the plunge and buying the whole shooting match at once. Divided by 21, that's only six dollars per book, and they're hardbacks! Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Mar 13, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2011 15:31
|
|
|
Buttonhead posted:I'm pretty sure the reader is supposed to be bewildered about all the complexity of the sails and rigging and whatnot. I think it's also, especially right there in the first book, a bit of the same reason that Umberto Eco puts that gigantic multi page description of the abbey door right there in the beginning of The Name of the Rose -- it's there to let the reader know that 1) this book has some serious scholarly chops, and that therefore 2) your rear end better be ready to hang and/or deal with it. It's a test of the reader, to see if you're serious enough to power through :P
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2011 23:27
|
|
|
gowb posted:The only historical fiction I've read (loosely using that term here) was Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell, by Susanna Clarke. Oh and those awful novels about the English navyman riding a dragon. But I absolutely loved Clarke's novel, to the point where I've read it several times now and it influenced me to buy and deeply regret the aforementioned dragon books. Would anyone who has read her novel recommend this series? It got me interested in fiction from the Napoleonic period, which seems so interesting and is not really taught, at least in American schools. The most I read about Napoleon was that he sold us the Louisiana Purchase really cheap, and was a pretty cool dude, but his representation to the British of the time seems to paint him as the Devil. Anyway, let me know. Yes. Edit for real answer: yeah, I would definitely recommend this series to fans of Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell and also to fans of the first of the Temeraire books ["those awful novels about the English navyman riding a dragon" -- I have a sneaking suspicion those novels grew from the author writing a lot of (Hornblower / Aubrey) + Dragons fan fiction] Napoleonic / "Regency" (from King George's regent) era fiction generally means either stuff like Hornblower or Aubrey/Maturin -- british naval fiction -- or it means Jane Austen and all the romance novels derived therefrom. If you want more of that era after reading Jonathan Strange, and you want it to be smart, well-crafted, deeply researched, and written with a deep intelligence; and you don't want to read Jane Austen or Jane Austen derivatives; then the Aubrey/Maturin books are a logical next stop. Alternatively, though, Jonathan Strange draws a little more heavily on the Jane Austen tradition than on the Wooden Ships and Iron Men tradition that Aubrey and Hornblower fall into, so you might want to go back to the source and read Jane Austen. If you want a fantasy treatment, I'd recommend Jo Walton's Tooth and Claw, which is basically a Jane Austen novel where all the characters are dragons (much more smartly done than it sounds like, but a little hard to get into). Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Apr 27, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 19:00
|
|
|
Murgos posted:DV plays billiards, smokes, drinks and gambles. She's much more fun to be around. I think it's sortof implied that, basically, DV is more flirtatious and, well, for lack of a better term, more potentially willing to put out. Sophie's about as likely to cheat on Jack as the moon is to fall on your shoe, but Diana is, well, a fast woman.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2011 15:17
|
|
|
withak posted:He didn't understand the differences between cricket (which he hadn't played) and hurling (which he had). Hurling is an irish sport more like field hockey. With what result? Could you go into more detail as to how that particular scene played out? Every time I get to it I spend like half an hour online trying to research cricket rules to no avail.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2011 13:59
|
|
|
CarterUSM posted:In cricket, you are supposed to use your bat to defend your wicket (i.e. the three stumps with loose crosspieces that sit behind the batter). As such, cricket tends to be a defensive game from the batsman's point of view, since you don't HAVE to run unless you so choose. (Imagine in baseball, if a batter could just stand at home plate and decline to run on a hit ball, until he got one he liked) You could literally have a cricket batsman standing up at the wicket for over a hundred pitches. Ok, thanks a great deal for that explanation. I could tell it was a great scene, I just couldn't interpret it -- it was like I was reading another language.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2011 15:34
|
|
|
I thought it was bittersweet. It was nice to get a little more detail about Stephen's new romance and there are some cool parts but, yeah, it's not finished, so it's sad for that reason. I'd only read it if you get the boxed set that includes it. It's not worth buying independently but it is worth reading if you get a free copy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2011 05:07
|
|
|
It's amazing how wonderful the feeling of re-reading this series is. Picking up Master and Commander for the fourth or fifth time, after it's been a year or two since your last read-through . . oh, it's a beautiful thing.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 19:36
|
|
|
Terraplane posted:I read the books about once a year and it's always so, so satisfying. And what's awesome is that on each reread there's always something new, something you missed before. I've never read anything else like this series and what makes me sad is the fact that I probably never will again. So many new things each time. With each pass I learn the "language" a little better, so it's always a fresh start -- that first explanation of the parts of the Sophie to Stephen is always new! This time through I'm being careful to always look up words I don't know, and it's so amazingly revealing -- just as one tiny example, there's a point where Stephen says "I am no rapparee" and looking it up, "rapparee" is quote:
It's not just a word for bandit . . it's an Irish word for bandit, that Stephen's using because he's Stephen. So many perfect little details.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2011 15:18
|
|
|
It's funny how different passages stand out to you on each read through. This time I'm really carefully looking up every reference and foreign-language bit I can catch; some of them are just so perfect. Tutti contenti, saremo cosi, saremo cosi . . . Mahasamatman posted:I picked up Far Side of the World because I found it cheap in a local bookstore. Would I be remiss to start right into that? Or should I read the series in order. The best quote I've seen on this is "Only read the Aubrey/Maturin books out of order if you would read the chapters of a book out of order." I would strongly recommend r not reading anything after, well, The Far Side of the World out of order. You probably *could* jump straight to Far Side but I wouldn't suggest it; the books are confusing enough as it is just from the language. The best thing to do is just make the dive and grab the box set here: http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Aubrey-Maturin-Novels/dp/039306011X Hundred bucks seems like a lot but it boils out to $5 per book which is reasonable. And these are books you'll read many times. Alternatively, I think there are ebook editions floating around somewhere. BeigeJacket posted:
Good question. On my first few read-throughs I thought "no" but on this read through I changed my mind, and yeah, while it's ambiguous, I think there's a brief period where Diana is using him for sex, essentially, then she discards him and goes to Jack. But yeah it's definitely ambiguous. Worth noting for this thread: Jo Walton, a really brilliant sci-fi author, has done a "read through" blog of this series over on Tor.com. Starts here: http://www.tor.com/blogs/2010/10/re-reading-patrick-obrians-aubrey-maturin-series. She has some interesting and fun comments; for example, on The Far Side of the World: quote:The book begins with a note that the Napoleonic Wars are about to run out and O’Brian is going to be cast upon his own invention, “the author may be led to make use of hypothetical years... an 1812a or even an 1812b.” I know some people feel that this diminishes the series, but to me it enhances it enormously. They do not sail off the map, and everything remains as historical as possible under the circumstances, but they sail into hypothetical years. The beginning of The Far Side of the World is sometime in 1813 and the beginning of The Yellow Admiral is early in 1815, and there are seven or eight years between them, to my count. Stephen can’t say how old his daughter is, and really, neither can anybody. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Oct 17, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2011 14:36
|
|
|
Decius posted:The editing/spell checking was pretty bad with this edition as far as I know. Yeah, it's got some typos here and there but it's no worse than the average ebook edition of almost anything. The worst issue is that the paper's really, really thin. Still, though, it winds up cheaper to buy them all that way than to try to collect all 20 individual books, so regardless it's the best deal if you're new to the series.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2011 13:47
|
|
|
silly posted:I was about two-thirds of the way through Blue At The Mizzen when I forgot in a seat pocket on an airplane and decided that it was a sign. As long as I don't read the ending, the books don't end. You aren't alone. I'm on the last bit of Blue at the Mizzen now and I find myself reading other things just so I won't be quite done quite yet. I thought Jo Walton's end-comment for the series was great: quote:The thing Peter Weir understood solidly when he made his movie was that Jack and Stephen are best seen in motion, neither beginning nor ending a voyage, in the middle of a commission. All the quotations I have used as titles for this series of posts have been from the books, but this one is T.S. Eliot, from Four Quartets: http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/02/forever-bailing-patrick-obrians-last-unfinished-novel-and-the-end-of-the-aubrey-matrurin-series
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2011 16:07
|
|
|
Octy posted:I started reading Master and Commander the other day. It's alright so far. I read and loved all the Hornblower novels last year, though Hornblower's self-esteem issues and constant assholery to Mr. Bush was a bit tiring. Captain Aubrey seems quite likeable in comparison. Oh I envy you getting to read them for the first time. You'll know after the first book if you like them (probably). I couldn't ever get into Hornblower precisely because Hornblower is such a dislikeable character. The only thing I can distinctly remember about Hornblower is that he was tone deaf; but the music room in the Governor's House at Port Mahon, that handsome, pillared octagon, will always be filled with the triumphant first movement of Locatelli's C major quartet.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
Lord Yod posted:
I'd sailed on a sunfish but god no, most of the technical sail discussion was essentially in another language, one I'm still learning on my (fourth?) reread.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2012 15:13
|
|
|
Octy posted:I bought Post Captain and HMS Surprise with a gift voucher last week and I'm meant to be getting the next two books after that as a birthday present from someone. So I suppose I'd better start liking it soon. Haha! There's an old Peanuts comic strip where Linus is talking about reading the Brothers Karamazov, another character is surprised he's reading it, and Linus says "when I come to a word I can't pronounce, I just BEEP right over it!" and that's pretty much what you have to do with the cablechat on your first read through.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
Octy posted:About to finish The Mauritius Command. I've got the next two books lying in wait. I have to say, this series gives me what I suppose to be a much more realistic portrayal of life at sea. Oh, I'm sure there wasn't much cello playing and deep philosophical conversations for most, but I'm really describing the naval actions that come with a much darker quality than in Hornblower, which always seemed to focus on the heroic, superhuman abilities of the title character as well as his friends (Except poor Captain Bush). Yeah he doesn't actually invent words, but often his sources are crazily esoteric. The best example is probably "marthambles" -- one of the diseases Stephen treats the sailors for. It's only recorded instance prior to O'Brian was in a single quack patent-medicine circular from the period, so no one even knows what it means beyond "a disease"; it could even be something the patent medicine seller invented. Most of O'Brian's sea battles are based on records of actual combats, he's just dropped Aubrey and Maturin in to replace the commanders or whatever. You can read up the actual conquest of Mauritius on wikipedia, for example. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 12:34 on May 14, 2012 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2012 12:31
|
|
|
Notahippie posted:One of the things that stands out to me about O'Brian every time I read him or any other historical fiction is how drat good he is at navigating the differences between modern and historical social beliefs. People in the 19th century believed some pretty horrific stuff by modern standards - casual racism and classism was a general thing, people weren't so great about personal cleanliness, and slavery was a fact of life. Most historical authors seem to try to deal with that by having the main character be enlightened about racial or gender equality, or have funny ideas about hygene, or something like that, but O'Brian doesn't. Both Aubrey & Maturin have completely consistent and period-appropriate social beliefs, without shying away from the fact that some of them would be weird or offensive by today's standards or making them unapologeticaly horrible to modern readers. Maturin is an abolitionist and a believer in racial equality, but it's fully consistent with his background and education, and he doesn't think twice about things like using dissecting tools to cut lunch meat without cleaning them; while Jack is a kind of unthinking proponent of slavery. In fact, the whole way his beliefs change after seeing industrial slavery is more powerful to me than if he were anachronistically egalitarian the whole time. Mary Renault does a pretty good job but she approaches the problem from another angle. The societies she's depicting are so far removed from modern morality that she can just have her narrator be Alexander the Great's homosexual love boy, or a young Athenian in a homosexual relationship, and it's not even a thing, it's just the Way Things Were Then. You're right though that nobody else I'm aware of really compares. Renault and O'Brian are the two grand-masters of historical fiction as far as I'm concerned, in a large part for exactly that reason.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2012 02:34
|
|
|
I just noticed that Ron Swanson is reading a Patrick O'Brian book in a 3rd season episode of Parks and Recreation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
Nektu posted:Each time the ships are cleared for action, everything that is not nailed down is put down into the hold to allow the people to actually move around unhindered. Only that the cacafuego was surprised and her decks were still littered with assorted stuff. Its kinda hard to do your job under fire if you keep tripping over chicken coops. The Cacafuego was also a Spanish ship that didn't stay up to the British standards of clearing for action, cleanliness, order, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
Blog Free or Die posted:It's been a while, but IIRC the letters are yea from Wray, who is mostly just being a jerk at Stephen since he dislikes him. I seem to recall it implies later that Jagiello is too innocent to pursue a relationship with Diana, especially as it would be viewed very distatefully in his native Lithuania. Not sure why Diana runs off, probably just bored. Yeah, I saw that as the polite fiction Stephen and Diana told themselves afterwards. It's open to interpretation though.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 15:22
|
|
|
Raskolnikov2089 posted:Stephen is pretty prickly about his honor though. He's all set to duel with Jagiello when he goes to retrieve her, until he receives an explanation. Yeah, it depends on how much you believe Diana and how much you believe Stephen was willing to believe Diana.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 15:59
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:I just finished The Hundred Days. There's just not that much that can be done with Diana at that point as a character, and (correct me if I'm wrong) she's said she never wants him to leave her again, i.e., never go to sea. She basically had to die in order for the series to keep going.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
ItalicSquirrels posted:But before this turns into the Sharpe/Tull Appreciation Station, I've got a question for those of you who have read Treason's Harbour. I've probably heard or read this book a half dozen times, but something just occurred to me. Was Mr. Hairabedian actually a French agent? I had always assumed it was just a cover that Wray and Lesueur cooked up, but after the theft of Hairabedian's effects (when one of the thieves loses a finger), Wray meets with Lesueur who says, "There wasn't the slightest indiscretion." Before now, I had always assumed that there had been planted evidence or something like that. Is my new interpretation correct? That's how I always read that, especially the bit with the Chelengk (that's in that book, right?) How are the Sharpe books? I haven't read them but had the impression they were a little more juvenile-oriented than Patrick O'Brian's stuff. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Jul 22, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
ItalicSquirrels posted:Yeah, that's the right book. Huh. I figured the chelengk was either just greed or got planted (somehow). Looking back, I have absolutely no basis for thinking what I did. Makes me wonder why I thought that. These are books where there's so much wealth of detail that you're likely to always miss something and find something new.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
Hah, I love how it sets off the car alarms.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, did I just read a passage with Stephen's Dad?!? In "The Commodore," when Stephen is in Spain, he asks if "Colonel Don Patricio Fitzgerald y Saavedra is still with us" -- and we know from earlier books that Stephen's father was a Fitzgerald who was in Spain. When he meets "Don Patricio" he calls him "Cousin Stephen," and describes himself as an "old soldier." Old enough . . . to be Stephen's father? If we dismiss the "Cousin" as a euphemism, everything else fits with this being Stephen's father, especially given who else is with Stephen on that trip. Am I off base here or is this a legitimate theory? I don't think there are any other mentions of Stephen's parents in the series.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
withak posted:What reason is there to think that the guy isn't a cousin? 1) We know Stephen's father was older than he is, a Fitzgerald, in the Spanish military service. "Cousin Fitzgerald" is all three of those things. How many such people were there likely to be? My guess would be not many, and those few details are all we have of Stephen's father, and this guy only shows up for a paragraph and all three are mentioned. 2) "Cousin" makes sense as a euphemism for "son" in this context; compare with Aubrey's relationship with Sam Panda. 3) What more natural than that Stephen should take his daughter to see her grandfather? And given that this is Stephen, never explicitly mention the man was his father? Plus, it's always bothered me that Stephen's parents never make any direct appearance in the series and aren't ever explicitly stated as dead. Anyway, I don't think it's provable that the guy isn't just a "cousin." But he also fits with everything we know of Stephen's father, and it seems to really fit with the way O'Brian writes to throw such a subtle, crazy detail into the book in a way that's exactly that crazy subtle. I think this is my new personal pet theory.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2013 01:55
|
|
|
withak posted:What reason would there be for subterfuge? The same reason Aubrey and Sam Panda never actually explicitly call each other father or son. It's bastardy, in the 18th century. On top of that, Stephen is the sort of person who keeps secrets and speaks cautiously even when there's no real reason to, just out of habit and practice. If they both know it, why say it?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
PlushCow posted:If this turns out to be a major spoiler I'm going to be pretty disappointed! Would've rather had not read it if it is Sorry! I don't really know what to use tags for in this thread, the whole thing's been out for like twenty years now =(.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
tonberrytoby posted:Actually, what happened to the communal read-along that initially started this thread? Will we forever be stuck at the second book? Yeah that guy has kinda vanished. I worry about him sometimes =(.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2013 13:21
|
|
|
Almost all the big battles, especially in the early books, are based closely on actual period accounts of real battles. In that sense they're almost nonfiction.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
Maturin in Sydney is the best Maturin.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
ItalicSquirrels posted:Counterpoint: Maturin in Boston. Boston is coolest Maturin. Sydney is most kick-rear end Maturin. I think what I like best about Sydney is the rumours that fly around afterwards about how Stephen ran the guy through on the steps and left him "weltering in his gore" or words to that effect.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Austen is weird like that. I think it's because she was so specifically writing for her contemporaries that most modern readers have to be exposed to the setting through some other medium first before a lot of us can really appreciate what's going on in Austen. For me it was the BBC specials but I can see O'Brian acting as the gateway too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 03:22 |
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:What other wooden ships novel series are there? The only thing I'v e found that's better than Aubrey/Maturin is pure nonfiction, like books that collect period accounts of battles, etc. Sometimes I move over to other non-ship-based historical fiction, like Mary Renault or Robert Graves.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2014 21:30
|
|